Rating: 
Summary: Finish your food. It's time to leave . . .
Review: Okay, lets get this straight. This movie is not only based upon a novel, its also a remake of another movie. Hey, lets not forget its a sequel as well. Hold on a minute, its also a prequel. Wow, what other movie could boast such an interesting history? The only problem this movie has is that it stinks like the dead bobies stuffed in Buffalo Bills' backyard.Maybe that was a little unfair. This film does deliver gothic and eery thrills from the beginning, a stellar A-list cast that at least does its best with the tired material on offer and Brett Ratners' direction is strong. Its just that it has an air of 'been there, done that' about it, which ultimately undoes any obvious effort that has been made by the filmmakers to try and create something mildly entertaining. The story concerns a world weary FBI serial killer expert Will Graham (a miscast Edward Norton), who has taken early retirement after successfully tracking down cannibal killer Hannibal Lector. He is coaxed back onto the job by the appearance of new nutjob on the block, cheekily nicknamed 'The Tooth Fairy'. The film flicks back and forth between part crime/police thriller to gothic horror, and sits uneasily as a straight genre picture. The problems with this film are legion, as compared with Michael Manns' original movie 'Manhunter' which was always stylish, scary and demanding. Maybe I am too much of a fan of that movie to appreciate this incarnation, but this one is pretty boring to watch, whereas Manns' film is a juggernaut of fast cutting, cool cinematography and excellent acting from the cast. Compare Edward Nortons' wimpish and dull portayal of Graham to William Petersons' angst ridden and determined expert, who could easily slide into the dark side of his persona at any minute. At around an hour into the 'Red Dragon', I just wanted Norton to stop the investigation, pack up his bags, head back to his wife and maybe get his foppish hair cut. Not exactly the kind of guy I needed to be rooting for. And as for Ralph Fiennes as Dollarhyde? Okay, he was pretty good - actually the best thing about this movie. His 'relationship' with Reba McClane (an always good Emily Watson) is sincere and creepy, but after the powerhouse performance of Tom Noonan as Dollarhyde in the original and his freaky interaction with Joan Allen as Reba, this comes off as good effort, but not good enough. Oh, did I mention the poster boy himself? Yeah, Hannibal Lector is given a more substantial role this time, but as usual Anthony Hopkins (one of the best brit actors around) hams up this role within an inch of its life. Where choice lines like 'I have oodles of time' would have had audiences crawling the walls in 'The Silence of the Lambs', this time they only irritate and annoy. It seems that producer Dino De Laurentiis is trying to create a $100 million dollar Freddy Krueger for todays' teen-obsessed market audience. Ted Tallys' screenplay is predestrian at best, failing to inject any new or interesting lifts into the script and one wishes he would have finished his association with Lector at 'Silence'. As I said before, 'Rush Hour' helmer Brett Ratners' direction is solid, if uninspired, and one wishes he could have bought that energy he has displayed on his previous efforts with him. The production design is suitably over the top, with creepy gothic houses and the cinematography is laced with 'Seven'- lite flourishes and nods to the original 'Silence of the Lambs'. So then, a dull big budget mechanical exercise made with the only intention to make a lot of money for studio execs. Steer clear, and get Anchor Bays' 'Manhunter' special edition to see how this book should be filmed.
Rating: 
Summary: Prequel definitively better than the sequel
Review: If sequels are traditionally worst than the original, prequels are less obvious. While Star Wars seems to show that they can be as terrible, a comparaison between Hannibal and Red Dragon is definitively a point in favour of prequels. In Red Dragon, Hannibal says "a rational society would have killed me, or put me to some use". This is not only an interesting sentiment, but also a reflection of his character in movies - either stop using his character, or put him to some use. The movie Hannibal didn't get that. Red Dragon does, and that's one of the things it gets right. Another thing it gets right is serial killers - or in this case, one serial killer, Red Dragon, who has killed two families and will kill more unless Agent Graham, the man who got Hannibal in prison (as told during the delicious opening scenes), gets on the case. Having established a patient-doctor relationship with Hannibal, who is a top-rate psychologist, Graham appeals to him again to help him solve this case. But Hannibal has an agenda of his own as well. Red Dragon is trying a bit too hard to psych people. It has a number of false alerts (as well as an ending which serves absolutely no purpose) and a trivial character (the reporter, who serves as little more than foil). It could have been more, but as a portrayal of serial killers, Hannibal Lector, and interesting mysteries, it's right on the dot.
Rating: 
Summary: Entertaining
Review: Michael Mann purists may turn their qualified noses up at this offering, and there is, granted, much which can be faulted. Contrary to fringe belief, there is also a lot which can be faulted with 'Manhunter'. I do not need to expound tiresomely on these views; they sre to be found in abundance at various sites, including this one. Detractors are eternal. Flawed but entertaining.
Rating:
Summary: The weakest of the Lecter series, but still a decent watch.
Review: I am a big fan of the Hannibal Lecter series. Although I've never seen Manhunter, so don't go expecting any comparisons here, I really enjoyed The Silence of the Lambs, which is one of my favourite movies, and Hannibal was great as well, well at least I thought so, but apparently not many other people did. Red Dragon is the weakest of the series so far but is still a fine film. The bad was pretty standard really, I say this about a lot of movies - just too long. A bit boring in places. Whereas Hannibal used the long running time to supply suspense and plot developemnt, it seems a lot of this film was bumbling around and pointless scenes. They could've devoted some more scenes to Emily Watson and Philip Seymour Hoffman instead of having them all on Norton. I also thought this movie was released way too quickly and seemed to be a money-making machine instead of an overly-great movie. But it was still a good flick. The acting here was as solid as it has been in the entire series. I had to seriously question before I saw this movie how they could fit THAT many stars into this film. Well, it seems like almost every single actor stood out here, though some more than others. Edward Norton is great as per usual and I really liked his hair. Anthony does his Hannibal thang and I loved it. His voice sounded too fake in some parts but he still did a really good job. Harvey Keitel has to stand around and spout off information, he does it well. Emily Watson was the most standy-outy of the actors here, she was brilliant and I really loved her character and sympathised with her. Ralph Fiennes is right behind her in second place for standy-outy performance of the movie. He was genuinely creepy and goes all-out. Great stuff dude! The directing of this flick was awesome. Heavy atmosphere and brilliant camera angles, especially towards the end of the movie. I didn't really dig how they used so many of the same ones from The Silence of the Lambs at the beginning of the film (I was almost expecting to see Hannibal standing up really perkily like he was the first time we saw him in SOTL) but as the movie progresses it grows into it's own story. A great thing to finish on is the great ending to this movie. I loved the reference to Clarice. I was hoping for a cameo from Jodie or Julianne but I liked the way they ended it. Almost made me want to flick on SOTL, but I'd probably be scared out of my wits because it was 12:30am when this movie finished, and I was already scared from this one!
Rating:
Summary: Great Movie
Review: I would have to say that I was surprised with this film. Anthony Hopkins give off yet another wonderful performance as Hannibal Lecter (maybe one of the freakiest characters in cinema). Hopkins and Ed Norton led an amazing cast that included Harvey Keitel, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Emily Watson, and Ralph Fiennes. Norton, Hopkins and Fiennes had amazing performances.
The movie starts out with Hannibal helping out FBI agent Will Graham (Norton) in solving a case which involves cannibalism. Soon Norton figures out that its Hannibal, then Will turns around only to get a knife in the liver. With barely enough strength he picks up arrows and jams it into Hannibal and then shoots him in the shoulders and chest. A great opening scene, good enough to get anyone interested. Several years later Graham is visited by Keitel and decides to help the FBI with the current murder case. From there the movie just takes off. It might move slow at first but it picks up and turns into an intense thriller.
Brett Ratner proves his directing talent. This movie will open him up more projects. He also has the Rush Hour movies working for him. Overall a great movie, not as good as The Silence of the Lambs but much better than Hannibal.
Rating:
Summary: ...burning bright ........
Review: RALPH FIENNES shines as the doomed "Dee" - a child twisted by adult perversions now exacting his own brand of retribution on society ~ possibly one of the finest realizations an actor can give of a soul truly in Hell. EMILY WATSON is another pleasant whiff of originality as the hadicapped woman hopelessly in love with our doomed hero [villian?] ~ she never disappoints. EDWARD NORTON - exquisitely sensitive as the retired semi-psychic [?] FBI-Agent, Harvey Keitel? Crusty and perfect as the his ex-boss. Philip Seymor Hoffman - quite creepy - creepier than Fiennes as the bottom feeding scandal reporter who is justly makes final hot news. So, what's the problem? Dated, so dated script ..... almost a retread of Robert Bloch's 'PSYCHO' give or take a modern tune here or there and a few startling sexual moments between Ms. Warson and Mr. Fiennes ~ mildly unnecessary for her prim character. The original "Manhunter" moves to a better pace - so EXCEPT for Hannibals "Titus-Like" opening dinner very hum-drum and rather predictable. Recommended though for Mr. Feinne's fine performance!!
Rating:
Summary: 4th Lecter movie thriller stands on its own
Review: "Red Dragon" is a movie I liked better the second time I saw it. The first time I thought it was made merely to capitalize on our fascination with brilliant arch villain, Dr. Hannibal Lecter. There is some validity to this opinion since the book by Thomas Harris, the first of three in which Lecter is featured, was filmed in 1986 under the title of 'Manhunter". [The first version, by the way, is a very good movie.] The second viewing, however, convinced me that, for whatever reason it was made, "Red Dragon' stands on its own as a first-rate thriller. The movie opens with a chilling encounter between FBI agent Will Graham [Edward Norton] and Lecter [Anthony Hopkins]. Just as Graham realizes that Lecter is the serial killer he has been looking for, Lecter attacks and nearly kills him. Graham survives, and Lecter is captured and incarcerated for life in a mental institution. Traumatized by the ordeal, Graham retires to Florida with his wife and young son. A few years later his old boss [Harvey Keitel] lures him back to help find another killer dubbed The Tooth Fairy. Finding himself in a dead end with the case, Graham reluctantly seeks the assistance of his old nemesis, Dr. Lecter, whose help turns out to be Graham's worst nightmare come to life. Part of the success of "Red Dragon" is due to its 'dream' cast. Besides Norton and Hopkins, it has Ralph Fiennes as the killer in question and Emily Watson as a blind woman the Tooth Fairy falls for. Other assets include the astute screenplay by Ted Tally, who penned the one for "Silence of the Lambs', and the chilling musical score by Danny Elfman. Perhaps the biggest surprise is the assured direction by Brett Ratner, heretofore known as the director of fun but forgettable comedies such as "Rush Hour" and "Family Man". If you are expecting this movie to top the classic "Silence of the Lambs", you may be disappointed. If you view it on its own terms, you may see it as very good - not extraordinary, perhaps, but way above ordinary.
Rating:
Summary: Dead Freakin' Horse!
Review: Just because there were three "Lecter" books written doesn't mean they should have made them all into films. Manhunter and Silence were enough. Overdosing on Hannibal Lecter makes him less and less scary(Hellraiser suffered the same fate in the sequels by desensitizing us to Pinhead). My main gripe withh this is the same as most reviewers that gave this a negative review: Edward Norton. As much as I admire Edward Norton, he was just a bad choice. That character called for someone totally different. I think I speak for most people when I say that when reading the book, you don't picture anyone remotely like Edward Norton as Graham. Ralph Fiennes was okay I guess. Emily Watson was decent with her extremely cutesy , wild googily eyed look. Keitel was there just coz they needed an older stern looking guy for Crawford(I guess Scott Glen wasn't available this time). People knock Keitel in this, but I think he did what he could with the not-so-demanding role of Jack Crawford. Hoffman was completely wrong for Lounds. This movie wasn't terrible or anything(that title goes to Hannibal), but it has a very strong "been there, done that" vibe going on all through it. I think it was very late in the game to make this film, coz it offers nothing that we didn't already see in Silence Of The Lambs or Manhunter(if you saw that one!).
Rating: 
Summary: Watch "Manhunter" instead
Review: After watching "Red Dragon" I was reminded of how brilliant "Manhunter" really is. The biggest flaw is with the casting. Edward Norton is a great actor, but I never believed him for one minute in this movie. If you remember William Peterson from "Manhunter" he was a guy dealing with torment after catching Hannibal. Peterson lets us know how he feels just through his eyes. Norton never really convinces me that he is tormented and crazy from his work. He always seems the same. Norton suprisingly makes the character very one-dimensional, never really getting at the thru-lines that Peterson did. Same goes for Anthony Hopkins and Ralph Finnes. In no way possible are these two actors as chilling as Brian Cox or Tom Noonan. Noonan made his "tooth fairy" one of the most chilling villians in movie history. Ralph Finnes is too normal looking and conventional to be truly scary. The worst performance of this film goes to Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal. His Hannibal is over the top and not as quietly cunning as Brian Cox's. Sure I agree Hopkins was great in "Silence" but the thrill of the character is gone. We know what he's capable of and it's no longer scary or shocking. Especially after seeing the horrible "Hannibal." Harvey Keitel and Emily Watson also give the worst performances of their careers. Their line readings are dead in the water. Especially Keitel. He looks like he's about to fall asleep in every scene. Emily Watson isn't even half as stunning as Joan Allen. Watching Allen in "Manhunter" in the scene with the tiger is so spellbinding and beautiful that when you see Watson in the same scene in "Red Dragon" it just seems so forced and out of place. I guess the main problem with this movie is the choice of director Brett Ratner. Whereas Michael Mann is a great auteur, who faithfully adapted the book to his vision, Ratner is just a hired gun. Studios use him to make money when the quality directors are all busy developing their own projects. The only reason this film was made was so the producers could cash in one last time on Hopkin's famous Hannibal character. I guess that's why Ratner was a good choice. His film is a safe, boring, carbon copy of Jonathan Demme's "Silence of the Lambs." That's just what the producers wanted and he succeeded. So if you want to see the definitive adaptation of "Red Dragon" to the screen, see "Manhunter." It's richer in story, deeper in atmosphere, and more developed in character.
Rating:
Summary: Another review... Goody, goody
Review: Red Dragon should be remembered in the Hannibal Lector series for being the one of the three most accurately translated from novel to theaters. Aside from following the book well, it is still a decent movie! Whereas the novel is a very tedious read due to its overtechnical attempt at clocking the forensics of a crime scene, The movie manages to capture an amazing story. The way this movie was filmed gives it an increadibly nightmarish feel. It moves fast in all the right ways, touching briefly on the forensics and delving in depth into the mind games and plots of his horror genre majesty Hannibal Lector. For a blast from the past you may also want to examine "Manhunter" the origional version of this movie featuring a great actor: Brian Cox (Supertroopers, LIE...) in the role of Hannibal.
| 
