An injustice to Larsson's brilliance

Rating: 4/10 (22 April 2012)

Translations of books to movies that have satisfied my imagination are practically non-existent. Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park may be an exception. OK, I know this is not a Hollywood adaptation, but still, Stieg Larsson must be turning in his grave. He spent some 500 pages to develop high level detail of characters and a complex intertwined plot, only to have it butchered in on screen. Yes, I've read the book, and that may be the source of my disappointment. But I fail to see how such obvious key elements are missing. Blomkvists' motivation for taking the job in the first place....the suggestion that it was purely for money goes against the actual personality of that character. I am yet to see the Daniel Craig version and sincerely hope that it has been more respectful to the author's original brilliant and captivating story. The film itself is technically OK in terms of cinema...well acted, well shot, but the story is a fraction of its former self.
UPDATE: OK, I have now seen the Daniel Craig version. Do yourself a favour and watch it, rather than the original.