The marketing campaign for David Fincher’s adaptation of The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo has already played up the film’s illicit element with an eye-popping red band trailer that may or may not have been bootlegged. (Even the all-audiences trailer gleefully claims that Girl will be “The Feel Bad Movie of Christmas.”) But this really takes things to a whole new level: A new poster for the film features a nude Rooney Mara as hacker/goth demi-goddess Lisbeth Salander, R-rated piercings and all. (Co-star Daniel Craig is wrapping his arm around and frowning. Can anything cheer this guy up?) The poster is apparently an international one-sheet; in another version floating around the internet, the release date sort of covers up the R-rated parts, although not so much that your sainted grandmother wouldn’t still be scandalized. Get a full look at the extremely NSFW poster below.
Follow Darren on Twitter: @EWDarrenFranich
Read more:
New, non-bootleg ‘Girl With the Dragon Tattoo’ trailer: Still liking what you see?
‘The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo’: Like what you see in the teaser??
Red Band Trailer: ‘The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo’ teaser — nudity, bloodshed, and self-mockery
So freaking hot! And I’m surprised this is on here… don’t think I’ve ever seen nudity on EW.
THE FEEL BAD MOVIE OF CHRISTMAS!
For seeking I’nterracial L’ove , i think i have the best choice
—-βlαck’whitе’Cùpid. СòM——it’s where to- meet black, white, gorgeous, beautiful for romance and- enduring relationships ! – it’s the best place for s”eeking int’erracial love.which gives you a chance to make your life better and open opportunities for you to meet the at’tractive s’ingles and treat you like a king or Queen. Maybe you wanna check it out or tell your friends.
—@ Jason
Compared to the actress that portrayed her in the Sweedish version of the movie R.M. has way more boobs. The woman in the Sweedish film had kinda scary small boobs.
Rooney Mara is smokin even with the make-up and haircut. How’d they pull off putting this image on here?
Smoking hot? She’s flat as a board. They should have got someone with boobs.
She is supposed to be flat, it is in the book.
@ Jason
Compared to the actress that portrayed her in the Sweedish version of the movie R.M. has way more boobs. The woman in the Sweedish film had kinda scary small boobs.
she isnt supposed to have boobs, she is so flat chested that she ends up gtting a boob job in book 2.
Why MUST every woman in the world have giant breasts to be considered “hot”? Women come in all shapes & sized & 99% are sexy.
If she wasn’t so flat chested they probably wouldn’t be able to show this image here. I don’t mind but do feel it’s a bit degrading and incredibly gratuitous. It even made my boyfriend uncomfortable and he’s not afraid to say when he thinks a girl looks good which surprised me. Maybe her toughness was unattractive but it’s still incredibly unnecessary.
@ Lisa go cry somewhere else you troll and get a real man. Geezus, gratuitous?!? What have you been smoking? They are selling an image, and I bet you have not even read the books, is there bush, pan down. What’s unnecessary is your baseless comment.
Liza, sounds like your boyfriend might want to switch sides, any guy who is uncomfortable looking at pictures of breasts is not telling you everything.
Jason….if you read the book you’d know that Lisbeth IS flat as a board. She is portraying the character….
Noomi Rapace had flapjacks for breasts. Mara’s are NICE and welcomely.
It is gratuitous because why doesn’t she have a shirt on? There is no reason for it which makes it unnecessary which is the very definition of gratuitous. I think my bf didn’t like it because she’s just not sexy to him or she looks too tough which is what I said earlier. How am I a troll exactly?
Liza, it mirrors the book, which itself is “gratuitous” in parts. Also, I don’t think she is flat, she looks like she can fill an A cup. flat as a board would be no breasts. She clearly has breasts. why do we have conversations with people like this on the internet? such a waste.
I never said she was flat as a board, simply that she is flat and if she wasn’t the poster may not have even been made. I’ve noticed the media is much more comfortable showing images of nude women if they have smaller breasts. Not that it’s a bad thing. There is nothing wrong with having small breasts and they do seem rather nice.
I am confused when you say there parts of the book that are “gratuitous”. Basically you’re saying that there are parts of the book that are without meaning and don’t belong there which is kinda weird because you would think Steig Larrson wouldn’t put a bunch of unnecessary elements into his books. I’m sure it’s all there for some reason, even the nudity and sex. I just happen to have the opinion that the nudity on the poster is unnecessary. You can disagree but that’s just how I feel but like I said before I really don’t mind in the end, it is what it is.
Someone else on the board mentioned that Daniel Craig is fully clothed and there seems to be an unfair focus on Rooney. I think it does make her seem more vulnerable and in need of his protection. He also looks very strong, according to what others have said this is inaccurate because she is a very strong character and even if she is emotionally vulnerable with him, she doesn’t need his protection. Another reason why her nudity wasn’t needed since it sends the wrong message. I hope that clears up how I feel since everyone took it as an attack.
I admire the filmmakers’ decision to cast such a homely and unattractive actress as the lead in the first of a trilogy that certain to be big box office. They could have gone for sexy or pretty, but instead they went for this look, which I’m sure is probably closer to the character in the book.
What exactly was her motorcycle in movie? Can’t fine any details.
@Kevin: First nudity in EW a long time, anyway. In 1992, they published a topless photo of Jane March, from the Bruce Willis movie THE LOVER. I’ve clearly been reading EW too long.
I know this is off the topic regarding the poster but I don’t think that Bruce Willis was involved in the movie THE LOVER.
Bruce Willis starred with Jane March in “Color of Night,” but you should skip that one and see “The Lover” instead.
Jane March was in the Lover but she was in Color of Night with Bruce Willis too, not sure where the picture might have been from as she was nude in both movies
That’s what we get for doubting David Fincher
Speak for yourself. I’ve certainly never doubted him.
Ive never doubted him, He is my very fave director! Loved The Zodiac, Seven, and just about anything else that he has done!
I never doubted him. Always knew he wouldn’t get the story right. It’ a movie about sexual violation and degradation of women so he picks a naked girl to titillate the audience with a fully dressed guy there to protect her. Yeah because that’s what Lisbeth Salander would totally do (insert sarcasm). He took a good story about a story female character and made her into the next Paris Hilton tit shot. Way to go Mr. Hollywood. Way to miss the whole point of the book in order to get 18 year old boys to see your cash grab movie.
MTP, thank you for that insightful review of a 2-1/2 hour movie based solely on a poster. I wish I had your ability to detect good storytelling and plot based on a 24-by-36 poster. Bravo, sir!
Posters are 27×40. And David Fincher still rocks except for the Social Network.
I’m with you MTP. I love David Fincher so I’m really disappointed that he seems to be turning one of the few intelligent, powerful female leading characters into just another set of boobs.
Who ever doubted David Fincher???? The man can do no wrong, almost every movie (and music video for that matter) has been perfect! I was stoked when he was annnounced attached to this, and with Trent Reznor doing the music again it’s going to be great! And Rooney’s breasts and whole look is perfect! These movies will blow the Swedish flicks away big time!
WTF you guys ? Do you actually think the director of a movie decides how to promote it and does the posters himself ? Stop being such idiots for a change. Your constant whining is so obnoxious !!
Why not pierce her vulva and show that off too? Why stop with just the pg-13 breasts? How can we know you will go all the way if you don’t show the vulva? Come on Fincher, exploit your actress a bit more, no one is going to see your remake without some sexual exploitation.
Read the books, friend. This campaign is perfectly capturing the spirit of the original material.
VULVA! VULVA! VULVA! Come on everyone, if we chant it, perhaps they’ll adjust the poster for nnxt campaign.
(just kidding)
Because Lisbeth Salander didn’t have her vulva pierced.
A lot of the comments here perfectly illustrate why most of the world regard American as a culturally bankrupt nation.
It’s not scandalous or dirty or shocking, it’s just a topless woman.
I swear, the moral majority has screwed this country up beyond repair.
@Darthbanana ..think people.. mostly females… are a bit disappointed rather then shocked. It is culturally bankrupt when it is ALWAYS naked women. Take my point? Hope you can take some time to consider this. Would you be defending this if it was male nudity? Personally I’d be happy with that but that often seems to bring out homophobia in males. So yet again males get catered for and the female gaze is ignored.
I have. It was a pic of Lady GaGa from David Letterman last week and it showed her vagina. Not what I needed to see.
Then you haven’t been paying attention. Surely you didn’t miss the smokin’ hot cover featuring the Bill, Eric and Sookie from ‘True Blood’ that was on this very website a few months ago?
Wish it showed off the dragon tattoo though…
I don’t see what the big deal is. She shows a boob, so what? Why do women throw such a fit over this? It’s not exploitation unless she was forced into it or misled somehow. Also, if you have read the books, this is a very sexual character and not someone who shrivels up and the idea of exposing a tit. Be more concerned with over the top depictions of graphic violence if you simply MUST dwell over a simple movie poster.
I identified your lbewog internet site on google and check a couple of of your early posts. Proceed to sustain up the very very good operate. I just extra up your RSS feed to my MSN News Reader. Seeking for ahead to reading extra from you later on!…
can’t wait for prudes to start complaining…
BACK WHEN I WAS GROWING UP IN 1880, WOMEN COULDN’T EVEN VOTE! NOW THEY CAN BE TOPLESS AND CONFUSE/TITILLATE OUR GREAT GRAND KIDS?
Kidding. Here in New York it’s not illegal for a woman to be topless. Not a big deal in my opinion.
As a fellow New Yorker, I would just like to clarify going topless is illegal. It’s called indecent exposure and a topless woman would get arrested
Incorrect. Majority of the country don’t have this right, but New York is one of a few states that allows women to be topless in public. Thanks to some protesters who went topless in Rochester, NY legalized women being topless in ’92.
lol, i’m digging the history lesson.
In Columbus, OH women can go topless also. I lived there for 5 years and the only time I saw any boobs was during the Pride Parade. lol.
Alright, my mistake. Women can go topless in NY, but only in designated state parks. So it is still considered illegal everywhere else in the state
Women can go topless in Austin too. Go to Barton Springs, a city pool, virtually any day and you’ll see boobage.
I’m not a prude by any stretch of the imagination, and I am a huge fan of David Fincher, and I actually love the trailer, but … this is a little much for me. Not just because of the boobs showing, but more so because of the way Mikael is embracing her. It’s way off on representing the storyline of the book. And I don’t see the point of showing the blatant nudity other than for obvious shock value and to get everyone’s attention. The book is about so much more than that. JS.
some designated parks and fifth avenue during the gay pride parade. there is nothing quite so entertaining as watching the bridge and tunnel mums drag their sons away with their hands over their eyes as the gay pride parade marches down 5th ave.
Totally agree with those posting who say this poster inaccurately reflects the character of Salander. If anything she should be in her leathers with her arm around a nude Blomqvist. And while we’re on the topic of the poster…when the heck did Daniel Craig morph into Geoffry Rush?
Well, maybe it’s supposed to be a bluff for the non-readers of the book, like “let’s present Lisbeth as someone who needs protection in the poster when the audience will be really surprised by the the movie that no, she doesn’t at all.” The poster could be ironic. And I like the tagline. Do they mean Lisbeth is evil? She certainly does horrible things but against her own tormentors who do way worse and you can explain her with the draconian Swedish laws for abuse victims (maybe? I don’t know the laws) and a very traumatic history.
Oh Bob, how hopeful you are. The poster is not ironic, it is a cheap trick to get to show some boobs. I agree with people commenting that it is not keeping with character, not even a little. I don’t have an issue with the nudity itself but I do have an issue with it being gratuitous.
I do have to say I am loving the trailers I have seen so far. I was given the book as a gift (because they have been everywhere bc of the impending movie) and had no idea what it was about. I loved it, but the dark subject matter threw me for a loop. The trailer is much more direct about the tone which should help people intrigued by the non-descriptive title (the translation of the Swedish is the much more direct “Men Who Hate Women”) get an idea of what they are in for.
HOT DANG!!!!
seriously! i think they should just show this movie in black and white…i mean honestly, besides social network and and curious case, couldn’t any fincher film be designated with that color scheme and still be bada$$ ?
Ooh that would be interesting!
Damn you – Conveniently placed tagline! Damn you to hell!!!
What tagline? She’s wearing pants.
in the original poster, the tagline covers her breasts
And by using female nudity to sell the movie, they have completely missed the point of the book — and particularly Salander’s story. Got to love Hollywood.
good point
I don’t think that the Swedish films shied away from titillation and exploitation either. Just sayin’.
The poster for the Swedish movie has ONLY Lisbeth Salander. She is also fully dressed in layers and looking badass. In this Fincher version, the poster has her posing like a playboy playmate along with a man dressed in two layers of clothing. Lisbeth Salander likes sex but she is not a sex pot who would do a Paris Hilton style magazine shoot like the Fincher poster. It goes AGAINST her character. It’s a cheap way of getting teen boys to see the movie. Sony needs to make at least $200 million just to break even. So they decided to sell out Lisbeth.
If you think that look is “Playmate,” you haven’t seen many Playmates, bud.
You think teenage boys are going to want to see it because of THAT? The Human Centipede looks more attractive than she does in that poster. Way to prove your stupidity twice in the same thread.
In the book both these characters bang anything with a pulse, while Salander is abused, sex, violence and sandwiches drive the story
it is actually frozen pizza and coffee that drives the story, not sandwiches.
It is actually sandwiches. Frozen pizza is only eaten by Lisbeth. Everybody else eats sandwiches with coffee.
lol….I love that you pointed that out! When my brother recommended the books his exact way of describing it was “Mikael goes places…they offer him coffee and then he has sex and they all eat a sandwich….” love it!
she got breast implants in the book which totally went against the whole be who you are feminist thing so the poster really isn’t a big deal.
I agree completely. I dislike this immensely because it misses the point which is offensive, nudity in and of itself is not.
buffyfan is completely right.
yup.
actually i dont see it in that way at all. To me it looks like its showing her as fearless, standing up to anything.
HE looks like her supporter (which in a way he is) but also trying to hold on to her as well.
I love the poster and Im usually a prude about these things!
He is not supposed to be her “supporter”. SHE is the one who saves his life. HE should be the one naked on the poster with her behind him to protect.
what???? im glad you dont work in the entertainment industry!
Daniel craig naked? I love that poster already!
buffy is 100% correct. Did the Marketing Team get the memo with the basic synopsis of the book?? It’s like selling a serious Civil Rights Movement story using the N-Word casually and depicting men in baggy trousers!! COMPLETELY misleading and inconsistent with the story.
This complaint is pretty funny, considering that Lisbeth is a very sexual character who refused to let her abuse define her or how people perceived her. Someone missed the point of the books, but it wasn’t anyone involved with this poster.
I think the sexuality paired with Salander clutching at Blomkvist is what makes this the wrong kind of sexual. You are right about her being a sexual character but I think this portrays her as a sex-object or a potential victim more than a strong independent character as the books portray.
Rooney Mara is going to blow this thing out of the WATER. I’ve seen the original trilogy and she already looks better than Noomi Rapace–and I’ve only seen the trailer!
She(Mara) is ugly and she is supposed to be ugly to fit the character. Noomi was not as skinny which is not like Salander in the book, she is 95 lbs.
I thought Noomi was pretty skinny and I don’t think an actor has to look exactly like the character because Rooney looks like how I imagined Lisbeth looking in my mind but Noomi didn’t and as of now and even after this movie comes out no one will ever represent the character like Noomi did. I mean Jonathan Rhys-Meyers had nothing(And I mean nothing) physically in common with King Henry 8th but the way he portraed him- no one else can ever beat that-IMO
No she’s going to sink the trilogy and remind us why Hollywood should not remake foreign films.
The Swedish films weren’t even that good. The only great thing in them was Noomi Rapace. As a whole, Fincher’s adaptation will most likely be superior.
Adapting the source material which is the book doesn’t make the movie a remake, since its not adapting the previous movies
I’m OUTRAGED! NOT! I think it’s a great image and I wish more movie companies would advertise their films this way – especially if it’s part of the film.
Are you the same Marissa that let your kids watch “The Walking Dead” premiere, then complained it gave your kids nightmares ?
Ya… Right!
This is so inappropriate! Now I won’t be taking my kids to see this movie. And cancel my EW subscription as well.
I sure hope you wouldn’t have taken your kids to this movie anyway – if you read the book you know it is NOT kid friendly.
It makes no bones about being R-rated, so why would you see it with the kids in the first place, unless you’re a big fan of awkwardness?
Do you even know what this movie is about? There’s no reason anyone should be taking children to see this film.
I think all of your sarcasm meters are on the fritz.
were you born stupid or did oyu have extensive training?
I don’t like people like you.
Wow first of all hun if you read the book or so the Swedish version of the this film it would be pretty obivious this is not a Kids movie ( sigh )
You’re welcome. Also, Diem’s brrhoets, the Cardinal Ngo Dinh Thuc and Ngo Dinh Can teamed up to build a secret dungeon for Buddhist monks and nuns in the 1960s in Hue. This dungeon was discovered after their regime was overthrown. It was flooded with water 24 hours a day to make sure that all the prisoners had to stand constantly. Lately, Madame Nhu’s younger brother strangled her parents to death in Washington DC and her eldest daugher was killed in an automobile accident in France. Don’t tell me there is nothing sordid about this first dynasty of democracy of South Vietnam. Lately, many Vietnamese community leaders have encouraged to build shrines for the Ngos and make people bow to these fascists. Isn’t that sick?
@ Marissa: Please tell me your kidding. Really? Kids to an R rated movie? Full of violence and rape? Really?
are you serious! You cannot be serious just acting the fool, cause anyone that read the book or saw the orignal movies would know that they would be fools for taking kids to watch this american version.
Also want to say, I love how people that think that this movie was just thought of and never saw the original or even knew that this was a book have all this stupid comments to say. Dont watch the movie if it bothers you so much.
Please do NOT take you kids, unless you’re ok with the rape and revenge rape thing.
Hear Hear Matt!My take on pre-paid funeral artnngemears is BE CAREFUL there are so many scams out there. If you do buy them, make SURE your family knows about them so they don’t double spend!Marie at FamilyMoneyValues recently posted..
@Marissa, it’s R-rated movie with sex, rape, incest, murder, torture, and so much more, not really a “kids” movie anyways!!!
Haha because everything about this just screams kids movie right? I think you were being sarcastic, but still.
She’s obviously not serious, it’s pretty funny because I have seem similar comments on other stories where people act outraged “for the children” over something obviously created for adults.
With your attitude, I’m amazed that you committed the act that got you pregnant in the first place. Be gone with you, prude. I’m sure you won’t be missed.
well, first of all your kids have no business seeing this movie in the first place.
Exactly. Not every movie is or should family-friendly. This is a grown-up movie, based on grown-up book. Keep your kids at home.
“should be,” I mean.
God almighty. It’s called sarcasm, people.
Half of you North Americans still haven’t grasped sarcasm yet… we’ve given you centuries now..
@Greg: AMEN!!!!!
WOW, definitely not the same girl from Social Network! I like it but you just know there’s gonna be crazy back lash for this.
…and the point is?
Not outraged, but if this movie really is all that everyone seems to think it will be, why did they need to do this?
I wanna see her vulva to see if her inner lips extend outside of the outer. That freaks me out. Show it.
I’ll check tonight when I bang her. Thanks for your concern.
Assuming this is a legit poster. My guess is that they are trying to get the point across that this movie is VERY sexually graphic. “Feel bad movie of Christmas”, nudity in a poster… what I see is a studio actually advertising to people who would NOT be offended by such, which is exactly whom they should be advertising toward.
I really hope these are real! If so, thank you Sony for having some stones!!
Totally agree. Depending on how far they take the movie, some people should stay far away from this movie (especially if you’re offended by this poster).
nothing wrong with this poster! Grow up all you prudes
I swear I’m not a prude; it’s not the image itself I object to. But having seen the Swedish-language version of the movie, this poster is a major WTF. She’s not a sex kitten, she doesn’t need Blomqvist’s protection, and she doesn’t shoot off ‘come hither’ glances to all and sundry. Lisbeth does not court the male gaze in that fashion, and there is no reason for her to be nude when he is not.
A better poster (sorry, dudes) to more accurately reflect the relationship between the characters (and the characters themselves) would be her, fully dressed in her leather armor, with an arm protectively draped around his nude torso.
prude
Cal is right. If they wanted to accurately represent this story, she would not be naked and be “protected” by Blomqvist. As people who read the book know, she is always the one who’s saving HIS life. The book deals with the sexual exploitation of women in Sweden. As such, this poster is in really bad taste and is in reality just a shameless attempt to get horny guys to come see the movie. And judging from the comments on this post, I guess it’s working… even while it turns off actual fans of the book.
I would see this picture more correctly interpreted as him holding her back, not protecting her. Which would go in hand with the idea of her saving his life frequently. It almost looks as though she is trying to pull his hand off of her, free herself from him and do her own thing. But thats just my opinion.
Does the poster need to show boobs, no, do I like the first Swedish poster better, yes (I think it portrays Lisbeth better).
All that said, the book isn’t about sexual exploitation of women in Sweden, it’s about those cases that fall between the cracks in the Swedish welfare system – this is why Swedish crime novels are soo good, they deal with that in society which we do not like to admit, that which we prefer to ignore and yet it exists. It shows how, in this case, women can be abused by a singular or small group of individuals because we as a society believe in the “system” – which in all fairness often work to our advantages.
And to finish the trifecta… they both need each other; Lisbeth and Mikael grow as people much thanks to each other and the same is true in terms of “protecting” each other (better termed looking out for each other). Lisbeth is certainly strong and independent (and as such many may perceive her as not needing protection) but she is strong to a fault and that is where she truly needs his help. Throughout the books they each save each others’ asses more than once – true, Mikael would be dead without Lisbeth, but so would Lisbeth be dead or imprisoned without Mikael (if you don’t know why I suggest you read all the books (or at least watch the Swedish movies) before commenting here.
Oh, btw, I like the Swedish movies and feared that the Hollywood version might dumb down or soften the harshness of the story, but looking at the trailer I am thrilled to see what a bigger budget might have improved (because yes, the Swedish movies hinged on the performance of Rapace)… any way they will manage to get the real Paolo Roberto to star in these movies as well? Lol.
They should make that poster as a companion to this one. And then women could stare at Daniel Craig.
You are correct Cal.
Well said Cal & LM! It’s not the nudity that’s off-putting, it’s the crass rejection of the book’s intent.
After having seen the Swedish movies of “Girl…” I’m don’t understand why they have to remake them at all. The first one was great; the last one not so much. But I agree that the poster does not convey the real Lisbeth character – she could barely stand to have someone touch her, let alone attempt to protect her.
How many times do people have to say it : it’s NOT a remake, it’s another ADAPTATION of the book.
And “I’m don’t understand” is no English, but thanks for the laugh.