This should have been really good
-
kryp44 — 12 years ago(April 15, 2013 08:13 AM)
Harris was obviously saying F-U to his publishers writing Hannibal. Lecter was at his best as a supporting character. A tremendous amount of work went into Red Dragon and SOL. Not so much with what Harris wrote after that. I enjoyed reading all of them, but I was pissed at the same time that Harris didn't care if his readers got crap. Enjoy your money dirtbag.
-
aasoloway — 13 years ago(October 08, 2012 01:44 PM)
I think Hannibal is far superior to SOTL - call me crazy. I thought SOTL was over-rated. I've watched Hannibal a dozen times and SOTL three or four times.
Hannibal has a better atmosphere, a better score, location and it was just crazy enough for me. Also, Giancarlo Giannini! I prefer Julianne Moore to Jody Foster
and the bizarre cameo by Osama Bin Laden. Ray Liotta eats his own brain. That's better than Buffalo Bill in my twisted book. -
randyhndrsn — 13 years ago(March 20, 2013 08:10 PM)
Without question, this is certainly one of the biggest disappointments of the last decade, and it's confusing given the extreme talent that was involved.
Good acting and some decent moments are there, but this movie is certainly a mess, dull for a large part of it and it just never feels right, like they never nailed the tone. -
Doom — 13 years ago(March 21, 2013 11:23 AM)
I think Hannibal is far superior to SOTL - call me crazy. I thought SOTL was over-rated. I've watched Hannibal a dozen times and SOTL three or four times.
Hannibal has a better atmosphere, a better score, location and it was just crazy enough for me. Also, Giancarlo Giannini! I prefer Julianne Moore to Jody Foster
and the bizarre cameo by Osama Bin Laden. Ray Liotta eats his own brain. That's better than Buffalo Bill in my twisted book.
^ this x10
Wait a minute who am I here? -
T-eschberger — 13 years ago(March 24, 2013 07:43 AM)
I like how people bitch that Hannibal is like "Superman" in this movie because of how good he is at evading capture, but nobody bitches about the crazy jail break scene in Silence which is just as over the top.
Hannibal is a great, great film. Julian Moore is much better than Foster who is INCREDIBLY overrated in Silence. She is perfectly competent in the role, but rather bland imo. Moore got across the toughness and vulnerability of the character much better without going over the top. -
PunishU — 12 years ago(April 11, 2013 12:56 PM)
Silence of the Lambs is overrated and I too wish that Julianne Moore had played Clarice as opposed to the overrated Foster but Hannibal is still a garbage movie and to act like it's a fact that it's a good movie won't mean much against the overall negative critique and place it received in film history.
-
pgFiSheYe — 12 years ago(May 14, 2013 03:01 PM)
come on guys have you actually seen these actors in other films before? Julianne Moore and Gary Oldman are terribly wasted in this, especially Oldman. You might as well have the elephant man play his part and there wouldn't have been any difference.
-
McQueen1980 — 12 years ago(July 03, 2013 07:58 AM)
the atmosphere in hannibal is perfect for the genre; eerie and chilling. loved hannibal being out and about. loved the scenes with giancarlo gianini chasing after hannibal. great movie.
silence of the lambs was boring and overrated. -
andras-andreea — 12 years ago(May 27, 2013 06:38 AM)
I think it's because the film's quite different from the book, which was much better. If they had followed the book, the film would have been great but it seemed to me that they were afraid? It's a shame. I think it would've been a very controversial movie too but sill The Silence of the Lambs deserved a better sequel than this one.
-
FirstBlood1982 — 12 years ago(July 07, 2013 07:19 PM)
I've read the book, and much prefer the film.
Hated Hannibal's backstory in the book and don't care for the ending. I also didn't find Mason's sister necessary and his death in the book was rather silly, and would've been even more silly onscreen.
I think this movie is on par with the greatness of Silence and much, much better than the others.
+++by His wounds we are healed. - Isaiah 53:5+++ -
kidd-simon — 12 years ago(July 09, 2013 02:35 PM)
I think if I am totally honest you cannot really compare the two movies. SOTL is a stone cold classic while Hannibal turned out to be a watchable piece of schlock.
There were many factors that made it this way. Anyone who has read SOTL will know that it is a great book and therefore the filmmakers had a unique story to work from and delivered a brilliant, truly memorable film. I have not read Hannibal yet but I gather its nowhere near as good and that clearly tells its own story. Perhaps you can only work with the material you have.
In Hannibal the fact Lecter was out walking the streets etc weakened him as a character, he was so much more interesting and chilling when he was locked up in his cell trading blows with Starling. Another factor was that Hopkins and Foster did so well together, really canny casting and the blend in Lambs was just right.
I see people mentioning the big names in Hannibal but that will not always make a great film, actors like Scott Glenn, Anthony Heald and Ted Levine were not and are not big names but were right for their parts in Lambs. Take a bow Jonathan Demme.
Maybe most importantly the fact that Jodie Foster decided against appearing in Hannibal left it dead in the water. Her work in Lambs was so strong and I found it hard to accept another actress as Clarice Starling, it just didn't feel right.
Hopkins milked the Lecter role for all it was worth, probably unwisely, but his best portrayal will always be in SOTL. -
degree7 — 12 years ago(July 27, 2013 09:14 PM)
ere were many factors that made it this way. Anyone who has read SOTL will know that it is a great book and therefore the filmmakers had a unique story to work from and delivered a brilliant, truly memorable film. I have not read Hannibal yet but I gather its nowhere near as good and that clearly tells its own story. Perhaps you can only work with the material you have.
They should have made 'Red Dragon' with Ridley Scott at the helm, instead of this one.
Limit of the Willing Suspension of Disbelief: directly proportional to it's awesomeness. -
ommik — 12 years ago(August 28, 2013 10:55 PM)
I recently re-watched "Manhunter", "Silence of the Lambs", and "Hannibal".. and I absolutely loved the two first movies, but I have mixed feelings regarding "Hannibal".
Yeah, it was good, but it also somehow stumbled on its own clever ideas. The movie tried to be very psychological and intellectual, but it failed to deliver what it was promising and had some weird gaps in it. I haven't read the book, but I've been told it's great and that it really opens up the characters more so, maybe I should read it.
I didn't have a problem with Julianne Moore playing Clarice (tho Jodie was better), but I somehow really didn't like Ray Liotta. Of course his character was supposed to be despicable, but I think he wasn't convincing at all.
Anyway, I think I won't re-watch "Red Dragon" or the absolutely ridiculous "Hannibal Rising".. I'm good with two excellent, and one mediocre, Dr. Lecter movie