Rating: 
Summary: This a different take than Manhunter
Review: I've seen Manhunter and Red Dragon now. They are both good movies from a different time. Manhunter focuses more on FBI agent Will Graham and we barely get a chance to see killer in this movie, except at the end. Who can forget the scene of Will Graham breaking through the window to the music of "In da gada da vida." Lector in the movie Manhunter was played by a different actor who is very good, but had a different take on how to play him. He was almost cocky in this one. Now Red Dragon which as I see it focused on three parts, Will Graham, Lector, and Dolarhyde. Each one had there moment. We also get to see why Dolarhyde was the way he was, this was absent in Manhunter. Both movies were good, but Red Dragon was more impressive.
Rating: 
Summary: Astonishing, yet...
Review: My original review was denied posting, but I assure you I saw 'Red Dragon' on the 4th with the rest of you.There is little I can say to further inform you of the character of Hannibal Lecter, nor could I bear to unearth the story of the 'Red Dragon' to those who have yet to witness this film; however I will say in good faith that I have mixed emotions as to the treatment of this one. When Demme first made 'The Silence of the Lambs' Lecter was a new concept, and it became clear right away that he struck a chord with us. Brilliant, mysterious, and above all a vivid representation of a dark ideal within, Hannibal Lecter had the kind of outright presence that is very rarely attained. Surely, it must be rarer still to hold that quality over time, and, although I shy from giving anything away, I will say that the theme of Lecter's "domestication" that has been rising steadily ever since the release of 'Hannibal' has grown very strong indeed.
The decision to take on Ratner, I'm sure, caused the basic elements of this film to change dramatically. The feel is truly dark at times. Everything about the way this movie was shot is very sobering, very real. Yet the basic premise for Hannibal Lecter was one of fantasy, in that you could never come to truly know him or witness him in private life. That he never slept, never shat, and never ate, save... And now, with Ratner's stone cold portrayal of Lecter, he has diminished the good doctor's character to a sort of reserved jealousy; brooding from behind the glass and slower off-the-line this time 'round as well. Admittedly, this is not Hannibal's hour. That came and went with the film that was no less than named after him, and I do of course embellish just a tad about nationwide cannibali disillusionment seeing as how Hannibal Lecter means very much to myself and others personally. However; to watch the three movies in originally intended chronological order, that is to say: 1 - 'RED DRAGON'; 2 - 'THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS'; 3 - 'HANNIBAL' would leave you with radically altered impressions of Dr. Lecter, and, it is my guess, not for the better. Understand, this is not in the least to say that Ratner did not make a marvelous, marvelous film. He's done no less than that. It is only that he has forgotten the very first rule of Hannibal Lecter. We want to fear him. We want to lie prostrate in the presence of his sheer power and ability. Instead, we have traded in true terror for familiarity. Hannibal will no doubt forever be favored my more than most, but he cannot be our champion, for we can neither truly know him nor claim him as our own. Either way, 'Red Dragon' triumphs endlessly over 'Manhunter.'
Rating:
Summary: worth seeing
Review: really scary
really good
go see it, now!
Rating:
Summary: Red Dragon Tops Silence of the Lambs
Review: Anthony Hopkins once again gives an amazing performance as Hannibal Lector in this prequel to Silence of the Lambs and Hannibal. This is, I'd say, the best film of the trilogy, edging out Silence of the Lambs. Edward Norton and Ralph Fiennes also give strong performances. Brett Ratner did a superb job on this masterpiece, clearly his best work to date. Wittier and more clever, Red Dragon is an instant classic.
Rating:
Summary: GOOD GOD!
Review: This movie is terrifying! ...no, wait...the toothfairy is terrifying. He is one of those killers that commits unspeakable and horrific crimes...stuff that makes your skin crawl and your face cringe...and you keep asking yourself "GOOD GOD, WHY?!", and "WHAT IS GOING THROUGH THIS MONSTER'S MIND?!". I think the movie's success is partly owed to the fact that little is revealed about the killer's background, and you keep asking yourself what could have possibly happened that turned this man into what he is...you keep wondering what string of events in the character's life contributed to his formation as a killer...a true suspense movie. excellent. scared me silly.
Rating:
Summary: Verrrry Scary
Review: He's back! Anthony Hopkins returns as Hannibal Lecter, and this time it's 1980; erstwhile FBI agent Will Graham (Edward Norton) is capturing him and putting him in prison for multiple killings and cannibalism. Will quit the agent biz after their last encounter, but four years later, he's called back to help find another serial murderer. He asks for Hannibal's help, just as Agent Starling did in Silence of the Lambs (But Norton is much more convincing as an agent than Jodie Foster was). We follow Will through some very graphic and gory scenes, as he puts the clues together to find the current madman. There is abundant blood and mayhem, but none of it is shown happening on camera; only in photographs (which are stomach-turning). The musical score is frightening in its intensity and even makes the end credits creepy. Hannibal plays a relatively small and unnecessary part in the story, but it is great fun to see Hopkins in action again. We don't seem to mind that he is 20 years too old for the part; he is almost an American icon at this point, and we love to be scared by him. Edward Norton is wonderful as the sadder-but-wiser former agent who is still brave, dedicated, and quick-witted enough to find the evil villian (played by Ralph Fiennes). Fiennes is so good as the devil with a pathetic past, that you feel sorry for him, despite his deeds. The script is top-notch and the direction is quick and restrained. This movie is absolutely guarranteed to scare your socks off!
Rating:
Summary: Interesting variation on a theme
Review: Hamlet gets performed throughout the world hundreds of times. The story, characters and outcome always the same. What makes it interesting with each retelling, though, are the variations in performance, interpretation and setting found within different performances of the same play. I'm not suggesting that Red Dragon is Hamlet (although you could argue that since Shakesphere was a popular artist and considered clever and vulgar at the same time during his reign, he could be seen within the same light--a pop artist playing to the audience of his time). I really like Michael Mann's Manhunter. Despite what you've heard in the press, it was a solid film adaption of Red Dragon. Both films share the same basic plot and characters. Red Dragon plays very well as a variation on the same story. I had a hard time buying Edward Norton as Will Graham at first (CSI's William Petersen is still the best embodiement of Will Graham), but he does manage to bring off the emotionally vunerable walking wounded aspect of the character. I'm surprised that Scott Glenn wasn't asked to reprise his role from SOL as many of the other principles are back. Still, Harvey Keitel does gives a strong performance in the role. Ralph Fienes as the title killer gives a great performance. He strikes an interesting variation on the character. Tom Noonan also did a great job in Manhunter. Both succeeded in portraying the anguished monster at the core of the character. Emily Watson does a very good turn as the blind woman who becomes involved in the title character's life. What matters about Red Dragon are the differences. The film is bookended with two major ones; we see how Will Graham captured Hannibal Lecter and we also see the explosive climax from the novel as well. Both add considerably to the story and make Red Dragon less a remake of a cult film and bestselling book. I have to give the director credit--he manages to mine the same vein as Michael Mann, Jonathan Demme and Ridley Scott and still makes it fresh and appealing. I was also happily surprised at Ted Tally's skillful adaption of the book and how he managed to weave in both plot points from the novel and his own creative take on it. His screenplay stands up well to others he's written (including Silence of The Lambs). Ultimately, though Red Dragon's success either rises or fails based on Anthony Hopkins' performance and his interactions with Norton as Graham. I'm happy to report that Hopkins' performance is less mannered than in Hannibal and equal to the task at hand. He's credible at playing a formative and cocky Lecter. Once Norton interacts with Hopkins later in the film, the character takes on a believability missing from some of the earlier key scenes. When the tables turn and Graham's fear of Lecter becomes dominance, the film actor and character take on further believability. By the end of the film, I could accept Norton as Graham and Hopkins as his eternal foe. On the whole Red Dragon is more successful than Hannibal for a couple of reasons: 1) The over the top performance Hopkins gave in Hannibal is reined in here. 2) The story is better written and better adapted and 3) The beefed up role for the character of Lecter allows for a more interesting cat and mouse game between him and Graham. That last point was one of the strengths of Silence and it was missing from Hannibal. Oh, and the over the top gore is gone replaced by a more restrained approach. Silence Of The Lambs is still the benchmark and, in that regard, Red Dragon places a very close second in terms of the quality of the film. There are weaknesses but once the lights go down and the performers convince you that they are the characters, your disbelief will melt away.
Rating:
Summary: A well made suspense/thriller
Review: Some including myself didn't think Brett Ratner (Rush Hour) was a suitable choice to direct Red Dragon when it was first announced. However he easily put all my doubts to rest after me viewing the film. Don't get me wrong Maichael Mann (Heat, The Insider) is a fine director but I think he had the wrong idea with Manhunter. Sure it was good but the whole look of the movie was wrong, plus he sorta made it too sexy. It's sorta like Hannibal Lector on an episode of Miami Vice or Nash Bridges. Ratner does so much more with a lot of the same material and took a lot more of a darker and scarier approach. Hell even Danny Elfman's score is much superior to the typicla 80's drama musical score in Manhunter. On the subject of Hannibal, Brian Coxx just wasn't menacing enough and doesn't have the over the top but fun presence that Hopkins does. I saw Red Dragon and then watched Manhunter and Coxx has a lot of the same dialogue that Hopkins has in Dragon but just says the lines with no energy. He even lacks the expressions of Hopkins and that insane look in his eyes. Coxx looked bored playing Hannibal but Hopkins you can just tell he loves playing him. Edward Norton plays Will Graham, who William Peterson played in Manhunter and their couldn't of been a better choice. However I saw a review on tv where this women said Hopkins and Norton are the only reason to see Red Dragon and I disagree totally. Ralph Fiennes (Strange Days) and Emily Watson are excellent in supporting roles. Think they both should be nominated actually. The idea of a mad man who thinks he's hideous falling in love with a blind women who has no way of knowing the type of man she's with is ingenious. Dragon does so much more with those 2 characters than Manhunter did too. They both have a lot more human emotion and character build up than in Manhunter too. Plus like I said Hopkins is back but as the Lector you loved in Silence of the Lambs and not the insane Martha Stewart one in Hannibal. The beginning he has a little fun cooking for guests but that scene is a lot less gross than the one in Hannibal. Well anyway I'd love to see Hopkins return for yet another serving as Hannibal, possibly this time Clarice and Graham could team up to catch him.
Rating:
Summary: More than sufficiently entertaining
Review: After the pedestrian "Hannibal," "Red Dragon" restores the legacy of the original, "Silence of the Lambs" .The plot bears a strong resemblance to that of "Silence of the Lambs Anthony Hopkins, who appears heavily made-up (the skin on his face also seems to be stretched tighter than a snare drum), plays Lecter with increasing hamminess. At times Lecter is almost reminiscent of the character who parodied him in the spoof "National Lampoon's Loaded Weapon 1," as he seems to do everything but yell out "boo!" a lot. Still, his over-the-top performance is sufficiently smarmy and spooky. The perpetually youthful-looking Edward Norton, while not brilliant as in "Fight Club" or "American History X," projects Graham's tortured persona well. As portrayed by Norton, Graham is an investigator whose ability to get inside killers' heads is both a blessing and a curse. Thanks largely to Ralph Fiennes's performance as Francis "Tooth Fairy" Dolarhyde, I think the villain is one area where "Red Dragon" is a definite improvement over "Silence of the Lambs" (not that Buffalo Bill was bad). As the Blake-loving killer with grandmother issues, Fiennes turns the Tooth Fairy into a truly twisted and disturbing character. The movie as a whole, while not especially original or profound, is certainly servicable entertainment. In contrast to "Hannibal," "Red Dragon" makes a strong effort capture the psycological depth that characterized the first installment in the Hannibal series. There's also no shortage of suspense, with plenty of tension-filled scenes and unexpected plot twists. "Red Dragon," much like "Hannibal," is basically just a cash-in on the legacy of its legendary predecessor. However, it's also a well-made and well-acted cash-in that's more than worth dropping eight bucks for.
Rating:
Summary: More than sufficiently entertaining
Review: After the pedestrian "Hannibal," "Red Dragon" restores the legacy of the original, "Silence of the Lambs" (well, I know "Red Dragon" is a prequel, but whatever). The plot bears a strong resemblance to that of "Silence of the Lambs": imprisoned genius/psycho Hannibal Lecter helps an investigator track down a deranged serial killer, providing lots of cryptic hints along the way. The pursuer this time is ex-FBI agent Will Graham, who still bears the physical and mental scars from his capture of Lecter years ago. His near-death at Lecter's hands drove Graham into retirement, but now he's back in action to try to bring down the "Tooth Fairy," a brawny and facially disfigured family-killer with a thing for William Blake. Anthony Hopkins, who appears heavily made-up (the skin on his face also seems to be stretched tighter than a snare drum), plays Lecter with increasing hamminess. At times Lecter is almost reminiscent of the character who parodied him in the spoof "National Lampoon's Loaded Weapon 1," as he seems to do everything but yell out "boo!" a lot. Still, his over-the-top performance is sufficiently smarmy and spooky. The perpetually youthful-looking Edward Norton, while not brilliant as in "Fight Club" or "American History X," projects Graham's tortured persona well. As portrayed by Norton, Graham is an investigator whose ability to get inside killers' heads is both a blessing and a curse. Thanks largely to Ralph Fiennes's performance as Francis "Tooth Fairy" Dolarhyde, I think the villain is one area where "Red Dragon" is a definite improvement over "Silence of the Lambs" (not that Buffalo Bill was bad). As the Blake-loving killer with grandmother issues, Fiennes turns the Tooth Fairy into a truly twisted and disturbing character. When he flexes his Red Dragon tattoo and says "You are the witness to a great becoming," it's pretty scary, but when he shows his more sensitive side in his relationship with a female co-worker, its convincing as well. The movie as a whole, while not especially original or profound, is certainly servicable entertainment. In contrast to "Hannibal," "Red Dragon" makes a strong effort capture the psycological depth that characterized the first installment in the Hannibal series. It's interesting watching Graham and his FBI cohorts decipher the clues, and the scenes where Graham and Lecter face off nicely recall the Hopkins-Jodie Foster scenes in "Silence of the Lambs." There's also no shortage of suspense, with plenty of tension-filled scenes and unexpected plot twists. "Red Dragon," much like "Hannibal," is basically just a cash-in on the legacy of its legendary predecessor. However, it's also a well-made and well-cash in that's more than worth dropping eight bucks for.
| 
