Rating: 
Summary: Intense story and superb acting by Mr. Petersen
Review: This early version of Thomas Harris's novel features an intense story, with fine acting by William Petersen (now seen as Gil Grissom on CBS's CSI). Mr. Petersen is more intense than his Grissom character but the dogged determination of Grissom is there. Brian Cox is fine as Lecter (but his role seemed kind of short, since he was one who got the critical praise). Joan Allen was good as the blind woman who nearly got killed. Also, interesting choice of song (Iron Butterfly's In A Gadda Da Vida [long version]). Pretty cool movie. I'm interested to see how the "new" version compares. See it and buy it.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't waste your time
Review: Many reviews portray this movie as a masterpiece. WOW- don't be fooled. This is a terrible movie. The acting is bad.....really bad. It almost becomes commical at times because this movie is so terrible. I recommend that you save your money and watch the version with Anthony Hopkins in it.
Rating: 
Summary: Manhunter meets Red Dragon
Review: Manhunter is a movie made in 1986. So it has all those little things that remind you of the 80's, which today might strike you as odd or funny. Observe the shorts that Graham wears when in Florida, or the sun glasses of his wife, or the song at the end titles... Still, the movie, as the first installment of the Hannibal trilogy, is so much better when compared to the recent 'Red Dragon' flick, which retells the same story, with different actors and a different ending. The plot follows detective Graham (William Petersen) out of retirement, and asking for the help of Dr.Lector (Brian Cox) - he later became Dr. Lecter- whom he personally captured in the past, in order to catch a new serial-killer on the loose (Tom Noonan). I have to admit, seeing Brian Cox as the Hannibal made me feel strange at the beginning. For me, and many others, the role of Hannibal will unarguably be linked with a certain actor, called Anthony Hopkins. But if you manage to overcome this single shock, you will start realizing how 'Manhunter' succeeds in what 'Red Dragon' fails. To build a convincing atmosphere. For one thing, the acting is far superior in 'Manhunter'. In 'Red Dragon' there are cases where you feel that even the actors do not believe in their lines, which is a big waste if you take into account the superb cast. What about Dolarhyde? Ralph Fiennes in 'Red Dragon' does a good job. Yet in many cases you see that he is acting, or even, over-acting. Tom Noonan in 'Manhunter' is so natural in the same part. You can sense his inner struggle, without seeing it. There is also a scene where he holds a blind woman in his arms. His reactions, the movement of his hands, the way he lays his head upon her shoulder, clearly reveal his vulnerable and shy self. Furthermore, 'Red Dragon' decides to explain everything to the viewer as if the latter will be unable to understand by himself. It has to show us why Graham decided to retire early. In a sequence that vividly brings to mind Hitchcock's 'Psycho' it has to detail the roots of Dolarhyde's wounded psyche. It even attempts to loudly explain, through the words of Harvey Keitel, about the 'supernatural' charisma that detective Graham possesses, in order to justify the fact that he will later use it to solve the murder cases. 'Manhunter' on the other hand, does none of the above. All these facts, crucial for the development of the plot, are not explicitly stated. Rather than that, they are implied, and thus, the viewer has to discover them by himself, making the whole experience more fulfilling. As for the ending, 'Red Dragon' decides to go for the extra suspense, for the final fear. On the other hand, 'Manhunter' chooses a much simpler road. Many would probably argue that the former fits better with the rest of the movie. Still, in my opinion, 'Manhunter' does well even in this case, bringing the film to its natural ending. By the way, pay close attention to the music score. It's simply brilliant.
Rating:
Summary: More believable than RED DRAGON.
Review: In my experience talking to friends, family, co-workers, etc - I am part of the minority which thinks MANHUNTER is actually better than RED DRAGON. MANHUNTER actually follows book more closely. Although Ed Norton is usually a very good actor - I couldn't believe him as a Retired FBI Profiler. (didn't have that "kicked-around" look.) William Petersen (MANHUNTER) was more believable. The first movie MANHUNTER is lower budget, but I thought it was a superior film. While Anthony Hopkins was an excellent actor in RED DRAGON -Brian Cox WAS a vicious serial killer - indeed so realistic, I had to remind myself I was just watching an actor in a movie. Brian Cox is low-key - leaves you wondering, unlike Hopkins who hisses and speaks with an overtly scary voice. MANHUNTER is far "less polished" than RED DRAGON. But personally I thought MANHUNTER was a better movie. If you want a real treat - rent/borrow/steal SILENCE OF THE LAMBS DVD - it's got a commentary featuring FBI Profiler John Douglas - the REAL MCCOY.
Rating:
Summary: "Have you ever seen blood in the moonlight, Will?"
Review: I wish I had the original poster for this pup. This is one shy boy Will. And one original, creepy piece of work. Michael Mann who brought tears to my eyes with his gunfight in Heat, absolutely crafted a masterpiece here. After multiple viewings, this thing holds up as well as Silence yet no Oscars and no Jodie Foster on board. She could have made Hannibal something special. When compared with Red Dragon 2002, Sir Anthony has become a bit of a washed up Democrat. Just cant believe him. Kind of the Fritz Mondale of the screen. Turn in the mask, you were wonderful in Silence and Hannibal (De Palma can do no wrong). But Ratner?? wasnt he the dork in Fast Times?? hehe. One of my top 10, glad I got to watch it twice in the theater. Buy it.
Rating:
Summary: B-movie at best
Review: Plus point: pretty close in plot structure to original, Jack Crawford in particular. Minus points: flat plotting, unadventurous acting, the ending is changed to a "feel-good" cop-out, and most importantly the villain is never allowed really to blossom into his full hideous tattooed self. He remains a great big lumbering cipher, and Hannibal is almost invisible: result, the only character to engage you is the brought-out-of-retirement detective, and he's busy trying to act "tortured but fascinated" by looking confused or (more often) constipated throughout. Compare it to "Silence of the lambs": Cox just doesn't match up to Hopkins at all. Most of all, "Silence" has atmosphere, and a creative intelligence prowling behind the camera: "Manhunter" feels like a cheap made-for-TV little number. The cinematography is frequently from the "nice postcard of sunset over the bay" school. Read the book instead. I haven't seen the remake yet, but it has to be better. Final point: the soundtrack is only appropriate as the film has been made as a nasty little thriller rather than the horror film they should have attempted. It takes a real negative talent to take a book like "Red Dragon", leave out the beast itself and end up with this utter turkey.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent film, but DO NOT bother buying the Limited Edition
Review: I have been a fan of this film ever since I first saw it on VHS fifteen years ago. And with the passage of time, MANHUNTER has not lost much of its power. If you can get past the obvious stylistic comparison with Michael Mann's other project at that time, "Miami Vice," then I think you will find this to be as well made a detective thriller as there has been in our generation. It really is an excellent precursor to later genre films such as SEVEN. Personally, I prefer Brian Cox's version of Hannibal Lecter more than Anthony Hopkins', because Cox is much subtler in his ways than Hopkins. When Cox's Hannibal has a phone brought to his cell and proceeds to manipulate several people, and does it with all the nonchalance of a man enjoying bacon and eggs in the morning, it's the most frightening scene in the film because you get the strong idea this guy can do anything. There is no equivalent scene in any of Hopkins' portrayals because Hopkins never cares to hide the character's evil. Hopkins chose to play Lecter like a wild animal or a modern day Dracula, while I believe Cox is much scarier because his capabilities are hidden behind a mask of relative normality. Nevertheless, people tend to like the version of Lecter they saw first, and I'm no different. That being said, I must warn you, dear movie fan, to avoid purchasing the MANHUNTER Limited Edition set and consider the regular widescreen version instead. Whereas the "Theatrical Version" (Disc 1) is sharp and well presented in almost every way, the "Director's Cut" DVD (Disc 2) seems to have been created as a careless afterthought, and from an incredibly poor source print. The image is very grainy and washed out, with no sharpness or depth, and it looks for all the while like a second-rate TV print crammed onto a 2.35:1 format, or maybe even a simple transfer from a VHS copy! Yeah, it's that bad. It's possible the only source print of the director's version was formatted just for TV (and I think it was never screened in theaters), but there is no excuse for presenting this version of the film in such a raw, unrestored, unfaithful form. Also consider that there are NO extras whatsoever on the second disc, and you realize you're paying a premium price for literally no added value. Just the first few minutes of the film on Disc 2 gave me the distinct impression that Michael Mann had nothing to do with this release, because he would frankly be ashamed to issue such an inferior product. The film clearly deserves better treatment than this. It's almost as if it's a deliberate attempt by Anchor Bay (the distributor) to minimize Mann's adjustments in favor of its original catalogue print. Considering the price I paid for the limited-edition set, I honestly feel ripped off, and you will be, too, if you decide not to heed this advice. Four stars for the "Theatrical Version" and an overly generous one star for the terrible "Director's Cut." Here's hoping that Michael Mann will someday create a definitive, comprehensive version of MANHUNTER so that this shameful release can be forgotten.
Rating:
Summary: Loved it, here's why
Review: Just recently I read the book "Red Dragon." At the time I did
not know that the new movie was a remake of this film,
Manhunter. After I found out, I decided to track it down.
I have, and here are my thoughts. In a surprising move, this movie is actually pretty close to
the plot of the book, the key difference being only that
the movie concentrates more on Will Graham than on Francis
Dolarhyde (spelled with an extra L in this film) as such,
to those who haven't read the book, Dolarhyde is simply a
killer who thinks he's going to become a god. This also results
in the final leg of the film being totally different from the
book. Now, the other thing I liked about this movie is the music. Not
only did I like the music itself, but I liked how the director
used it to enhance the mood--thoroughly creepy, suspenseful
music when we see an unknown person stalking around a house,
for example--and give us insight into the characters. Like how
a song containing the lyrics "What scares me, as strong as I
am" is playing when Dolarhyde is watching Reba walk home with
another man, of course bringing to the forefront Dolarhyde's
desire for attention and his anger at it being directed at
someone else. It's subtleties like this that aren't done that
often anymore (probably because more recent soundtracks are
so awful or because the art of the subtle is lost on recent
filmmakers) that make movies like this such a blast. In the end, I would suggest at least renting this film and
seeing it once.
Rating:
Summary: THE WORST! I SAW SILENCE AND RED DRAGON BEFORE THIS!
Review: I know that the peoples' opinions on this movie depend on which of the Hannibal movies they saw first. If you're like me and saw Silence Of The Lambs(1991, Directed by Jonathan Demme) and Red Dragon(2002, Directed by Brett Ratner) , or Hannibal(2001, Directed by Ridley Scott(Not as good as Silence and definitely not as good as Red Dragon)) then you won't really be able to accept Brian Cox as Hannibal. I saw Anthony Hopkins in the role before I saw Cox so when I started to watch Manhunter, I just couldn't bring myself to finish it. Especially when I found out the Mann decided to leave out Dolarhyde's tattoo. THAT TATTOO "MICHAEL" HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH WHO DOLARHYDE IS. That tattoo shows the audience just who(what) he THINKS he is. I'm sorry, I watched the Documentary before the film, and when I heard that they left the tattoo out, that completely alienated me from this movie. Sorry Mann, but Jonathan Demme's, Brett Ratner's, AND even Ridley Scott's Lecter movies outpace yours by several miles. But if I had seen this one before all the others, then I probably would have thought that it was better than the others. I am 17 and even I know that Anthony Hopkins is great as Lecter(get the spelling through your heads LECTER). My dad bought the 2-pack of Silence and Hannibal, along with Manhunter as part of a special sale at Best Buy. I wish now that he had left Manhunter out.
Rating:
Summary: Avid Fan
Review: As we all know, this is the film before Silence of the Lambs. It does not have Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lector, but is still very good. There is some cheesy music but it is very interesting and smart. It's got the dad from Fear (Marky Mark movie) in it, as it is he who plays a detective trying to find a serial killer. There is also a blind woman in it, which makes it more of a western. Anyway, check this one out and let me know if you thought Jerry Lewis would have been a better Hannibal. Nice Lady!
| 
