As Mikael Blomkvist, Michael Nyqwist is more real than Daniel Craig, but if Blomkvist is irresistible to women as Larsen had portrayed him to be then Craig is the better choice. Armansky's character looks totally miscast in the Swedish one when his Armenian roots clearly show through in the Hollywood movie. On a whole the Swedish actors look a lot older than their Hollywood contemporaries.
Location: Again I've to choose the locales in the Hollywood version over the Swedish version. The bridge to Hedestad, Vanger's estate and his palatial house (which I read is the same in both versions) but the instances of weather showing up in the background make a lot of difference- all of these I believe, Hollywood shows a much better grasp. Maybe it could be attributed to a couple of facts, money at its disposal and two drafts (the novel and the Swedish original movie) to work off of.
Treatment of the story: There are sections of the novel left out by Swedish and Hollywood versions while adapting the story into motion picture format. Although these are different in both, in both versions the cuts don't affect the story telling.
Moving on to watch The Girl Who Played with Fire (Sweden).....