Manhunter

Rating:
Summary: Silence of the Lambs--the Prequel
Review: This is a fine film. Just don't expect it to be Silence of the Lambs. Manhunter is based on the book Red Dragon by Harris, the "prequel" to Silence of the Lambs. Hannibal Lecter is not the focus here, though he appears in the film. Instead, it concentrates on Will Graham, the FBI agent who caught Hannibal Lecter and must now catch a killer who murders entire families.

Willam Petersen is perfect as Graham, who must reawaken his own personal demons to find the killer. The depiction of Dollarhyde as a colorless, average worker with a really bad obsession is brilliant. The culminating scene, where Graham must track down Dollarhyde, is filled with 70's music (In-a-gadda-da-vida in its pulsating entirety) , weird pyschedelic scenery and some great tension. (think, bad trip.)

What disappoints many people is the depiction of Hannibal Lecter by Brian Cox. He underplays Lecter as a cool, cerebral, distant villain. Which is quite appropriate--he's not the central character here. But many people see this film after Silence of the Lambs and want more of Anthony Hopkin's chilling interpretation. That's not in this film.

Don't expect a tight thriller like Silence of the Lambs or to see lot of Hannibal Lecter and you will enjoy this version of another Harris novel. This is a different interpretation of Harris' work and it's great. But enjoy it for itself and not in comparison to other films.

Rating:
Summary: What Most People Dont Understand is...
Review: this movie was the very beginnning of Hannibal Lecter. It is not, a Hannibal Lecter, movie. This is an intense look at the man who caught the well-known cannibal and how he is called to "duty" once more. This is a great film, directed wonderfully by Michael Mann, and William Petersen is terrific as the melancholy hero. I saw this when it came out in the 80's. I purchased it before reading the book Red Dragon, which I love. And, like Silence of Lambs, the movie follows the book completely. Take the movie for what it is, a terrific thriller.

Rating:
Summary: Not what it's hyped up to be
Review: A retired forensic scientist has been rehired to help catch a happy family killer who calls himself "Red Dragon". But in order to do so, he must go to the ever-popular Hannibal Lecter for help. Moderately thrilling at times, but astonishingly dull at others. Based on a best seller by Thomas Harris but hopelessly adapted by writer and director Michael Mann. Definately not the highlight of his work. May be slightly more enjoyable if you don't listen to the ridiculous hype that this movie recieves. The DVD treatment isn't much better. This two disk limited edition contains the original theatrical cut which is THX certified. The picture and sound are as good as can be expected from a THX remastering job. Suprisingly limited on extras though. A simply theatrical trailer, two moderately short and rather boring featurettes and talent bios. The second disc is the director's cut. Although presented in a 2.35:1 widescreen display, the picture doesn't display as much detail as the theatrical. So it can only be assumed that it isn't really widescreen, just made to look widescreen. The transfer is one of the worst transfers I have ever seen. The director's cut is far superior to the theatrical cut but its displayed with seriously shocking picture and sound. The picture is covered in so much grain and pixelation that it is almost unwatchable. Why bother remastering the shorter version and not the longer and better version. Anchor Bay have been known to have done this before with the Army of Darkness: Limited Edition. Hopefully one day they will learn.

Rating:
Summary: An Effective Thriller.
Review: "Manhunter" is a good thriller that deserves to be placed by "The Silence Of The Lambs" as one of the best films of its kind. The film is superbly directed by Michael Mann, who also made "Heat" and "The Insider" and like in those movies, he shows here an exquisite eye for visual composition. The photography is rich and makes use of colors and shadows. Mann's screenplay, based on the novel by Thomas Harris, is complex and is full of believable characters. But what should be most admired about the movie is how Mann, combining superb performances with rich photography and edgy music, creates an intense atmosphere that stays during most of the movie. He has a true understanding here of what is really creepy. The acting is also very well done. William Petersen makes us feel the tension in his character, Tom Noonan presents one of the creepiest psychos ever devised for a motion picture. Brian Cox is also interesting as Hannibal Lecter, he doesn't surpass the Anthony Hopkins version, but he's still good at it. And remember that it is probable that Hopkins took edges from this role because "Manhunter" was made in 1985, way before "The Silence Of The Lambs" was released. The only thing lacking is more energy, Mann needed to add a more visceral edge to his movie and then it would have been a masterpiece. But, in the end, "Manhunter" is visually seductive, well written and effective. A fine piece of filmmaking.

Rating:
Summary: The Scariest Lecter
Review: I saw this on VHS back in '87. A great, scary, thrilling pursuit by a complex cop. Clean visuals and the greatest use of Iron Butterfly ever. This Lecter was better than Sir Anthony's hands down. No silly face masks or props, just pure evil in the eyes.

Rating:
Summary: First Time Viewer
Review: Well, this was my first time seeing the movie. I've been a fan of Michael's work since Last of the Mohicans, so I was very interested in seeing this. My very first encounter with any content of this film was in a video production class, in college. Where our teacher examined the end sequence with us. Basically he used it as an example for "bad" editing. That had kind of put me off about viewing the movie, but that was some time ago, and I figured what the heck. I still do agree, with what our teacher said about the editing of the last sequence, but according to the dvd supplement, they didn't have much time while filming (like a day or something). So that doesn't bother me much. Mann always turns up some pecurlar editing in all his movies.

I've read allot of the reviews and there are allot of debates between Cox and Hopkins portrayles of Lector. I know I can't tell you who was better. It's hard to believe that anyone can.

Overall, I thought the movie was extremely well done. The DVD version of the original cut is realy clean. But the Director's cut seems to be cropped a bit, or zoomed a bit (still has the 2.35 aspect), and really low on the compression end of things. To tell you the truth, I've only watched the first 5 minutes or so, of that cut. But it's neat none the less, so someday, when i'm really looking for something to do, I'll probably sit down and check it out.

Rating:
Summary: ...good
Review: I first saw the movie a few months ago.I was browsing through the shelves and my friend at the store just hande me this.THE FIRST VHS RELEASE.Great stuff.Now I have #81,004 of 100 000.Fantanstic,a great movie made greater on dvd.Brian cox's lecter is not one who everybody would recognize,but it's worth a look.Pay close attention to his eyes.And pay even more attention to denis farina's hand on the phone; it shakes slightly when Will graham(Petersen) "Figures" things out.Great stuff.I also give silence of the lambs a 5 of course but that's me.Both Lecter incarnations are menacing,cold,and downright scary.....I won't even mention Tom Noonan's character.

Thanks

EDITORIAL.Wednesday, October 23. 2002

After seeing Red Dragon I must say that Manhunter is the better film. I like Norton, but in RD he looks like a child. Hopkins is always good and played Lector brilliantly. Francis dollarhyde was much more convincing when played by Tom Noonan. My two cents...

A.P.L

Rating:
Summary: Rating is for the movie, not Anchor Bay's destruction of it.
Review: How difficult is this? You'd like to rate this movie five plus stars, because it is indeed a masterpiece (Don't listen to those whiney saps who want to compare it to Silence of the Lambs. Manhunter was a crime drama. SOTL was a horror movie. While I don't favor Hopkins cartoonish portrayal of Lechter, I'll admit it was entertaining. I prefer Cox's cerebral portrayal which resembled the book. But let's stop this bashing back and forth, it's tiresome.), on the other hand, Anchor Bay butchered it so much, it doesn't deserve the high ranking. What do you do? I'd almost like to opt for a seperate rating system here at Amazon. One for if you like the movie, and a seperate one for what fans of the movie thought of Anchor Bay's "remastering".

For those of you who'd be interested, here is Anchor Bay's "canned" response to a recent critique:

"Dear Customer:

It has come to our attention that our THX version of Manhunter is missing several seconds of footage which can be found by viewing other sources.

Please be aware that the interpositive of the film was used to make our disc, not a print, of which there are many with varying differences. This was and is the best source in the world for the film. We were aware of several minutes of differences between this version and the director's cut, so we went to Michael Mann for the master containing the only existing and exact version of his preferred cut.

Michael Mann's cut is the version he wanted on home video, and he, as well as Anchor Bay understood the trade-off of content at the expense of state-of-the-art quality. It was with that in mind that ABE followed the quality path to create the THX disc version.

We have heard positive feedback from most in regard to both of our releases and are sorry if you, our customer, prefer one of the several other versions that are in distribution in other media or territories.

We were (and are) opposed to cannibalizing Manhunter to create a hybrid version of the two, and apologize to anyone who feels we didn't put our best efforts into each version. I think you know we always appreciate your feedback (good or bad) and strive to do our best for each film. In this case, the versions released are the best we could do, and for the record, we're hoping you, our customer, enjoy our efforts."

Yes it is a very lame response and I took my shot back at anchor Bay telling them that in fact what they did do was indeed "Cannabilize" this film (interesting choice of words.). they never responded back.

What did I really expect though. Again in summation: Five stars for the movie. 0 stars for Anchor Bay's effort/laziness.

Rating:
Summary: The worst adaption of a novel ever!
Review: I read the five and four star reviews on this movie (even though I knew I had to see it anyway) and they got me quite pumped up to see it. It's better than "Silence of the Lambs" some said. Ha! This is nothing but a chessy, poorly acted and ridiculous 80's film. It's lack of resemblance to the magnificent novel "Red Dragon" by Thomas Harris is astounding. The only reason anyone should see this is to see the differant (and not that bad) portrayl of Hannibal "Lecktor".

I have read all three of the books by Thomas Harris about the good doctor and the events that surround him. All three are some of the greatest popular fiction novels ever. My personal favourite of the three is "Red Dragon". When they turned "Silence of the Lambs" into a movie they made a powerful, stylistic and true-to-the-novel film. But apparantly when they made "Red Dragon" into a movie they had to change the ending into a predictable one, hardly even attempt to get inside of the killer and get rid of almost anything that actually has to do with the red dragon aspect of the story. Instead the screenplay is conventional, boring and predictable. I sat in disbelieve as the end credits came up and couldn't help saying to myself "That's it? What's all the fuss about?".

But just to compliment the terrible screenplay and cardboard acting they had to through in one of the worst movie soundtracks ever. The terrible eighties electronic music fills the speakers at any chance it gets much to my dissapointment. The only bit of music that works in the whole film is Ina gada divita at the end and that was still a bit cheesy. Oh and the worst was that song that was at the end of the movie when Graham and his family are all standing happy on the beach.

Brian Cox was interesting as Hannibal. He played it differantly than Hopkin's and because of that it is not fair to say who was better or worse at it. You only see Lector for like ten minutes in this film anyway so it is hard to tell.

So if you like cheesy action movies and have never read "Red Dragon" maybe this film will be for you but for others the only reason you should watch it is to see Cox's version of the Lector character becuase the rest of it is just Mann screwing up a hell of a good book.

Thanxs...

Rating:
Summary: Manhunter
Review: A lot of people seem to want to view (or promote) "Manhunter" in terms of its' relation to "Silence of the Lambs" and "Hannibal". That's understandable given the widespread success of those films, but it's misleading. "Manhunter" was basically an attempt to transfer the huge success Michael Mann was having at the time with "Miami Vice" to the big screen, using the novel by Thomas Harris as its basis. The film plays a lot like a two-hour episode of the series, with a serial killer taking the place of drug traffickers, and as a result, it has many of the same strengths and weaknesses that the TV show had- the marriage of visual imagery and music to create atmosphere and intense action is extremely effective, but the dialogue and acting fall flat on occasion. Mann corrected those problems with "Heat", and the result is one of the better films of the last decade. In short, anyone interested in this film should rent before they buy, just be sure they're getting what they're looking for.