Hannibal

Rating:
Summary: SUPERIOR TO THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS
Review: Thomas Harris have done another great masterpiece . This book is even better than the novel, THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS

Rating:
Summary: "...not with a bang, but a whimper."
Review: Having just rewatched SILENCE OF THE LAMBS, and desperately needing some low-brow entertainment, I bought HANNIBAL. Although Harris can be compelling in parts, he allows minor characters to take up loads of space with their banal babbling, while Starling's major nemeses are two-dimensional caricatures. I guess the goal is to make us feel 'alright' with their gruesome ends -we become participatory in their deaths- but they are so ludicrous that they are not particularly interesting (Krendler, Verger, etc). Basically, everyone in the the book is crazy as hell, which sort of takes away from Lecter's monstrosity, making him less interesting. Starling's boring Elektra complex compounds the dullness. Mind-numbing lists of Lecter's effete purchases give the novel a feel of bland inertia. Then some icky guy dies an icky death, and it hardly seems notable.

Grammatical errors and typos abound. Apparently Dell editors are either cowards or clueless. Either way they should be fired. Harris' style at the beginning of each chapter is particularly annoying: each introductory being short, hapless fragments in the style of a screenplay. Incomplete sentences simply denote bad writing. He tries to engage the reader as the observer ("Now we are walking up the steps where blah blah blah") but it all falls flat and the tense gets all screwed up. The narrative is disrupted with such attempts at flair, and the scenes are subsequently poorly constructed. I got the feeling like he was writing this novel in order to make a bundle of the movie, and the fluidity of the prose suffered as a consequence. This makes the flow of the narrative very tedious.

The conclusion of the book elevates Starling and Lecter to a mythic inhumanity. It is so melodramatic that you feel as if you have lost all touch with the characters. Harris adores his creations too much, and it kills the story in the end. I give this book two stars because I'm not one of the die-hard fans who has had his hopes and dreams crushed by this silly book; plus the movie managed to be even dumber.

Rating:
Summary: So much potential...
Review: For the most part, this is a very compelling and well-written book. Unfortunately, what could have been a classic is spoiled by an utterly unbelievable and disappointing ending. I came away from the climax feeling cheated and disgusted. What a miserable end to a great trilogy!

Rating:
Summary: Conclusion Confusion
Review: First, let me say that Harris' descriptions of Italy are top-notch. I would not be surprised if tourism in that country picked up a hundred fold due to the impact of this book. Second, this book starts more powerfully than any thriller I have ever read. I feel so sorry for Starling--and so angry at the selfish tabloids and the racial situation in this country and the presence of sexism, etc. Third, Lechter is again seductive in this book, but scarier this time: he is brilliant and quite, totally mad. And the pigs--oh, what a great device! The only problem with this book is the disappointingly contrived last fifty or so pages, in which both Lechter and Starling act completely out of character. No, he would not try to seduce her. No, she would not try to save herself by exposing her body to him. The Lechter that Harris showed us in 2.75 books might not actually KILL Starling, perhaps, but if she escaped death it would be through a cynical, though noble, GESTURE on his part as he did in the previous work. Since she DID save his life earlier and now he has her life in his hands, he would allow her to escape with a warning: "Don't try to follow me, and I won't follow you." That is the extent of their relationship, you see: mutual trust and a spirit of fair competition. Not romance. No, no, no.

Rating:
Summary: Still Not Sure If I Liked It Or Not
Review: Title says it all...I'm not sure if I liked it. It started off great, then the parts in Italy got sort of boring and pointless. There were parts where Lecter just was not as chilling...I think his captivity in the prison made him a better character...I'll admit that I was turning pages wanting to know what happened the entire time. Then the ending...It just doesn't work...No...I liked the book...But the ending just ruined it...and the ending is arguably the most important part of a book...After the "climax", Starling is not the same character she was in Silence and in the first 500 pages of Hannibal...

Rating:
Summary: Not half as good as "Silence of the Lambs"
Review: Trust me on this one: This is one case where you should skip the book and see the movie instead. Grab yourself some popcorn and go for it.

Rating:
Summary: Amazing
Review: In Silence of the Lambs and Red Dragon, you meet Hannibal Lector behind bars, locked in an insane asylum. In Hannibal, you see Hannibal living in society according to his tastes and lifestyle. Harris gives you such an incredible in-depth look into Hannibal's psyche, including a look at a very frightening part of his childhood. The detail that Harris uses to describe Hannibal's mind, especially his extraodinary memory, is captivating. I had to reread that part twice because it was so unique.

Harris' other characters receive equal attention, including Clarice Starling, one of Hannibal's objects of interest, and Mason Verger, one of Hannibal's victims and now out for revenge. Each character is equally unique and emphasize different personality traits.

What stands out the most to me in this book is the ending. While I won't give it away, I will say that the ending is not what you would expect and certainly surprising.

I think you'll find yourself glued to Hannibal's pages and its great plot. The book is a credit to Harris' ability to follow his own characters throughout their lives as if he (and the rest of us) are right there with them.

Rating:
Summary: Not up to par...
Review: Silence of the Lambs is a hard act to follow...Hannibal came close, but not quite. I would actually like to give it 3 1/2 stars, but that's not an option. It was (as usual) VERY well written. The descriptive talent of Mr. Harris continues, but the story-line waned, and the ending? Well, I don't want to give anything away, but it doesn't seem to fit the characters at all. Just an average reader's opinion...might be worth reading if you're REALLY into Mr. Lechter (kind of like continuing to torcher yourself w/Anne Rice novels), but not worth it if you're just picking it up.

Rating:
Summary: Does not live up to its predecessors!
Review: At first I was excited about reading this book. Then, as I began reading it, I became dissapointed. Harris seems to be writing this book only for the sake of having another movie made. His writing is all over the place. What I mean is that he starts to go into the background of his characters (Hannibal's childhood, Mason's twisted past, etc.) and then stops and doesn't finish. Why did the people who cannibalized Hannibal's family do what they did? How did Mason get so sadistic. Harris touches on this but never finishes. And the last few chapters with Krendler and Clarice are a little confusing.

I have loved Red Dragon and Silence of the Lambs. I was very dissapointed in Hannibal. It could have been better. Many possibilities.

Rating:
Summary: I Ain't 'Avin' You!
Review: "Red Dragon" and "Silence of the Lambs" were both excellent books, and both good films. They are therefore going to be a hard act to follow and, for the screaming millions that have waited so long for this book, nothing less than a brilliant read was going to do.

Thomas Harris has made a game attempt at this masterpiece, and he is to be commended on not sticking to formula. The early part of this novel shows Harris' ability to write fast paced and detailed narrative, a quality that is observed in all his books. And the horror moments are, generally speaking, frankly stated and brutal - just the way Lecter fans like it.

So where did this book go wrong? Firstly, the formula has been altered. I know I commended Harris for this before, but the other Lecter novels are so utterly brilliant that a change in formula was always likely to be a step backwards rather than a step forward. What made "Dragon" and "Silence" was the psychology of the characters, and the chase to capture the killer in each book. In "Hannibal", we have several mini chases and no psychology to speak of. Mason Verger is the closest we get to exploring the mind and he is an example of where the book falls down again.

Harris, in his acknowledgements, thanks a couple of eminent psychologists for their information on the "memory palace". This is the device that Lecter uses to remember everything he has ever done. He walks the corridors of his own mind and enters rooms that act out memories. This is how he can call up information, however small and trivial, at a moment's notice from something that happened literally decades ago. I can accept phenomenal memories, but I don't think Harris' descriptions of the memory palace add anything at all to the book. Instead, I get the feeling that they have simply been lifted from some textbook, or a conversation with an eminent professor somewhere.

Throughout "Hannibal" we are faced with situations that just do not ring true. Previously, Hannibal Lecter was an incredibly intelligent man that was approaching a superhuman status through his strength, crimes and intensity. In "Hannibal", Harris has allowed him to become superhuman and thus destroy the reality that "Dragon" and "Silence" approached but never crossed. Nothing displays this more than the ludicrous dinner that Lecter holds at the very end of the book. A scene so syrupy, so farcical and so ridiculous that no reader is going to be taken in by it.

If "Hannibal" was a one-off book and not the climax to a trilogy, it would have fared a little better. As it is, it had to live upto the very high standards set by its predecessors and could not do so. "Dragon" and "Silence" show that Harris' ability to write a very good book was not a singular occurrance. "Hannibal" shows that Harris simply had an off 11 years or so.