The problem here is the tone mapping method used - and I use the word "problem" loosely, as this method is in a way the most accurate way of reproducing an HDR image. It looks to me like this was just compressed over the range of contrast, so things that look vivid in the mid-range of the original are lower in contrast in the HDR tonemapped image. Other methods produce more interesting results that look much more realistic and much better (in my opinion) than the original. I agree that this particular image looks less appealing than its original, but that is a fault of the display technology, not of HDR in general. Actually, if you want to get technical, the ugliness you're complaining about in the second image is _Low_ Dynamic Contrast--if the same image were displayed on some hypothetical display that could show any color that exists, it would look exactly as good as it does in real life