Hannibal

Rating:
Summary: Highly over-rated
Review: I wish Harris never wrote this one. He ridiculed the character, Hannibal Lecter. Moreover, i think Harris isn't a good writer at all. Just by researching on Italy and Behavioural science, he has included many facts but very poor with imagination and creativity. His description of serious and important sequences is poor as well.

Rating:
Summary: Hannibal
Review: I did something when I finished this book that I haven't done in about 15 or 20 years. I threw it away. I disliked and disapproved of it so much, that I wasn't even willing to recycle it by taking it down to a used book store. I just threw it out.

I give "Hannibal" 1 BLACK HOLE, because that's where every feeling of goodness and decency ends up by the end of it. I believe this book causes harm. I believe it enough to speak out against a BOOK of all things.

I loathe censorship, at least by government, church and / or the people. Self-censorship is another matter. I don't think this book needed writing. As far as I'm concerned all it did was cater to the increasing bloodthirstiness in the world and unfortunately, added to it. This isn't ancient Rome. I thought we had outgrown "Bread and Circuses". Perhaps we haven't come as far as we might wish.

I read "Silence of the Lambs", "Red Dragon" and "Black Sunday". Yes, they are all dark and they are all frightening. I had nightmares after I read "Silence of the Lambs". I told myself that it was OK because these books are mostly well written, and most of the bad guys get caught or die. I never thought that "Hannibal" was going to be a walk in the park, but something seems to have happened to this author since he wrote the first three books.

Psychological thrillers tend to show that there is darkness in everyone. OK, I understand that. It's basically true and if something in a book strikes a chord within me then I believe that it shows that I have some work to do. OK, fine. But Thomas Harris seems to have forgotten that in most of us, there is also good.

If I had had any idea of how it would end, I never would have read it. As it was, I almost put it down several times without finishing it. I regret wasting my time. I'm very glad that we didn't pay full price for it, although we still spend too much.

I believe that this is an extremely ugly story with little redeeming value. It is well written (technically) but something inside of me has been hurt by reading it. I'll get over it, but the harm wasn't necessary.

I will not read anything else by this author. I won't go see the movie. There is already too much darkness in the world. More did not need to be created.

Rating:
Summary: Not Another Silence of the Lambs
Review: Harris invited all of us who couldn't put down Silence to another Lecter story, but Hannibal isn't the bad guy this time. He is presented as charming, educated, and affluent. He is made out to be a victim. Harris wants you to like Hannibal, and after pages and pages of Lecter stroking you sort of can't help it. Herein lies the twisted irony of the work. Don't expect another Silence of the Lambs or Red Dragon. This one is out there, and definitely worth the read.

Rating:
Summary: Unfortunate Disappointment
Review: A great book with a weak ending. The ending isn't even believable, and really leaves the series with a sour note (the outcome is too fairy-tail-ish). I did love the book, but I believe this to be more anticipation than a great read. After "Silence of the Lambs" and "Red Dragon", this book is an unfortunate disappointment. Read this book, for sure, but don't get your hopes _too_ high.

Rating:
Summary: Disappointing and Pretentious
Review: I was extremely disappointed with this book for several reasons: 1. Instead of being a riveting thriller, this book seems to be philosophical and makes too many attempts to be "literary." Harris is not a suitable writer for this; his talent has always been far below that of Stephen King and other writers who are able to handle such a task with aplomb. He should have stuck with his strengths and simply wrote a thriller. 2. There is a strange undertone of classism and religious bigotry in this novel. Hannibal Lecter is presented as a "hero" seemingly because he has good taste in music and wine. Mason Verger - the book's "villian" - is seen as evil because he's a hypocritical Southern Baptist and a rude pig farmer. (Verger never manages to seem scary, however, because he's completely paralyzed.) Another character is described as a fool simply because she belongs to a conservative Methodist denomination. If Harris has a sore spot with Christians and red-necks, he should keep it to himself. To air one's prejudices makes for poor storytelling. The only two characters who come close to being remotely positive in this story, by the way, are a black man and lesbian woman. Gee, how original - just like every other movie Hollywood puts out. Sounds to me like Thomas Harris has been spending too much time on college campuses and taking praise from feminists a little too seriously. 3. This book just isn't scary. Mason Verger is pathetic instead of frightening. If Harris wanted to make another villian instead of Hannibal, he should have made the villian something Lecter would fear - a physically powerful, animalistically clever vigilante who is driven by a psychotic sense of mission. That would be the perfect contrast to Hannibal's aging, nihilistic, and effete character. Nobody is scared of a quadraplegic. He should have also given Hannibal AIDS, hepatisis, Mad Cow or some other affliction that cannibals invariably suffer from. At least that would have made the book realistic. Maybe Harris will read this and take my suggestions to heart - he'll need to do something radically different next time around if he wants to keep the Hannibal franchise appealing to its fan base.

Rating:
Summary: Starling destroyed
Review: "Hannibal" is the perfect follow-up to "The Silence of The Lambs" in all but one way. The ending of this novel is shocking, and left me extremely disappointed- Thomas Harris has absolutly murdered the character of Clarice Starling, creating her as the loser in the strange game between herself and Lector, where once they were equals. Harris creates the most bizarre and unsettling "happily ever after" ending for his novel-although I must commend him for not taking the soap opera way out and killing off Lector- and in the process completely distroys Starling's feasible character. Her actions, decisions, and choices are so completely out of character that I chose to ignore Harris' ending and imagine my own. Clarice Starling is one of the best "strong women" characters in modern literature, and by the end of the novel- in a 360 degree twist- when a drugged (nice touch) Clarice submits to Dr. Lector, and they form a relationship, her independence, her freedom and her very character are destroyed. In the end note, "three years later", Clarice has been transformed into the beautiful trophy bride at the Opera, complete with expensive emerelds, a pretty dress and (another nice touch) platinum blonde hair. Jodie Foster reputedly turned down the role of Starling in "Hannibal" the film (due out 2001) because she so detested what Harris had done to Starling, and I applaud her for her choice.

Rating:
Summary: A fine read but not as good as original
Review: Well, where have we heard that before. Look at nearly every movie sequel and we have the same story. Not as good as the original.

I agree with the other folks who gave this book a mid range review. While this is a fine read, there is something missing which was found in the original.

The way in which Starling decides to aim the hunt for Lector is a good one, and well thought out by the author.

As as with the original, there are not very many violent scenes depicted in the book. However, the ones which are, are told well and with some detail.

But as for the ending, that really is quite bizarre. After reading 'SOTL's' and watching the movie, I really felt that one of the final scenes with Starling would not have happened. It did not seem in her behaviour to act in the way she did, (unless there were drugs involved ad I missed that part? ) But you end up hoping that what happens happens but also I think you can see it coming aswell.

However, don't let me put you off, it is a fine read but not worthy of the same acclaim that was bestowed upon 'The Silence of the Lambs'.

Rating:
Summary: The Genteel Cannibal
Review: The book "Hannibal" would have been more aptly named "The Compleat, Genteel Cannibal". While skillfully written, what disappointed me most is that the story contains NO heroes. But it's not merely the lack of a hero that makes this novel unique: the author makes it abundantly clear that HUMANITY can be divided into two categories: LAMBS and SWINE. The lambs are incorrigibly pathetic and helpless, and the swine are incorrigibly unholy and predatory. At the end of the novel, I found myself sympathic to no one (except the reader). Even the surviving victims of Hannibal were so corrupted by their lust for revenge (ie, emotionalism over intellect) that I could no longer sympathize with their victimization. I first placed my hopes in Clarice Starling, but it soon became obvious that while she was interested in pursuing Dr. Lecter, her concern was NOT with bringing him to justice. Hannibal's villainy is compared and contrasted with the villainy of those who seek revenge against him. But the other "monsters"' in the story are all "babes in the woods" compared to the suave, sophisticated and highly-cultured Hannibal... They hate Hannibal because he has tormented and mutilated them...but they cannot gather their wits sufficiently to satisfy their emotional need for justice against him. The author Thomas Harris loudly proclaims Hannibal to be "Il Mostro Supremo" by gracing Hannibal with THREE advantages: SUPREME intelligence and intuition, the ability to CULTIVATE SYMPATHY from those who should know better, and sheer "good LUCK" when the first two fail. In other words, the author Harris tries to make us sympathize and even "admire" the character of "Hannibal the Cannibal"... After all, Hannibal only eats "rude" people. Which makes me wonder: would we sympathize, admire and respect Jeffery Dahmer... IF he had played the harpsichord, drunk fine wine, eaten white truffles, and evaded captivity by outsmarting authorities? (Perhaps Hannibal IS the ultimate POLITICIAN). It boggles my mind that an author could spend and entire DECADE thinking and writing about these characters... emersed within their possibilities...During the time he wrote Hannibal, WHAT was Harris thinking...? When Harris dedicated Part 3 "To the New World..."' what is it that he's trying to suggest about the future of the New Age? "The Serpent devouring Humanity" is an appropriate cover for this novel. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the devil himself knocked on Mr. Harris' door and handed him the completed manuscript for "Hannibal".

Rating:
Summary: Hannibal Lecter's review
Review: Dear Thomas,

I have followed with interest the course of your fans' public rebuke.

In reading Hannibal, it was apparent to me that Hollywood figures large in your value system. I think your success in furthering my career as a cannibal pleased you most because you could imagine no end to the financial rewards.

Now you are in bad odour with your fans. Have you always imagined your fans, watching your progress with pride? And now, after a decade's wait, do you see them disappointed? The sorry, petty end of a promising career? Hmmmm? Will your failure reflect on them, will people forever wrongly believe that your fans were sick lovers of highbrow horror trash? Tell me truly, special writer Harris.

Give it a moment before we proceed.

Now I will show you a quality you have that will help you: You are not blinded by tears, you have the onions to read on.

Here's an exercise you might find useful. I want you physically to do this with me:

Do you have an old Underwood typewriter? You are a Mississippi news reporter, I can't imagine you would not. Put it on the kitchen table. Turn on the overhead lights. Look into the typewriter, Thomas. Lean over it and look down. If this were your old typewriter, and it well may be, it would hold among its molecules the vibrations of all the stories and novels ever typed in its keys. All the intuitions, the dry runs, the blinding flashes of inspiration, the horror and the poetry of your language.

Have your editors demonstrated any values, Thomas? How about your Hollywood agents, did they demonstrate any? If so, are those values the same? Look into the honest Underwood typewriter and tell me.

You can be as strong as you want to be. You are a writer, Thomas. The bank account is fat, your career is safe. You are a writer. Look into the Underwood typewriter, Thomas, and start typing a better novel.

Hannibal Lecter

P.S. You still owe me a good novel, you know. Tell me if you still wake up hearing the applause for writing The Silence Of The Lambs.

Rating:
Summary: This ending was perverse, shocking, unbelivable!
Review: But I loved it! Have to wonder what kind of sick person is actually rooting for a monster such as Hannibal to fall in love and live happily ever after with the object of his obssession as he does in this book. However, due to the characterization of Mason Verger as an even bigger, sadistic, child molesting sicko it leaves the reader sympathetic to the plight of Hannibal. In this novel we are able to understand how Hannibal thinks and what events made him do the things he did. This journey into the depths of his mind allows the reader to sympathize with him or at the very least understand his actions. Clarice on the other hand, I'm not so sure about. I understand she was drugged but how could she go from solid citizen and law enforcer in one minute to brain eating cannibal in the next? All because she saw some lambs get slaughtered? Thank God she was never molested as a child - imagine the monster she would have become! Harris would have to have written 3 books about her.