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 current rating on IMDb is too low. This is an enjoyable enough film. It's certainly worth taking in, especially if you're into crime dramas.

The plot is fairly straightforward. Three members of a family are brutally killed, only the oldest boy surviving. He's in a coma though. Police investigator Joona Linna (played by Tobias Zilliacus) ends up investigating the crime. He gets a doctor to come in to hypnotise the boy to identify his assailant, and the doctor succeeds in doing so. (It is apparently possible for comatose patients to talk under hypnosis.) But then the doctor and his family become caught up in the drama. Will the killer be stopped?

It's a good, simple story. The start and end of the movie in particular are quite strong. The climactic scene at the isolated farm was unexpected and the best part of the movie. Spectacular filmmaking really. It had me on the edge of my seat.

The acting was fine. There's a lot of character development involving Joona Linna, Erik Maria Bark (played by Mikael Persbrandt) and his wife Simone (played by Lena Olin). The movie is called "The Hypnotist" but I didn't really see the doctor as being at the centre of the movie.

This is a slow paced movie, a little too slow for me at times. That might be why people have not rated it higher.

Most of the events take place in a hospital and three homes. There are a lot of shots of wintry Stockholm, a suitable backdrop I suppose for a dark Scandinavian crime drama. I enjoyed what I assume is a realistic portrayal of Swedish life. The dialogue was in Swedish, with subtitles. Everything in the movie seemed rather understated and starkly realistic. This is not a grand Sweden of magic and beauty.

As you might expect in a thoroughly Swedish movie, mental illness and human foibles are the major crime themes. No Hollywood moralising here about good and evil, right and wrong.

Bias disclosure: This is not my favourite genre. I know next to nothing about Scandinavian crime novels, television shows and movies. I haven't even yet read the Larsson "Girl" trilogy, although my sister gave it to me two years ago. Even most American or British crime shows don't interest me, although I am an avid fan of Law & Order.

Also, I went to see this movie without knowing anything about it. Haven't read the book. I didn't even know it was a Swedish movie. Even so, I thought it was OK. You might too.

I'm a big fan of both Lasse Hallström and Swedish crime drama (Beck, Wallander etc), so needless to say I was expecting a lot from this. I didn't come here before watching, so I had no idea of the low score and I can tell you it's totally justified, maybe even too high.

Crime drama clearly is not Lasse Hallströms forte. He's done some remarkable films and often creates very likable, believable and true to life characters. While Persbrandt and Olin create somewhat solid characters, they are still miles away from characters Hallström has previously put on screen. The rest of the cast on the other hand is just amazingly dull and underdeveloped.

I haven't read any detective Joona Linna books, so I have no knowledge of him as a character. And after watching this movie I still know absolutely nothing about him. I don't know if he is also downplayed in the books, but in this movie he's just plain uninteresting. There is no background info at all. The detective characters are the driving force behind all crime series. Wallander and Beck are both very solid and interesting characters as is the Norwegian Varg Veum. Germans have crafted the art of "krimi" for years and are masters in that genre. Hallström clearly hasn't watched any of those. Altho I was wondering at times if they had just made a bad casting choice with Tobias Zilliacus and wanted to minimize his screen time in editing and instead focus on Persbrandt and Olin, who steal the show. Zilliacus - at least with his screen time - is incredibly boring and lacks charisma.

Then the story. While initially interesting, the script is just horrible. I will probably have to read the book just to see how they filled in the plot holes that ended up in the movie. Absolutely nothing is logical here. Why did the crime happen? The relationship between the boy and his mother is a complete mystery. A lot of loose ends like her sister. It's a complete mess and the pacing is horrible. The finale is rushed after spending way too much time on everything else.

The only positive things in this movie is the relatively atmospheric cinematography and the acting by Mikaeal Persbrandt. Since this was the first of the Linna series, there will probably be more. They probably wanted a big name to direct the first and then make the rest with a different crew and an established crime series director like Kjell Sundvall or Anders Engström (atleast I hope so).

Not for fans of the genre.