Hannibal

Rating:
Summary: Harris falls to the sequel jinx; a surprisingly silly read
Review: This book just didn't inspire the same page-turning momentum that Red Dragon and, to a lesser degree, Silence of the Lambs, did. Is it possible that a character like Lecter can lose his ability to shock? Well, it happens here, as the Lecter that is referred to from prior books seems infinitely more fresh and awe-inspiring than the one we actually encounter in this story. It's a fine line between painting a portrait of a chillingly depraved mind and an overwraught cartoon of a fiend. This book tends towards the latter.

Mason Verger was much more horrifying and interesting a character when mentioned in passing. Up close, he turns out to be an almost ludicrous caricature rather than some terrifying madman. A bad guy with a deadly eel for a pet? This is the comic villain of a James Bond film gone bad.

To make matters worse, Harris uses a narrator that often addresses the reader directly, as if leading him on a tour of various settings. It fails miserably, succeeding only in constantly jarring me out of engagement with the story.

Harris should have left Starling and Lecter alone after Silence of the Lambs. The curse of the sequel, with all the pitfalls it contains, has leapt up and snapped Harris by the throat.

Rating:
Summary: a completely different approach
Review: Like millions of others, I have been waiting for this novel for years. Nothing from my own imagination could have prepared me for what Mr. Harris delivered to the world. Yes, I thought it would neat for Will Graham, the man who caught Lector in the first place, to come out of retirement and collaborate with Starling to catch Dr. Lector. But that would be just a little too easy. I'm glad that Harris took the approach he did for this novel. That's why I read...that's why we all read for that matter. If you already know how the story goes, why read it at all. By taking a fresh approach, Harris has taken his characters to a new and unanticipated level. Excellent work, in my opinion, from one of my favorite authors. I can't wait to see how Dino pulls this one off on the screen.

Rating:
Summary: it's hard to one-up a masterpiece
Review: SILENCE OF THE LAMBS was truly a masterful work of fiction. Its sequel, Hannibal, was inevitably in the shadow of the masterpiece. Harris' task was huge. Did he succeed? Doubtful, perhaps. But if he writes another, providing an on-going tale, he just might.

Rating:
Summary: Mixed Emotions About Author's Purpose?
Review: I confess that I am a Connelly, DeMille, and Steiger fan first and foremost. I read a copy of Slience of the Lambs after I had seen the movie and wished that I had read it before seeing the movie. I liked it a whole lot and thought it was excellently written and plotted. Recently I bought about 10 books from Amazon, the best two were 'The Generals Daughter' by DeMille, 'Alien Rapture' by Steiger, Red Dragon by Harris, and'Blood Work' by Connelly. Towards the end of Harris' "Red Dragon," it seemed over, but there was another 35 pages, so I read on with anticipation of the actual shocking ending. It was soft and weak and delivered in a quick and limp manner. Overall, I loved the book except for the ending. Then I bought "Hannibal," and as I read I wondered: Who really wrote this book; Why is the plot so evasive; Who is the main character; and where is this story going? I did enjoy many pages that seemed to have a set-aside story or message, but still the plot was only average. Read the reviews on these other books first. If you just have to have a Harris book now, buy Red Dragon.

Rating:
Summary: It's hard to believe we had to wait ten years for this .
Review: Every act of fiction requires the reader to somewhat "suspend their disbelief" -- Harris asks the reader to abandon it completely. I found the plot to be simplistic and very unsatisfying. People in this book act as nowhere else on earth. The opening set-up, a bungled drug bust, attempts to eco the public reaction to recent bungled police actions and shootings, but in the end rings hollow, it just doesn't "get it right." Starling is at the center of this. In the process she kills a drug-selling mother (who fires on her first), but also goes out of her way to save the woman's child. In real life would all in power in the FBI have so totally ostracized Starling, as Harris has his FBI? It requires no naivete to say: "come-on, I don't think so." The position Harris places Starling in -- vital to the rest of the story -- just seems too forced, Harris asks too much of the reader. Hannibal "the cannibal" has now become the most brillant man ever to have lived. Harris tries to convince us of this by having the great and powerful Lector contemplate . . . everything. He considers physics -- his favorite movie is "A brief history of time" -- which is virtually un-sitthroughable. Hannibal loves the best cars, he tosses about (again and again) the names of various fine wines. He quotes from brillant books, and recites music. This occurs over and over and over again, until you are left screaming: "okay, stop it! He's smart!"

There is little in the way of further psychological analysis of Starling, one of the underlying themes in the Silence of the Lambs. What there is is largely crammed into the final chapters, where little new is revealed.

Others may disagree, but I felt that the movie Silence of the Lambs was better than the book. I hope the same occurs here, but I pity the poor fellows that have Mr. Harris' book to work with -- good luck!

Rating:
Summary: An unbelievable, extremely disappointing novel
Review: Thomas Harris clearly had his eye firmly focused on the future movie adaptation of "Hannibal". After all, as long as movies are shocking they do not need to make any sense. Harris makes sure that his current readers remember some of the key scenes of the movie version of "Silence of the Lambs." He also ensures, via his ludicrous ending, that there will be a fourth Lecter novel, one that I will not be reading. This is one of the worst novels I have ever read.

Rating:
Summary: Hannibal, "Master . . . master of puppets!"
Review: I couldn't put the book down. For all the negative criticism I'd read, I was expecting a far worse ending. Like a puppetmaster, Hannibal controlled everything and everyone. He destroyed the agent in "Red Dragon," didn't he? Clarice, too, falls into his web. Not credible? Don't forget the drugs used and Lecter's command of psychology. I was rooting for him. Krendler was awful ( better off left lobotomized ). Mason was so sick, as to lose anyone's sympathy as a victim. Quite humorous, his demise by the very dogs he tortured. Okay, the pigs got to be a bit much, but a nice detail in that they smelled no fear on our dear Doctor. Hannibal is an awesome tale of horror, sometimes nightmarishly written, as if by stream of consciousness. Stephen King is about as frightening as R.L. Stine in comparison. As one review pointed out, I guess I AM in need of some serious therapy . . . just not with Hannibal Lecter, MD, please.

Rating:
Summary: Perfectly Dreadful
Review: The book started out promising. The first scene is very well handled. And there are passages here and there that are memorable and metaphors that are remarkably precise. All signs of a good writer. But this good writer should be ashamed of himself for coming to the conclusion that this is the story he wanted to tell.

Which is not to say this book is well written. It is not. For example, throughout the book it seems every sentence has its own paragraph. The shifting of tenses is unsupported by any inner necessity of the book's "plot" or "structure". Tense-shifting sometimes happens within a single sentence!!! This cannot be purposeful. It's just sloppy. At the very least his editor needs to think about another line of work. The straight narrative past tense sections are workmanlike. The present tense sections are just embarassing. The plotting is plodding and tedious. But the ending is not forgiveable. The worst writers know better than to pull stunts like this, and they know it instinctively.

The ending is not just ridiculous, it's a betrayal. Good stories follow common lines and dramatic situations. The reason that heroic tales always end in either victory or at least catharsis is that the structure of the heroic narrative requires it. (See Aristotl's Poetics) Silence of the Lambs was true to this. Hannibal is not. As Mary McCarthy used to say about Lillian Hellman, "every word is a lie including 'a' and 'the'." Hannibal is a LIE dressed up in page after page sticky brocade. The arch-baroque prissiness of Dr. Lecter is sooooo thick it sickens. He becomes a caricature of a monster and not even that. Harris's seeming desire to have the reader understand Lecter fails so profoundly because Harris doesn't understand him. This is unforgivable in a storyteller. The other characters are either stick-figures (Mapp, Krendler) or just failures. Their inner coherence self-destructs as Harris sacrifices them to the goal of producing the all-embracing gross-out. As characters, the main players, especially Clarice Starling, finally betray themselves in the absurdity of the books amazingly lackluster finale.

One could go on, but it boils down to this: Do not waste you money, or more importantly, your time on this garbage. The images will pollute your imagination and you will have gained nothing in return.

Rating:
Summary: rubbish published
Review: This is proof that editors don't read what they publish. The result is that this rubbish has been published. Giving "one star" rating is far too generous. Amazon should consider increasing the number of rating categories to include some negative categories.

Rating:
Summary: More holes than a hunk of swiss cheese.....
Review: I was so excited when I saw Hannibal on the shelf and completed it within 48 hours. I felt rather unsatisfied, though. Too many questions and not nearly enough answers.

The whole novel was fragmented and loosely put together. There were flashes of potential but they ultimately fizzled out into something lame.

The ending was very innovative and fun, but it made me turn back and see if I missed something in Starling's character development. No answer there, either.

I don't mean to nitpick, but Lecter's choices of wine are too obvious, opting for the popular names like Petrus and the likes. I thought Lecter's taste and style would be more subtle and refined.

This novel would translate so well into a movie, where you have less time to ponder the finer points of the story. May I suggest Nicholson for Lecter? Since Hannibal's Lecter is quite different from Silence's Lecter I think it would be fitting to change the actors as well.

Now to its good points, at least Hannibal is a quick and exciting read, though an unfulfilling one. In its surreal settings, the far-fetched characters and circumstances somehow manage to fit together, admittedly awkwardly. If you don't think too much about it, the novel is rather okay.

To those who haven't read Hannibal: If you like American Psycho (by B. Ellis), you should like this one. But if you like Thomas Harris, ironically, this novel is not for you. By the way, don't buy this book, borrow it or wait for a paperback. It's not worth spending the money on....