Hannibal

Rating:
Summary: DEAR GOD, STOP HIM! STOP HIM BEFORE HE FILMS AGAIN!!!
Review: Once again Ridley covers all thebases.
<YAWN>
I'd heard Demme passed on this project, butI couldn't figure out why (Hopkins? Moore?) until I saw the HannibalDVD package. Once again Dino De Laurentis rises from the ashes. Trueto form he picks the most successful mediocrity of his generation todirect, and here we are.
This movie is tediously predictable, voidof any sense of character (beyond Hopkins, who seems to be havingfun). It goes like this: Julianne Moore is persecuted; Ray Liotta isher evil boss; Hopkins is Evil and Charming; Act II is set in Florencewith an Italian policeman. <YAWN> In other words a typical Scottproduction. I wish he would stop making movies and take up macrame orsomething.
And it comes with a supplimentary package (all that"making of" nonsense) that is even more contrived than themovie: lot's of ass-kissing PR with Make-Up and SPFX guys who justloved working with Ridley "because he's so visual"; Dino (DeLaurentis, not the dog from "Flintstones") andGrand-daughter doing their spin. It isn't documentation, it's just apress-package -- as fake and worthless as the movie itself.
Andthen there's the Director's commentary and "deleatedscenes": sure enough, anything resembling character wasdeleated. Ridley, clearly suffering from ADS, clipped them all to"move the story forward". I don't see why he bothered,unless he just wanted the damn thing over with.
Hard to believethis is the man who made Bladerunner. One thing you'l get from thisDVD is a sense of how hopeless the future of Hollywood is.
HannibalLOOKS, FEELS, CUTS LIKE, and SOUNDS like all the other stuff the ScottBros deliver. And it'scopmpletely forgettable.
I wish Steven Sonderberg haddirected this movie. AT least then it might've lookedinteresting.
Why TWO stars and not one? Well, it's in FOCUS most ofthe time.

Rating:
Summary: Alternate Ending Better than Theater Version!
Review: Get the DVD. Anthony Hopkins and Julianne Moore generate a marvelous story about Dr. Hannibal Lecter's return to the States
and then some--of course. This two-DVD pack includes a number of missing scenes that bring in a few skipping areas from original version. AND, AND, AND---the Alternate Ending is Better (IMHO) for those Lecterphiles who may have been a little bummed in the theater. Hope they do, do another Lecter story. Agreed with comments saying this is not a sequel to Clarice Starling tales.
This is an Italian Renaissance flare conveying a wee adventure
by Dr. Hannibal Lecter.

Rating:
Summary: This is one SICK FILM!
Review: Hannibal is such a breath of fresh air in today's hollywood landscape. It is a film that is unapologetic and unflinching in its depiction of graphic violence. Most of today's so called "horror" films have been reduced to nothing more than cheap laughs and tight halter tops. Hannibal is the antithesis of the so-called "modern" horror film. Anthony Hopkins plays Hannibal Lechter to scary perfection. He is a refined, well educated, verbose, psychopath. Those who are suspect of the film because of the absence of Jodie Foster should read the title of the film, Hannibal. The great majority of Hannibal focuses on the title character and not Federal Agent Starling. Julianne Moore is servicable but is really a periphery character. Once again Ridley Scott has proven that he is one of the few remaining master directors in Hollywood and he continues to produce important and intriguing work. Overall, this is without a doubt a DVD that you should own not only for the film but for the extras including an alternate ending and deleted scenes. One word of caution: This film should NOT be viewed by children (especially the last 20 minutes). That said, enjoy and prepare to be shocked.

Rating:
Summary: A Rather Dark Little Tale
Review: This is one of those films that is a bit of a guilty pleasure for me. As it goes, FBI Agent Clarice Starling (Julianne Moore) is not in the best of places when she is put back on the investigation to find killer Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins). This is all part of the machinations of the only survivor of Lecter's attacks, Mason Verger (Gary Oldman, in a truly twisted performance) who wants nothing less than to use Lecter for pig food. Sure I can carp about the slight lapses in suspense (moreso when we leave the Italy sequences behind), the ending (not the "dinner" scene, but after that), and to some degree, the charcterization of certain characters. The thing is though, I still get wrapped up in the sick absurbity of it all. Visually, this film is just stunning (especially during the time in Italy), the music is quite beautiful (such as in the opera sequence), and even chilling in some places, like an eerie flashback involving Verger and his reason for wanting Hannibal Lecter dead (and to The Blue Danube, no less). Is it a good movie? The answer depends on what you expect from "Hannibal". If you expect a straight forward thriller, at least you have a copy of "Silence of the Lambs", right? If you expect a dark, gore-drenched little melodrama, then by all means, dig in.

Rating:
Summary: not as tasty as the original...
Review: Hopkins is back as Hannibal and Julianne Moore replaces Jodie Foster as Agent Clarice Starling (a tragedy in its own right, but more on that later.) The movie stars out with an impressive market shoot-out, in which Clarice gets one of her fellow officers killed and shoots a woman holding a baby. After that she is reassigned to the Hannibal case because he has started killing/eating people again. Although the market shoot-out was very cool, the rest of the movie is boring and pointless. Anthony Hopkins isn't half as scary as he was in the original and Julianne Moore is horrible in Jodie Foster's role. Most of the Hannibal attacks are in the last 45 minutes of the movie and you have to wait until the last 30 minutes or so of the movie until Clarice and Hannibal actually meet. Yes, it's that boring. Up until that last 45 minutes, the movie is an seemingly endless blend of Hannibal sipping wine in Florence and Clarice in her basement, reading Hannibal's notes, watching Hannibal videos and listening to Hannibal audio tapes. Mixed in with that is an old geezer on a wheelchair that keeps talking about how he survived when he cut off his own face when Hannibal told him to. There is practically no suspense. It is replaced with (not needed) gore. The special features were okay, but not what I expected. Some of the deleted scenes are good and the featurettes are somewhat interesting, but the other stuff makes you think, "Who actually cares about watching different camera angles of a scene?" That feature is totally useless and boring, (all you see is footage of four different cameras showing people talking) as is the other vignettes. The audio commentary by Ridley Scott is good as usual. Also, some of the deleted scenes should have been in the movie. For example, there is a deleted scene where Clarice explores the dark and abandoned mental hospital. (Where Lecter was in the first film) The scene provides some pretty creepy things, but no. Anything that would be actually scary shouldn't be in the movie, according to the editors. I give this movie two stars because at some points it's interesting. For example, when Clarice talks with Barney (the old security guard at the mental hospital from the original film) it is interesting and it's fun to watch things that the first one hinted about. For example, in the first one, the head of the mental hospital shows Clarice a picture of what Lecter did to a nurse when they removed his restraints because he complained of stomach pain. You don't see the picture. In this film, you see the act. Anyway, this film is passable as a sequel, but I was disappointed. This movie cleary didn't take advantage of it's possible potential. All in all: The Silence of the Lambs is MUCH better. That is a movie worth owning. I recommend you rent Hannibal before you see it. Only die-hard Hannibal fans should actually buy this movie.

Rating:
Summary: A vastly underrated film.
Review: People look at me strangely when I describe this film as "beautiful". But that was the adjective that immediately came to mind when I saw "Hannibal" last winter. Like many people, the ending of the novel on which this film is based left me feeling slightly cheated. So I went to the film out of a sense of obligation (I love Thomas Harris's novels), but with slightly lowered expectations. I could not have been more pleasantly surprised. Ridley Scott has taken a good-but-not-great book and turned it into a film that deserves a more positive response than it seems to be getting. I can understand why some may be "disappointed" in the movie, but the ones who call this film "bad" are completely missing the boat. It is beautifully filmed, very well-acted, wonderfully scored, and ultimately emotional. To call it a bad film is an insult to Ridley Scott and all of the people associated with him. The problem is, people are going to the film expecting "SotL Part 2", which isn't fair to either film. If you expect to be on the seat's edge when you see "Hannibal", you will be disappointed. See it on it's own terms. In the documentary on disc two, Scott and the actors suggest that "Hannibal" should be approached as a completely different entity. The story itself has received enough commentary--everyone knows what it's about. I will say that the film's ending seems much more "appropriate" to the Lecter/Starling relationship. I loved it! The sweeping, panoramic shots of Italian countrysides and dark shadows are a sharp contrast to "SotL"s extreme closeups and jarring action sequences. This film is treated more like a vampire-esque gothic romance than an edge-of-your-seat thriller. I really can't see how Jonathan Demme would've done it had he chosen to direct. It doesn't suit his approach at all. Hans Zimmer's mesmerizing score has helped to give me chills each of the three times I've seen the film. As for the DVD extras, they are of extreme interest for filmmakers especially. The Fish Market breakdown will appeal most to them. But as a plain ol' movie watcher, I enjoyed the hour-long documentary the most. The DVD itself looks terrific on my screen. In a few years, I believe that this film will get the kudos it deserves. And people will realize how underrated it was upon release. (4 1/2 stars)

Rating:
Summary: Riveting
Review: I enjoyed the movie. I had to look away from the screen about three times due to gore. The gore is to be expected. It is a movie about a cannibal. Anthony Hopkins is good as "Hannibal" again. This time we get more insight into what type of man he is. This movie is both thrilling and amusing.

My only worry is that some could see this movie as the glorification of a serial killer. It isn't blatantly said that what "Hannibal" is doing is right in the movie but all the indicators are there. "Hannibal" attacks only people he considers sinners. The majority of these people aren't shown in a favorable light for the viewer. He saves "...." And the ending shows him in a favorable light. He's actually this movie's hero!

That said, I still want to see this movie again. It's morbidly fascinating. I keep recalling all these scenes I would like to see again. The more I think about it and the more I see the commercials for it, the more I realize how much I liked this movie.

Rating:
Summary: Finger Licking Good
Review: This is a very good sequel with a totally different approach from the original. I think this was actually a great character study. Some scenes that reviewers thought were gratuitous are really sorties into the real world. Symbolically you let the demons come to fruition by having them come to the surface. This is not nearly as grotesque as the media hype suggested. That is a shame because it kept many people away from the box-office. This film reminds me of the reactions at the time THE FRENCH CONNECTION II was released. THE FRENCH CONNECTION II was a totally different approach to the character from that in THE FRENCH CONNECTION. Jimmy 'Popeye' Doyle was literally out of his element and out of his country in THE FRENCH CONNECTION II. Many people expected something different just as they did here with HANNIBAL. The DVD extras are interesting to see what was left out. However why are some things left in and others left out? I think only the company that releases the film can answer that.

Rating:
Summary: Oh God Oh God, This Movie Is INCREDIBLE!
Review: I have read some of the reviews for this film, now I feel obligated to write my own review. I am sorry SOTL enthusiasts, JULIANNE MOORE DOES JUST AS GOOD IF NOT BETTER JOB OF CLARICE STARLING THAN JODIE FOSTER! Julianne is not the same person Jodie was, she admits in this film that she thinks about hannibal atleast a half minute every day, Hannibal is WITH her all the time, she is never going to be the same. First we have to accept that clarice is now OLDER and she is in the middle of a scandal and is under a lot of public and private pressure at work. Her american innocence being plunged into darkness is over, she has been through bill and has met and interviewed hannibal. This movie goes deeper into Lector's character, fortunately, he still has all the witty genius of SOTL. Hannibal's interest in Clarice has been VERY kicked and beaten by SOTL enthusiasts. There is a deleted scene in SOTL where hannibal goes into clarices car during her infamous run and starts a sort of closeup with the steering wheel (her hands...). Hannibal in my opinion, has feelings for Clarice beyond just intrigue, but being the gentleman he is, never crosses boundaries. WE TRULY get to see Hannibals relationship with Clarice in its full form, the scene where he rescues her in this sort of classic knight in shining armor way is VERY telling. This movie is filled with various wonderful characters and some very "sick" violent scenes, but those are definitely all part of the story and are somewhat necessary. Frankly, its a classic, sorry, but I can no longer imagine SOTL without hannibal close by.

Rating:
Summary: THROW THIS ONE TO THE DOGS!
Review: I am not wondering why this movie flopped at the box office. This movie left me wondering why they bothered to make it. Julianne Moore didn't hold a candle to Jodie Foster in the role of Agent Starling. I was dissapointed with the fact that Jack Crawford had no part in the movie at all. I didn't care for the way this movie jumped back and forth leaving you to assume what happened,for example, Hannibal is in Florence and then poof, he's in D.C. It was too unbelievable that the F.B.I.,and all it's resources couldn't catch the charming doctor, but Carlo and the boys snatched him up in a matter of hours. I have watched this movie 3 times making sure I didn't miss something,and have been insulted more everytime I watched it! They should've left the deleted scenes in this movie just to beef it up some more.....

<< 1 .. 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 .. 62 >>