What a wasted opportunity

Rating: 2/10 (26 September 2016)

I read the book and was excited to see that a film had been made of it. Firstly, if you have seen the film and didn't like it, read the book.
The two have very little in common. I understand that it is difficult to make a film out of a book and you have to condense it and give it more impact. However, you don't need to take away the main essence of the story in doing so.
My main gripes are these: Why do they insist on talking with awful fake Russian accents throughout? It would have been better spoken naturally or even in Russian with subtitles...
The entire story about Leo and the killer's past has been removed. The hunting of the cat, Leo's disappearance and the killer's clues which tie back in to this are all gone. Leo's entire history is rewritten as a shallow backstory with no meaning to the story-line. As a result, the killer has no real motive in this film. It makes absolutely no sense.
What happened to the main plot of the book about Leo's internal struggle and changing from a unquestioning tool of the state into someone with a conscience? As for Vasili, the character in the film shows little resemblance to the character in the book. The film version is very shallow and there is not really the impression of his personal hatred for Leo.
All in all, this was such a wasted opportunity. Essential parts of the story were discarded and story-line changed to be so simplistic that it no longer makes sense. I have to wonder whether this is a result of the editing process or the screenplay itself? They maximised action (jumping from the train, fight in the forest etc) and at the same time removed any thought provoking aspects of the story. Why would you make a film of a book and take out the main aspects of the story that make it great? On the plus side (and the reason for 2 stars) some of the scenes were well acted (if you can ignore the accents) and the photography was quite impressive at times.