This should have been really good
-
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
-
montrossboc-1 — 12 years ago(September 01, 2013 06:11 PM)
I love this movie. Hannibal loose in the world. What more could you ask for. Julianne Moore is great as Clarice.
The brain-eating scene is spectacular.
Thought this was much better than SOTL, which I just finished watching again about an hour ago.
Short Cut, Draw Blood -
ABetterDay — 11 years ago(October 11, 2014 07:44 PM)
I think you are being generous in describing this film as "average." I thought it bordered on being terrible. SotL was ok. Not great by any definition but above average. This film was not. It was yet another example of trying to go to the well, and make money, too many times.
Remember When Movies Didn't Have To Be Politically Correct? -
Dark_Phoenix89 — 11 years ago(February 05, 2015 12:05 PM)
I thought it was really good, myself. Silence was better, but this was definitely one of the stronger Lecter films in the series (I just thought Foster had better screen chemistry with Hopkins).
"Speak of the Devil, and He shall appear." -
MydnightRose — 10 years ago(September 25, 2015 06:49 PM)
I never understood the hoopla over Jodi Foster in SOTL. I haven't watched all of Hannibal but I have read most of the book; the movie improved on 2,things done poorly in the bookthe ending and Virgil's death. In the book the latter was just laughably stupid, in the movie it was terrifying.
I can only guess that Silence was received better because it was innovative and was influenced by recent events and influenced the countries reactions to serial killers. Apparently Harris didn't want to write a sequel and the results were divisive amongst readers.
I will say that while the book SOTL had more atmosphere Hannibal had such scary moments that I couldn't finish it.
Superman & Wonder Woman -
kellymariekitty — 10 years ago(October 23, 2015 05:46 AM)
Sounds really bad but it went wrong because Juliann moore is in it.
Should have re-used Jodie because she was amazing!!
I cant actually stand Juliann - she is the miserable, moodiest actress i have ever seen.
Every film she comes in she plays herself - why why why?
I watched Hannibal once & she destroyed Clarice - I like the film except for her - Clarice was a big headed egotistical bitch like her.
Eurgh just cant stand her -
reaseltbim — 9 years ago(April 22, 2016 12:12 PM)
i really really cant believe so many people love this stupid garbage,
they just must be Ridley Scott super fans or just fans of Thomas Harris
i just cant believe any other reason why people would lower their standards and defend this mediocre terrible mess. -
cjwright79 — 9 years ago(July 17, 2016 07:56 AM)
You really don't know what you're talking about Jack, this really is a first rate movie. Tell me though, were there some particular elements you had trouble with? What rubbed you the wrong way? If nothing else I suggest trying it again when you're older and wiser, then you may begin to realize that the movie lacked nothing, it was only your mind and preconceptions and vision that were cluttered and distorted.