Rating: 
Summary: Just tried to eat somethin'...
Review: hannibal lecter( NOT LectOr), the elegant, charismatic killer from "the silence of the lambs" is back. and he's as sympathic and "stylish" as before. Of course, this movie can't reach the athmosphere of the great book ( you all should read it), but this movie is still a top-quality horrorthriller, from bloodthirsty "dinners" to absolute quiet harmony. And Anthony Hopkins is the one and only who's able to play the role. oh, one word to juliane moore: of course, she did her job, in fact, she's great. But she isn't jodie foster...
Rating:
Summary: Deliciously Brilliant.
Review: This movie gets better every time I see it (It should really be viewed twice so as to not miss out on some passable events that really add depth to the story.) This movie slowly pumps you with adrenaline, giving you some excitement at the beginning then easing the rest into your soul. It's chilling and just as mentally disturbing as the first. True Jodie Foster was EXCELLENT, however Julianne Moore offers a new, stronger Clarice. Hopkins however is violently playful and remains cool and calm regardless of his surroundings. He is disturbing and evil. He is better in "Hannibal" than in "The Silence of the Lambs" and should definitely be rewarded with an Oscar for this blood-curdling role. In Short, this film is exciting, scary, mentally disturbing (It will get to you) and is directed beautifully (The scenery, music and general flow are amazing) See this movie, buy this movie IT IS THAT GOOD.
Rating:
Summary: HANNIBAL-A MASTERPIECE OF HORROR
Review: I had been wanting to see this film for a long time, ever since the 1991 Academy Awards when Billy Crystal asked Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins about the sequel and both confirmed it was coming. Upon the release of Michael Mann's Manhunter and Demme's Silence of the Lambs, this film seems poised to come under incredible scrutiny, which it did. Manhunter was more police procedure suspense film, which veered into the more horrific parts of humanity; whereupon, Silence took that notion and fleshed it out even more. Police procedure became horror film and vice versa and the door was left open with Lector walking away peacefully in Jamaca. Now comes Hannibal, the inevitable conclusion to this series and takes its subject directly into the horrific. The last two films combined had locked doors, pits, bugs, sharp teeth, cannibalism, etc and the terror was built out of your mind's eye (with the exception of Lector pulling the face off the victim in the back of the ambulence; which detractors of Hannibal tend to forget), and now comes the almost operatic notion of criminals on the run being pursured by FBI, perverts and money hungry and fame seeking detectives, not to mention killer pigs. The series was building up to this nightmarish series of images and taken as a whole, this is the most distubring horror series possibly ever made. Hannibal, seems more like a foreign film than the blood and guts slasher film that everyone seems to think it is. Is it bloody? Yes, but enough so--not overly. This isn't Dawn of the Dead, people. The ironic thing was that alot of attention was made that the filmmakers changed the ending of the book, which they did--and it works beautifully; however, the ending of the book probably would have worked in this adaptation of the film. The idea of Lector and Starling together would not have seemed out of left field coming out of this film. All in all, though--this film will be thought well over time and if not chalk this up with other great horror films that no one seems to pay any attention to (Mute Witness, Opera, Blair Witch 2, Cherry Falls). Take what you want from this film, but I feel this is one of the best and strongest horror films in recent memory; so if you are into bubblegum horror--please stay away.
Rating: 
Summary: Hannibal merely lingers above mediocrity.
Review: You would think that with the combination of a fantastic director like Ridley Scott, stellar screenwriters like David Mamet and Steven Zaillian, and astounding actors like Anthony Hopkins and Julianne Moore; that you would have one of the greatest films ever made. Well Hannibal is, disappointedly, far from it. Scott's normally masterful direction is quite weak in Hannibal. Many of the action/suspense sequences are rather lifleless, which is surprising considering he's given us such riveting films as Alien and Gladiator. Steven Zaillian and David Mamet's screenplay is not what you would come to expect from the men who wrote such masterworks Schindler's List and The Untouchables. They had a little too much fun with some of the characters. There are some very awkward lines of dialogue. A little more depth and thoroughness wouldn't have hurt. The pacing isn't the greatest either. After the opening shoot-out (which isn't that riveting, anyway), the film takes a while to get going again. Anthony Hopkins gives a solid performance. Julianne Moore is pretty good but I couldn't help but miss Jodie Foster. Gary Oldman delivers an unnecessarily over-the-top performance and comes off as being quite annoying, as the disturbed Mason Verger. Giancarlo Giannini gives a great performance, and probably the film's best, as the sleazy Italian detective, Rinaldo Pazzi. Some of the films highlights are John Mathieson's sharp and atmospheric cinematography and Han Zimmer's wonderfully haunting musical score. Hannibal could have been worse but it could have been a lot better.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best films of the past year..
Review: Not many great films came out over the past year but this is one of them. Many want to compare this movie to Silence of the Lambs because of very obvious reasons but it wasn't a sequel as much as it was a new story. This story revolved around Hannibal Lecter. I felt Anthony Perkins was brilliant in this movie and showed so many more sides to Hannibal then you saw in the first movie. I liked this easily as much as the first one. If you expect to see Hannibal in a jail cell for the entire movie then you will be dissapointed, but if you want to see him out on the prowl then this is sure to satisfy.
Rating: 
Summary: Gross, entertaining feast!
Review: There is a lot shadowing over Hannibal to stop audiences from enjoying it. The critics didn't think it was too flash, the censors gave it mighty high ratings and most sequels, according to some people's philosophy, aren't worth the time. I was really looking forward to seeing this movie and I wasn't distracted by any of the above. At the start I honestly found Hannibal a little boring, but when the cool detective story comes in it gives the film a little more life. We needed something else to keep the film going however, because it was missing the chemistry of the first. When Lecter finally enters the United States, things heat up. The gore splashes everywhere, the scenes are more exciting, the characters get meatier (in both senses of the word) and the audience will start to get more involved. The detective story in the first hour or so in the film is very well played and neat, the killings in the movie are creative, the cinematography is beautiful and the soundtrack is stunning. At times the film goes a bit off-course and is a wee bit laughable, but it remains enjoyable in the focused parts of the movie, which is a lot of the film, not much of it is really 'bad' bad. Ridley Scott directs the movie fabulously and gives us stylish and memorable scenes. Some scenes in the movie are memorable in a bad way, though, I'll warn you now. The acting is brilliant, with Julianne Moore fabulous as a more determined but less interesting Clarice Starling, Anthony Hopkins as a scarier and less mature Hannibal and Gary Oldman who is great but completely unrecognisable as grotesque make-up covers his face. Hannibal is a gross, great and gory re-visit to the character we enjoy so much, I recommend it to people who either enjoyed the first film or enjoy very extreme deaths in movies.
Rating: 
Summary: Anthony Hopkins is good. That's about it.
Review: Maybe Anthony Hopkins doesn't need to try in order to scare us. He certainly makes it LOOK easy. His performance as Hannibal Lecter is again riveting and chilling. Thus ends the movie's good traits. Much has been made of this movie being relatively gory compared to the first. I frankly think people don't remember the first if they think so, but I understand. Hannibal is much more PSYCHOLOGICALLY horrifying the aesthically horrifying. But the fact is the this horror does nothing to advance the plot. It is purely there to horrify. Without a sensible plot, Hannibal is only debatably worth your time.
Rating:
Summary: HANNIBAL AND SCLICE 'N' DICE MOVIES [MOSTLEY HORROR]
Review: I THINK HANNIBAL , HORROR AND SCLICE AND DICE MOVIES ARE GREAT BECAUSE 1 THEY ARE INTERESTING 2 THEY ARE GORY 3 THEY ARE COOL NOW SOME PEOPLE MAY THINK I'M SICK BUT THE TRUTH IS A LOT OF IT IS STORY LINE I MEAN SOME TIMES THE CHOP MY HEAD OFF AND GORE IS COOL BUT WHAT REALLY IS GOOD IS BOTH NOW I HAVE NOT SEEN HANNIBAL I MIGHT BUT IKNOW IT IS GOOD FOR HANNIBAL FANS [ DANNY LOMBARDI]
Rating:
Summary: What the story needed
Review: We saw what Hannibal could do with his mind in the silence of the lambs, now it is time to see what he can do physically. We needed to see what put him in the asylum in the first place which this film does well. Because where the story began about Dr. Hannibal Lecture in the book Red Dragon he was already in prison. Then comes Silence of the Lambs which did well in showing the mind of a monster he was still in a cell. And when they mention what he did to the nurse they didn't let you see the picture so we never got a full idea of why he is in a cell in the first place. I believe thats what we needed to see in the movie Hannibal and I believe thats what we saw in Hannibal. Dont get me wrong I thought the book was great and better than the film but that was only because it gave a better view of the elegance of the character Hannibal. It showed that hannibal only killed the rude. But the book did not give a good enough depiction of why he was thrown in a cell. The movie showed what happened to the nurse. It showed the true monster Hannibal is. It showed how evil he is and what placed him in a cell. The movie needed more scenes of the elegance of Hannibal. That is the only thing that is missing really in the movie. As in for the ending I believe that I like the movie ending better than the book ending because the book ending didn't leave room for another book. Which is not usually a problem but I believe that the book Hannibal did not explain everything that needed to explain. I believe that it didn't complete the story of its main characters. So the movie ending left it open so that it could explain the rest of the story. The movie with its small special effects really sealed a four star rating. They brought out the true emotions in the important scenes with flashes, slow motion, and through the sound track music. There were a couple of parts in the book in which I wished were in the film for example why didn't they mention the sixth finger that hannibal had? And there are many other things that I wished were in the film. I did not believe that the film was scary nor gory. I belive that the film was not supposed to be depicted as a scary film. Yes I believe that it was possible that it could have gotton a higher rating than R for like the ending scene with Hannibal on the airplane. You know what I am talking about. But with me growing up in an age of violence I have seen worse. There are some graphic scenes such as when they show you on video what happens to the nurse but I believe you needed to see it. My overall view is that it is a good film. It dipicted the evil side of Hannibal In which we have never whitnessed before. The only flaws were that it didn't show his nice side to people who treat him with respect as well as it should have. It didn't show enough of his elegance as it did in the book. He shouldn't have tried to meet clarice as he said in Silence of the Lambs. The book made it as a coensedence that they met.
Rating:
Summary: Hannibal
Review: Awesome!!!!!!! This movie may have been criticized as being not only bad but just plain horrible! That's because people compared this movie too much to 'The Silence of the Lambs'. 'Hannibal' is not like 'Lambs' because 'Hannibal' is a thriller but I'm not saying that 'Lambs' is bad because it certainly is not. 'Lambs' is more drama and dark while 'Hannibal' is a thrill-ride and at some times funny. People were skeptical about Julianne Moore replacing Jodie Foster not because they thought Julianne can't act but just because Jodie was in the first one and wasn't in 'Hannibal'. Julianne Moore did a great job to make us forget about Foster which is what was needed. Also, in this movie I just couldn't picture Jodie Foster being in it. Julianne Moore stole all the scenes she was in and really did a great job acting that she was being stalked by this cannibal who is obsessed with her. Speaking of Anthony Hopkins, he did a great job as Dr. Hannibal 'The Cannibal' Lecter. Like with the movie in general, his role was not like the role in 'Lambs'. If it was possible, he seemed more calm in this role. He has been living the great life under a different name in Italy for the past several years which must be a lot nicer than that glass jail cell from the first movie. It was great to hear him utter lines like, 'Goody-goody', 'Okey-dokey', and 'Well, let's gets this thing going' right in the middle of drama scenes where you think he's going to do something like kill the person but then takes you away. The movie was really a thriller and kept you on the edge of your seat. You really can't say whether this movie was better than 'The Silence of the Lambs' because they are 2 completely different movies. So if you're wanting to see 'The Silence of the Lambs Part 2', this is not it. 'Hannibal' is a great movie and completely recommend it because it's a lot of fun to watch and for parents unsure about their kids seeing it, there's only a little bit of profanity. I didn't find any of the violence offensive or gross and their was no sexuality of any unless you count some of the Italian sculptures/statues. This is a great movie.
|
