Rating: 
Summary: 3 stars for the movie, one more star for the DVD.
Review: "Hannibal" was a solid hit upon its release in February 2001, but, like the "Godfather III," it stood in the shadow of its more superior predecessor. When word got out that "Hannibal" was going to be filmed, expectations were high, and critics gave the movie no love, often comparing it unfairly to the far better "The Silence of the Lambs." But "Hannibal," as a film by itself, is a decent picture, and should be watched with an open mind, flaws and all. Julianne Moore gave a great performance as Clarice Starling, although Anthony Hopkins verged on camp during his revisited role as Hannibal Lecter. Some of the scenes were so outrageously graphic, it was often hard to take them seriously and realize the full horror of Lecter's actions. But for all its shortcomings, "Hannibal" the DVD is a worthy purchase because MGM gave this disc such a deluxe treatment. The picture and sound are top-notch, while the features on the second disc inlcude multiple angle shots, documentaries, and other goodies. So my advice is this: if you hated "Hannibal," then you're not going to find much to like here. But those who, like myself, found the film flawed but still entertaining should grab this DVD: it's among the best MGM has ever produced. It's clear that the studio put a lot a love into its making.
Rating: 
Summary: Hannibal? Why it is the best?
Review: Just another one a those sick nutjob old slice them up cut them up well in this case eat them up same thing movies when you think of Hannibal.But no!From the time I put the dvd in and flashed throuh it to the time i took it out i was amazed it wasn't stupid old and slice me up it was a maze of thrills chills crime and punishment fun house as it picks up ten years from Silence Of The Lambs Clarice is back but this time portrayed by Julianne Moore and Anthony Hopkins once again portraying his role as Doctor Hannibal the cannibal Lecter as they rekindle there grusome relashonsip clarice vs hannibal a must see film by Ridly Scott!!!!!!!!! So See It or screw you guys go home
Rating:
Summary: Hannibal stomache is STILL growling!!
Review: Dr. Lector has the need for flesh! Can Clarice handle the case?
After her recent demotion, she is assigned the "Hannibal the Cannibal" case. Hannibal is now over is Italy studying art. I won't give away any more. I'll let you check out the VHS or DVD from your local library, video store, or Blockbuster. Try watching it while eating cow liver and pig feet! And just remember.....people don't really don't kill people and eat them and have a FBI agent chasing them(okay, well some do). It's just a movie! Enjoy!
Rating: 
Summary: This movie made me want to VOM!!!
Review: Okay, I would just like to say that this movie should have come before the first one. I'm not sure if that is what was meant to happen or what. You know, like how Star Wars Episode One: Phantom Menace blah blah blah came out like 20 years after the first movie? Well, this movie is just . . . it doesn't really have much to offer except for more blood and gore and what it has is just plain GROSS!!! I'm still ready to heave cuz of a scene towards the end of the movie that I can NOT shake from my . . . dare I say it. . . brain! There was just senseless grotesque human violence and death in this movie and it kind of downed my opinion of Anthony Hopkins and his choice of actings moments to add to his repetoire! I'm serious, if you don't like slow moving movies that have high points of "bring up your food" moments RUN AWAY from this movie!! I'd heard that there was more death scenes in this movie and that it almost had nothing to do with it's predecessor and I should have, for once, heeded the advice. This is just plain ridiculous!! Now you'll have to excuse me while I go bring up my meal!
Rating:
Summary: This movie was good
Review: Ridley Scott's Hannibal in my opinion is just as good as the first one. Ridlet Scott blends hunting images with extremely graphic violence which in my opinion works very well together. I like how they show you the evil of Hannibal Lector. I think that was good the first one should you his good side this one shows his bad side. This film should have got the NC-17 rating for violence its one of the most violent films ever made.
WARNING: This film contains Extremely Graphic Prolonged Groesome violence and Graphic Cannablism.
Rating:
Summary: RUBBISH UNTIL THE END
Review: Oh Boy was I disappointed with this pile of crud. Ridley Scott has never made a 1.85:1 movie in his life but, for some reason, he made this his first. I thought that Manhunter had very cool widescreen photography and Jonathan Demme really should have followed in its footsteps. I thought I could depend on Scott to give us photography as good as he given us before (Legend, Thelma and Louise). But NO! I have to get that MAJOR gripe out of the way first. But I have some other gripes. Mainly that the film is incredibly boring and has no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Hopkins was cool and creepy in SOTL but here he is just campy and hammy. Did he deliberately try to turn Hannibal Lector into a gay icon? SOTL received 4 Academy Awards but Hannibal deserves a truckload of Razzies. There are countless, scenes after scenes, of Clarice watching tapes of surveillance cameras and some Italian cop pacing about a rainy and miserable Florence. Ray Liotta pops up occasionally playing a role that was played by someone else in SOTL. He doesn't do much and contributes ZERO to the story. It seems that the only reason his character was in the movie was for the GROSS, GROSS, INCREDIBLY, GROSS ending. The ending is worth the price of admission but it is not worth sitting thru 2 hours of trash to see. It's a real shame that Manhunter and Silence of the Lambs were concluded with this total pile of garbage. Don't see it, don't rent it, don't buy the DVD and do not watch it on the TV.
Rating:
Summary: Bloody awful.
Review: This is an incredibly vile, unbelievably stupid film, such that even needing to go into details would be an utter waste of time. I'm not sure how low of an IQ one would need to actually enjoy this tripe, but suffice it to say that even my teddy bear, who watched it with me to comfort me through the "scary" parts, was sneering in disgust for two weeks afterward. And on that note, even the gore factor was a joke compared to its hype...the film's gore imagery was so ridiculous and over the top that it was far more comedic than frightening. No comparison with Silence of the Lambs (or any other film for that matter), no hand-wringing over the film's ridiculous gore, and no regret over any likeness or lack of likeness to the book, is necessary to judge this moronic waste of celluloid as anything but a mind-numbing insult to intelligence. It's clear now why the film burned through its 15 minutes of hype so quickly, and on a related aside, I hope Ridley Scott is enjoying his post-Gladiator 15 minutes while he has them...they won't be lasting much longer. My sincere hats off to Jodie Foster for her show of integrity, whatever it was worth, in not having been dragged into being a part of this sorry mess...I've never respected her more. And if ever I ask myself what made me lose what used to be a healthy amount of respect for both Anthony Hopkins and Julianne Moore, there is no doubt at all where I'll point. This is the most insultingly stupid and plainly awful film that Hollywood has churned out in several years, and a complete embarrassment to some noteworthy, talented actors that may be laughing to the bank, but who have destroyed a large part of the professional credibility they once enjoyed with intelligent movie-goers. Anyone claiming that this film is "brilliant" should have their right to use that word revoked permanently. And stay away from complex machinery.
Rating:
Summary: A Waste of Time
Review: I saw this movie in the theatres. My friend's and I were anticipating thrilling, gory scenes..with suspense and action. Sure, the movie had it's gross parts, but the plot was terrible..and I slept through some of the movie. This was not as good as "Silence Of The Lambs." What I found more disappointing than the movie, was the fact that I actually paid to go watch this! PLEASE don't buy this, it's terrible.
Rating:
Summary: Highly dissapointed
Review: I love the scenery like most of the people praised here about, but that's about it. What was so gory about? The original was more gory. It wasn't as strongly contented either, it shouldn't have been rated PG-13, that would be pushing the envelope too much. The original was dark with a thrilling atmosphere, this isn't dark neither with a thrilled atmosphere, just silly. People also called it violent, I've seen worst than this. Some of the acting was great, especially Hopkins' role as Hannibal (of course not paring up to his excellent role in The Silence of the Lambs). There is one other good thing to it, they didn't use the ol' "Silence of the Lambs 2" title. I was hoping for it to be decent, like what we always ask for when we are about to see a film, but instead, we got an over-hyped, typically merited for a sequel film. The script and plot are alright, but nothing special. The "I'd like to eat your wife for dinner" line was pretty good. The plot isn't so bad. There's been worst.
And the plot is were Hannibal moves out of the country to continue his cannibalism that was delayed for about a decade. Don't buy it, trust me, it'll dissapoint you, just rent, no, just buy it's proceeder The Silence of the Lambs.
Rating: 
Summary: Not as great as the original, but what sequal is?
Review: This is just what a sequel does after the original movie comes out and does so well. I saw this here in town and I can honestly say this is not up to par. Hopkins should have known what Foster did and turned this down. The ending is a waste of everyone's talent! The beginning was good.
|
