Rating: 
Summary: "You Stink Of Fear...."
Review: The prospect of a remake to a film that many loved in it's original form and wouldn't want to change in any way usually makes those very same people gasp and groan. "Psycho", anyone?. This isn't one of those cases. "Red Dragon" is a re-make of 1986's "Manhunter". While that film is just fine, it isn't one of those films were there isn't an open door for improvement or re-doing. Thus, "Red Dragon". Based on Thomas Harris' 1981 novel of the same name, this new version is heads and shoulders above it's first incarnation. First of all, let's get to the plot. The movie begins with a nifty opener(not in the book or first film)that deals with Dr. Hannibal Lecter's capture by FBI agent Will Graham(Edward Norton). While Will was horribly injured in the process, he survives and stops Lecter. Flash forward several years and Will is retired in Florida. He works on boat motors with wife and little boy. Jack Crawford(Harvey Keitel)visits and asks for Will's help in solving a case. A serial killer named 'The Tooth Fairy' is stalking families and then brutally murdering them. The identity of the madman is Frances Dollarhyde(played brilliantly by Ralph Fiennes). He is a seriously disturbed psychopath who had a rather harsh childhood. Will goes to Dr. Lecter to ask the brilliant madman for his help in tracking down the killer. Ah, Hannibal. There has never been a screen villain like him in cinema history. While we were all disappointed with "Hannibal", the character that we know and love and get creeped out by in "Silence", is back. Boy, is he back. Anthony Hopkins returns to fine Lecter form here. His voice and way of speech are creepier than ever. His motions and expressions are classic Lecter. This is the performance we should've seen in "Hannibal". The character works better with a smaller, supporting role. The much larger, starring role he had in "Hannibal", just doesn't work. Imagine Darth Vader in every frame of "Star Wars". Just wouldn't work. Some reviews say it's camp and funny. Sorry folks, that was "Hannibal". Not here. Some people also worried how Hopkins would look since this movie is supposed to be years before "Silence". All I can say is that he looks just like he did. Sure, there's some age there, but it's nothing big or noticeable. He looked just like he always did in my book. Not that age has anything to do with anything anyways. Edward Norton is a great actor. One of the better ones we got going nowadays. However, I couldn't get over the feeling of how he was miscast. He does a good job. There's nothing wrong with the performance, it's just that he's too young and feels out of place in the role. Ralph Fiennes as Dollarhyde is magnificent. His portrayal is scary, creepy, and has depth and emotion. I didn't think I would forget Tom Noonan's original portrayal, but I just did. Phillip Seymour Hoffman also appears as an annoying reporter for a gossip rag called 'The Tattler', and british star Emily Watson appears as Dollarhyde's blind co-worker that he falls for. The talented Mary Louise Parker also co-stars as Norton's wife Molly. She pretty much has nothing to do but be scared. The script is tight and clever. Ted Tally who wrote "Silence", and won an Oscar for it, is back writing this one. Thank god. He keeps it like "Silence" and we can't thank him enough for it. Director Brett Ratner shows that he can be a serious director, and not just the guy who did the "Rush Hour" movies. He did an admirable job. Good for him. Two other familiar faces from "Silence" appear, but I won't say who. The end scene is also a nice wink to "Silence". The movie is far more gripping and dark than "Manhunter" could ever dreamed of being. It's clever, intelligent, and suspenseful. One of the sharpest thrillers to come out of Hollywood since....well, since "Silence". One of my favorite films so far this year. Watch it with some fahva beans and a nice chianti.
Rating:
Summary: red dragon or man hunter?
Review: Being a grate fan of the incredible MANHUNTER i was very surprise to see how good and entertaining RED DRAGON really is. First , for those of you that have a sentimental side for manhunter, let me tell you that this is a completely diferent film and stay pretty clean in not to overcome manhunter's greatness. i find red dragon to be more into the serial killer background his insanity. Manhunter is more about catching the killer and detective's will graham uncontrolable desire to get the killer. i do find pettersen's performance as will graham more aprochable to the character than edward norton's....pettersen is more frantic and suspenful, norton is more pasive and less misterious but he did a great job, is just that i like pettersen character better. As for lector, well in red dragon it goes back to lecter....and again it have nothing to compare to manhunter. His job is beautiful achived.
i love both movies....if you like detective movies watch manhunter...to tell you the truth they are very different in their own right...and they are both very good....so is really good to have the same story with two good point of view.
five stars for both films.
Rating:
Summary: Made a believer out of me....
Review: ..."Red Dragon" was suspenseful and faithful to the story, while the filming was not as dark as the Michael Mann version. Brett Ratner, a favorite from "The Family Man", succeeded brilliantly with the film. It's great to have fans who have not read the books get the idea of how Lechter was captured in the first place, and Hopkins sparkles in the role -- you can see that his antagonism with Will Graham (Norton...a surprise for me; terrific as the agent!) is even stronger than with Clarice. In adding to Lechter's role, the screenwriters and Ratner not only capitalized on the character's fame and Hopkins' brilliance, they gave us footage that was crucial to understanding the triangle between the three men.Ralph Fiennes is disturbing as Dolarhyde, and the house in which he lives is even creepier than in the book. Emily Watson is delightful as the "foil" for his strangeness. The tattoo was done masterfully. One of the chief positives for me was the wonderful score by the greatest name in movie music, Danny Elfman. Alternatively brooding and menacing, with soaring leaps of action, the music deserves its own awards. Outstanding, all the way around!
Rating: 
Summary: Where there's a Will, there's a pay day
Review: Blimey, ear plugs to the ready, lads. With a soundtrack like this, it should be Harry Potter turning up at Lecter's door at the (admitedly dynamic) opening scene. In which case, he's found a couple of candidates for Slytherin House. The volume especially rises whenever the camera scans over news cuttings or documents. Now, I don't know about you, but the last thing I want when trying to concentrate on documents is someone running into the study and blowing a trumpet in me lughole.
Not being a fan of the Harris happy hour, I couldn't wait to see the latest round of preposterous Moriaty-like super-villains and killers who want to turn into butterflies to give it a right kicking. Even devoted fans of his repellant tosh had to admit 'Hannibal' was a bit of a rum do and short of a few dozen elephants. Sadly, 'Dragon' is above average, so I couldn't. Not great, mind, but probably as good as you're gonna get nowadays. It has 'resonance', as they say. Why? Probably because Dollarhyde's gaff reminds one of childhood memories watching 'The Munsters' and 'The Addam's Family', only in this case with a malevolant subliminal giggle tape. And Norman Bates gets a look in too, so we're cooking.
On an academic level, I supose you can have fun looking at how two contemporary film-makers approach the same story and the little touches that distinguish acting performances. For instance, the blind lady in 'Manhunter' seduces Frankie-boy with surprising confidence. In 'Dragon', her forthright language hides a lack of confidence that needs two swigs of a bottle to do the deed. Hopkin's Lector rather throws away the phone scene in his cell. Yes, hours of fun (zzzzz). It's also a case of two Grahams, both curiously miscast. In 'Manhunter', Graham is a dour detective so bow-legged that any cornered serial killer has an easy escape route. He also likes to yodel out loud to himself up trees. As one does. Doing the Dragon, our Will is a more perky, preppy kettle of fish and does not yell up trees, which is welcome. He sort of muses. Playing Will, Norton looks distant, as if sussing the casting issue, but remains watchable as ever despite the dodgy dye job that makes it look like an exceptionally tired Gerbil has taken a nap on his head and fails to wake up despite all the gunplay. And as for Ralph Fiennes, well, I'd like to say his performance brought the house down but instead it brings it up, which has a certain uniqueness. On a personal museum level, I wish he had chowed down on a certain lady I never thought was all that. He could have spent the rest of the picture with an enigmatic smile.
Anyway, take your pick.
Rating: 
Summary: Awesome remake
Review: This was a great remake of a awesome movie to begin with. I highly recommend it. A+++
Rating:
Summary: Opens the door for "Silence" and shuts it on "Hannibal"
Review: I though Hannibal was a good movie. But it definitely doesn't compare to this gem! Before the movie came on, my stomach was completely empty and all I could think about was food. But the minute the movie came on, my previous thoughts faded and I never left my chair for a second. That's the effect a movie like Red Dragon had on me. Edward Norton was a wonderful pick for this movie. His chemistry with Hopkins easily rivaled Foster's. Ralph Fiennes in my opinion though was the show stealer. His acting was so convincing that you could almost feel sorry for him and what he was which was a killer ruled by pain and suffering. For people who thought that the series went downhill after "Hannibal", do yourself a favor and see Red Dragon. Like I said, I liked Hannibal, but Red Dragon shuts the door on it.
Rating:
Summary: Average film
Review: This is an average film. It was somewhat boring, maybe because I've read the book, and seen Manhunter. Most of the shots, and scenes, and dialog were just like in Manhunter, just different cast. My friends and family enjoyed it very much though. Hannibal is now a stand up comedian in this film, rather than a horrific killer. Every scene with him in it, you laugh, rather than gasp. Anthony Hopkins didn't do as good a portrayal in this film, and this may have been Edward Norton's worst acting job. My mother mentioned she felt he was cast wrong, since he is such a quiet skinny introverted person, she would expect some more alive, and strong person to have caught all these killers. It seems like he's reading his lines from notes on the wall. The actor in Manhunter is way better, and actually shows some emotions. The killer is just shown as a man trying to do good, and then at the end we see how bad he is. I tried to like this, but after Silence of the Lambs, I do not think there will ever be a serial killer movie as good, so why do they keep making them? To cash in, and this is what they are doing here.
Rating:
Summary: Wow!
Review: The best hannibal yet. it was interesting to see how he got started and it was equally interesting to see that there is someone out there who was as sick as hannibal. I highly reccommend this movie and the fact that it lasted over 2 hours wasn't even evident until I left the theater.
Rating:
Summary: Awesomely Perfect Psychological Performance by Ralph Fiennes
Review: I did not yet view the 1986 'Manhunter' that already brought Thomas Harris' novel 'Red Dragon' to the screen, but I cannot imagine anyone portraying Frances Dolarhyde, the voice-hearing psychopathic killer, any better than Ralph Fiennes. Even if you don't like or are tired of Hannibal Lecter after the campy focus on him in the last film installment, (Hannibal) Ralph Fiennes' performance of a quiet man filled with inner rage stemming from a horrible childhood simmers with surpressed sexuality and yearning and is not to be missed. "Dee" as he is nicknamed by co-workers is a churning river of past angst that demands renumeration, like a tide that cannot retreat, he encroaches on his unsuspecting victims, passing through with a tempest's increasing strength. The only calm allowed to this storm seems to be in the person of a blind woman played by Emily Watson. As she cannot see his slight facial deformity, he accepts her more readily, allowing his need for contact to creep through while his killer persona is on short hiatus. With well-honed acting skill Fiennes waxes pathetically spellbound by her attention---one gets the sense that during this sequence the eye of his storm is passing; her questions regarding his life titillate and exhilarate what little humanity is left him. Particularly touching is a moment where "Dee" takes Reba to "see" a tranquilized tiger, to further buttress one of her last sights before illness stole her sight. Fiennes is magnificient, his shyness poignant, his madness heart-wrenching.
Other remarkable performances include Emily Watson as Reba, Philip Seymour Hoffman as the scruffily annoying journalist and of course, Anthony Hopkins as the chillingly trumped Dr Lector--here as this is a prequel, sporting as dark Eurotrash slick-backed queue. Edward Norton does an adequate job as the FBI agent Will Graham. Attacked by Lector in an unforgettable scene before the opening credits, Norton achieves an understandable wariness that sometimes borders on downright reluctance to ever see Lector again,let alone confer with him. Rather than have his motivation to capture the Fiennes character be the threat to his wife and son and its obvious connection to the new killer's focus on family, I would have liked to have seen more of his personal terror--maybe in fugue states flashing key moments of Lector's attack on him. I would have also liked to have explored that portion of Graham's character that Lector intimates from Graham's success in flushing Lector out as being composed of part pride, part mental superiority and part affinity with the criminal mind.
Nevertheless, the film is great---intense----psychologically satisfying and disturbing enough to warrant after movie discussion. Not only does it keeps one's attention from start to finish, but despite some of the disgustingly gory sights, (not for children!!) compels one to keep both eyes on the screen at all times. Don't miss it.
Rating:
Summary: Red Dragon..... my review....
Review: I just got home from seeing the movie. OMG, it was good. A lot more like "Silence Of The Lambs" than Hannibal one, with a male FBI agent. It changes the whole dynamic, which I thought was better in some ways. In SOTL and Hannibal, you are too distracted by the female leads, which I hadn't noticed before. This one seems to drag your interest in deeper than the other movies. It's dark, slow, and inviting, in a creepy way. Anthony Hopkins is once again brilliant as the charming, disturbing Dr.Hannibal Lecter. Edward Norton is brilliant himself as an agent who's fear guides him, and very early on, you see why. The movie starts with a jolt, and never lets go of it's grip on you. Superbly filmed with an intimate feel, makes you feel really a part of things. It's warmth and intensity lets you in on things, and if you've seen the other movies, you get the "in" jokes and references to Hannibal, even though this is a "PRE-quel to the SOTL's. I think this is much better than HANNIBAL, and hopefully, there will be a "fourth" or a 2nd one of this pairing of Hopkins and Norton, because their chemistry is powerful and quite unique. They work well and on balance, without any posturing and "out-acting" eachother. This is why they are great actors, and most likely chosen for these roles. A great way to spend the afternoon. I can see why this movie is still at number one. As for Ralph Fiennes as "Dolarhyde" - (might be an obvious sir name for a once Rich boy) - must be seen to be believed. He is at once menacing and sickening, and a shivering, scared little boy. The melding of all these emotions on the surface can't be easy, and I think he's one of the few actors who could pull it off with grace, and keep the menacing part intact, with the other layers of emotions playing off eachother. Even though I read the book and have "manhunter" I was still surprised, and shocked in all the right places. Some beautiful photography even in the gruesome bits. So well done, I am sure whoever did NOT think of this movie is bashing their head against a very firm desk as I write this. It's going to become another cult classic for sure. Not overly violent. They leave most of the mayhem to the imagination, which makes it more creepy. Highly recommended.
|
