Rating: 
Summary: bad movie
Review: Extremely disappointed in this one!! I almost wish I had not wasted my money and bought it. Very slow and boring story line, no suspense at all. Thought the first movie was much better. Actually had to slap myself from falling asleep during this one!! If you really have to see it rent it first, not worth the money to buy!
Rating: 
Summary: Hannibal
Review: A true stand alone sequel. The movie follows the book exactly along the plot line, but it does lack the in-depth detail and plot twist that you can only find in reading a book. I highly recommend the movie. It is a dark comedy, dark romance, and thriller all in one. It is not for the squimish or faint of heart
Rating:
Summary: What were they thinking?
Review: Since I am a huge fan of the original, I was hesitant to see Hannibal given my experiences with sequels. I realize that any sequel attempt would probably have fallen short of The Silence of the Lambs, but Hannibal is ridiculous. What made the first so great was the suspense and psychological terror. Hannibal resorts to unecessary gore, while the first one was scarier because of what you didn't see. Hannibal depends less on psychological fear than on the grotesque. So disappointing!
Rating: 
Summary: "Good. Doesn't compare to the classic "Silence of the Lambs"
Review: "Hannibal" was a pretty O.K movie except for the fact that Jodie Foster wasn't in it. As a southern woman, I must say that Julianne Moore had one of the worst southern accents I have ever heard before, and she didn't bring any justice to Clarice Starling. However, I did love the story, and I thought it was a good thriller. It wasn't necessarily what I thought it was going to be. When you say a name like Hannibal Lector you think of cannibal, but in my opinion he hardly did any killing, and those he did kill weren't killed in the fashion that I thought Hannibal Lector had become accustomed to. "The Silence of the Lambs" was a classic, but I guess you could say that "Hannibal" was a fairly good movie, certainly not one of the best though.
Rating: 
Summary: Hannibal is an amzing sequel!
Review: Hannibal is underrated, I'm not saying it's better than The Silence of the Lambs (which it isn't), but is a great sequel for it. Anthony Hopkins isn't as scary as he was in The Silence of the Lambs, but I understand he's mellowed out after 10 years. Julianne Moore replaced Jodie Foster (I don't know why, she just did) and to be honest, I think she did a great job being Clarice Starling. Hannibal actually showed that Hannibal Lecter was in love with Clarice, making it more of a Horror/Romance film ( an unlikely and unusual combo in my oppinion). I rarely get movie soundtracks, but this musical score is just irresistable. The dinner scene in Hannibal is one of the most chilling scenes I have ever seen out of all the Horror flicks out there (cutting someone's head to reveal a brain, then cook part of it, gives me the creeps just thinking about it!). So go to your local movie store and pick up a copy of Hannibal. Don't forget to buy the soundtrack too!
Rating: 
Summary: Technically great movie, but, too gruesome!
Review: Gruesome! Don't watch it unless you are willing to fast forward a few scenes. This is an ironically sick movie. The script is well written, Anthony Hopkins is, of course, very good in his role, (but, you have to get past the cheesy voice overs that are supposed to be from "Silence of the Lambs") and Julianne Moore plays an excellent Agent Clarice Starling (a tough act to follow after Jodie Foster's role). Director Ridley Scott makes another great movie (Gladiator was similarly excellent while being gruesome, but not quite as gross as this). The photography is stunning (except the grossly gruesome disgusting scenes). The locations are beautiful. The music is excellent. The editing is wonderful. The deeper uses of symbolism is intriguing and challenging, Etc. Etc. Etc. There really are some many technically and artistically great things about this movie; but in the end (literally) it becomes exceptionally gruesome, with a extraordinarily odious and contemptible final scene. I would not recommend this movie for almost anyone because several gruesome scenes go too far. Of course, there are those who like to push their personal limits. But, if this is something they would enjoy...... maybe Hannibal would make a good evening for them!
Rating:
Summary: One of the worst movies I have ever seen
Review: This movie left me feeling tricked. "Hannibal" has absolutely none of the wit, intelligence or suspense of "Silence Of The Lambs". It is nothing but a vulgar little slasher movie. The beautiful Italian setting and the music are cynical, calculated but, ultimately, failed attempts to add a veneer of depth and sophistication. Hopkins hams his way through the appalling script and Moore's constantly impassive facial expressions suggest that she was slipped an overdose of botox. The shock-horror elements of the "story" are crass in the extreme. The thrilling suspense of the first film has been replaced by make-'em-barf excess. One disturbing facet of this film is the sneakily unspoken suggestion that, at the back of it all, we should somehow be cheering Lecter on as he eats the brains of Ray Liotta's boorish character. This movie has absolutely nothing to recommend it. Avoid, avoid, avoid.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing and empty
Review: Gothic and beautiful but empty-headed follow-up to Jonathan Demme's perfect The Silence of the Lambs that has Julianne Moore ably filling in for Jodie Foster's role as Clarice Starling. The change in cast is most appropriate, actually, since Demme's film had a documentary-like grunge feel to it that Foster fit perfectly (not to say that she's not glamorous), while as here director Ridley Scott has filmed the entire thing as if it were a grand opera, and Moore's classic looks and striking hair colour fit the visual fabric of the film so much better. Other than that, there's not much to it-the plotline is basically finishing off loose ends that the characters didn't wrap up last time, with Starling chasing Hannibal Lecter (the always impressive Anthony Hopkins) across two continents to save him from himself. There's no one to save in the nick of time, there's no driving plotline, nor are there any interesting characters (Giancarlo Giannini's turn as a cop who goes after Lecter in the most ham-fisted of ways is so predictable as to induce yawning when his outcome finally arrives), and so you're left with a film that's all dressed up and no where to go. That said, it also features some of the most disgusting and disturbing images I've ever seen on film, all the more annoying because there's nothing of value to attach them to.
Rating:
Summary: Don't buy it!
Review: I recommend that you don't buy this movie. It is exremely gross and isn't worthy of being a sequal to "Silence of the Lambs!"
Rating:
Summary: Don't be yet another victim of Hannibal Lecter
Review: What is it about trilogies? After creating the two best movies of all time, Godfather 1 and 2, Coppola served up a tasteless dish called Godfather 3, a film so bad he had to cast his talentless daughter in a key role. We find the same issue here. After creating the BRILLIANT and oft-ignored Red Dragon (which was the basis for Michael Mann's clumsy "Manhunter" film), Thomas Harris followed up with an extraordinary book (and, with the help of many others, a delicious movie) called Silence of the Lambs. As in the case of the Godfather, the Hannibal money machine demanded a third installment of this franchise. The result was a nearly unreadable book that actually broke the old Hollywood paradigm: bad books make good movies (certainly great books rarely make great movies, the Godfather being a notable exception). "Hannibal" the movie belongs in the Ed Wood pile of misguided and misused celluloid. If you are considering spending any of your money on any part of Hannibal... the book, a DVD or VHS .. consider Jodie Foster, the original Clarice. She knew what she was doing... she took one look at the script and RAN. You would be well advised to do the same. I only wish there were a rating of "0 stars." Or less.
|
