UnowPriceless hyped garbage

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

showdown Sorry, this movie was a let-down. It was a totally mediocre, implausible mix of too many different threads. The focus was not on the case, but on the sub-plots. The only positive things about this movie are the cinematography and the showdown, which was fairly thrilling. Even though I usually like the actor Mikael Persbrandt, in this role I found him not authentic. Try to avoid this one and consider my recommendations. I didn't read the book, maybe it's much better than the movie (hopefully).Recommended movies, which are similar, but far better than this: - Stig Larsson's Millennium-trilogy + US-remake by David Fincher with Daniel Craig and Rooney Mara - The Woman in the Cage/The Keeper of Lost Causes - Most of the Wallander-movies - The witness(es), mini-serial - The bridge I + II*** Warning: Begin of spoilers ***the hypnosis-scenes: bad, uninspired, boring. - one of the victims is the persecutor: seen so many times, but in a much better way. - the problems in the relationship of Erik and Simone: superfluous. - the story was in total too unbelievable.*** End of spoilers ***

jake_mcaga Where to begin? Well, they got it right the first half of the movie. Sort of. After that everything got down hill. I blame in part the director, but mostly the screenwriter has to get the full blow. :-( Paolo messed it up big time. Large and essential parts of the book aren't included in the movie. Which is why the viewer get's the feeling the characters and the story line seems cluttered, kinda superficial and too streamlined. I know it's not easy to trim a book like this into a movie, but this time the screenwriter ruined a potential really good movie.I'd like to point out that (and here come the spoilers:) the main and essential part of the book is the group hypnotherapy led by Erik, the main character. I'm so tempted to say what happens there but I won't. The second major flaw is everything that led up to the start of the ending. You don't get to see or know why and how they ended up on a desolate farm in the countryside. In the book there are several events leading the story up to this place. What bugs me the most are two simple scenes which they stripped and changed completely. They didn't have to. In the movie, the first crime scene is in a gymnasium. In the book however it's in the adjacent wardrobe. The ending scenes...Good grief. They even managed to change McDonalds to a Thai takeaway. Let alone the final scene which is completely different to the book. So - unless you're dyslectic...Just the read book instead!!! Ending this comment, by changing my vote from 3 to 2. But the book gets a 10 from me.

kristian1987 The film is quite enjoyable but it does not come close to the book. I think this is the main reason why the movie has such a low rating: majority of people watching this film were first readers of the book. I did not expect word for word adaptation of the book, but this film does not do justice to the story. It alters and reinvent the story. It takes a few motives from the book but that's it. I was quite disappointment. Maybe I am biased and I'm judging the film in comparison to the book. But what can I say, the screen play is just bad. What it has me baffled is, why did the two authors allow the release of the movie in state as it is? If only goal was commercial success than I am deeply disappointed.

OJT Saw this at the world premiere expecting another Swedish TV-drama, of which the Swedes are so good at making, though I'm a bit bored of the mass production of them. This, however, is directed by Lasse Hallstrom, which I think is an interesting director. Maybe Sweden's best, behind "What's eating Gilbert Grape", "My life as a dog", "The Ciderhouse rules", "Chocolate" and "An unfinished life". Being married to Lena Olin, no wonder he has a good touch directing her.A viewer watching this film after Watching Danish/Swdish "Broen" (The Bridge") or other recent Nordic crime stories must think Sweden is a dark, moody and dreary winter-Siberia. I didn't read the novel from which this is based upon by the pseudonym Lars Kepler, written by the married couple Alexandra and Alexander Ahndoril. It was a great sales success, but received bland critics.Nor will I read it after watching this, I can promise, but it surprises me that those reading this in beforehand will have any pleasure seeing this after wards either. The whole story must be given away. Or should I say stories, because it's at least three of them here. That is also some of the films many problems. it seems like the two writers couldn't decide between please and pain, or which story they wanted to tell here.When that is said, the acting performances are really god. Persbrandt is good, and especially Olin is amazing. A really believable stung housewife losing her child. This is the strongest part of the film. What ruins this is not the dark feeling, but the story. It's simply not easy to believe so much of this. It all goes over bend a little over half way through the film, and then 134 minutes is too long. I'm sorry to say that you end up waiting for it to end, and worse is that you don't get to know why either. But instead a great ending with a happy family. But what about the meaning of all this? Well, that's down to the script makers. Not One of Hallstroms best, maybe his worst, as I see that his bottom rating on IMDb after 26 movies is a 30 year old film, rating 5,44.