Overrated

An Exercise In Nonsense

Absolutely brilliant

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

The movie "The Hypnotist" (2012) is based on the 2009 novel by the same name that launched the husband-wife writing team of Alexandra Coelho Ahndoril and Alexander Ahndoril, writing as Lars Kepler, into the Scandanavian crime-novel genre. This novel, which introduced Swedish Detective Superintendent Joona Linna, vaulted quickly onto the best-seller lists when the English translation came out in 2011. The 6 installments of the Joona Linna series have so far sold 12 million copies. IMO, the books are well-written, though not quite at the Per Wahloo-Maj Sjowall or Henning Mankell level. But they're still very good.This movie, OTOH, does not measure up to the book in many ways. First, and *always* foremost, is "How faithful is the adaptation of the screenplay to the action of the book?" Every film changes something. Sometimes the filmmakers makes good changes. They resolve the plot more efficiently and more believably than what happens in the book. Alas, that cannot be said for this movie. Without including any spoilers, I'll just say that the film changes the book in a completely unrealistic, unbelievable way.Second is casting and character. Some really serious questions could be asked here about why the producers chose the actor they chose for the lead role of Joona Linna (a male, btw), and also for the dr. who is also a hypnotist--? IMO, those 2 actors could've switched roles and the film would've worked better. I also felt that the character of Simone, played by Lena Olin, was manipulated by the screenplay in unfavorable ways. Just let her be who the authors wanted her to be, for crying out loud.I also have the same 2 questions I always have whenever I watch a European-made movie about Europeans. 1, Are all Europeans, and especially kids, really as surly and hateful and disrespectful toward the police as the movie-makers portray them to be? And 2, Are all European men really as passive and unassertive as European movies portray them to be? They never verbally defend themselves, never respond when someone, even a punk kid, accuses them of ridiculous nonsense, never say anything. They just sit there and take all the abuse anyone wants to throw at them. I can't believe Europe is really like that. But European *movies* are really like that.Bottom line--read the book. This movie could've been so much better with 2-3 tweaks. It got a lot right. But it changed far too much.

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.

First of all, if you can read something, better do that and only then watch the movie. To see if your imagination and fantasy after reading something is near/far from something that the director had in his mind. The book itself is solid, interesting read, I love thrillers and mysteries and as a thriller there are multiple options to make you think that you know the answer. To some it might be predictable, to some like me, are let to be driven by the book. It is a long book and has some parts that could have been shorter ... but at the finish you feel good about it.The movie however, I know it is difficult to put everything in a two hour movie, plus to keep the focus and the things interesting, but the scenario is changed. There are so many good book adaptations on screen, but sadly this is not one of them. So many things are not like they are shown in the movie. That is what bothered me the most. Stick to the story! And secondly I was not impressed with the acting at all. Very frigid, yes I know the book is a little bit dark and the characters are as well, but somehow even the slightest emotions are presented very cold and robotic.You don't have to agree, after all that is my opinion. And to conclude my opinion, I say read the book. Much more fun.

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.