Rating: 
Summary: Underdone movie or overdone book?
Review: Was I the only one who was left confused at the end of this movie? They not only changed the ending, but the whole premise seemed forced and not true to the book. The book was good, even better than good some Harris fan's may argue, but it was a light read, much like this movie is a light watch. You don't need to pay too much attention to this film to understand it; in fact, you could be doing housework (like I do when I watch it). The beginning of the Lecter series (in this movie, spelled "Lecktor") this may be the most dissapointing novel in it. Lecter is imprisioned here, it's in the beginning of his eight-year incarceration. Some fascinating images and thoughts adorne the movie (a rather interesting scene when the hero, Will Graham, is trying to 'get into' the mind/mindset of the Red Dragon killer) and the actor who playes the Red Dragon is really quite good. Brian Cox is the infamous cannibal, not Hopkins, and his portrayle of Lecter is really interesting. He playes it like one might a circus clown; full of energy and not so much wit. I don't deny that Cox is a good actor, but Hopkins, with his slow and leathel style, was much better suited for the role of the flesh-eater. When you watch the Graham/Lecter interaction, one is reminded of an 'elaboration of a bad lie' (quote from Silence of the Lambs, the much better sequel to this film). It's almost like the actors are trying to play down the whole plot of the movie with a few minutes of poorly-written interaction. It's simple if you view this movie with a nonchalant attitude, really. You musn't see this without seeing Silence of the Lambs afterward, for it will releave you of this boring plot.
Rating: 
Summary: A disapointment
Review: Thankfully everyone had forgotten this turkey by the time Silence of the Lambs hit the big screen. Loosely based on the first of the series of books by Thomas Harris that showcase the character of Hannibal Lecter it is true to the book only in the names of the characters. The movie version ends prematurely with at least 200 pages of plot left to be told and it dwarfs the Manhuter's lead character to a Cobra-type Miami Vice type copper who is a good 15 years too young in the movie version. Red Dragon, the book that this movie pretends to be based on, is a work of art. Do yourself a favor and read Thomas Harris' best work and forget this movie was ever produced.
Rating:
Summary: An OK movie, a GREAT book
Review: I knew about how Red Dragon was the first of the Hannibal trilogy, so I bought it. When I had finished reading it, I loved it and decided to rent the DVD. Well, it wasn't very good. It was well acted, well directed, but the writing .... They changed a really good ending from the book to a ... one in the movie. So if you thought the movie was just OK, and your a huge Silence of the Lambs fan, then read the book!
Rating: 
Summary: It must be a JOKE !
Review: After reading other peoples opinions, I directly bought that film...But it was a terrible suprise for me! I love to collect serial killer films and if I have to compare this film with SE7EN or Silence Of The Lambs, this is just an ordinary film which has no massive impression.
Rating: 
Summary: Enter the mind of a psychopath...you'll never get out.
Review: I love cult classics, and this takes the cake. Violence of the Hams compares not to this, Silence was a mainstream slice of box office boffo for you little movie theater suckers.
Manhunter of course is about William Petersen (hooo lawdy is he hot) who plays a schizophrenic man who possesses the skill to easily profile the mind of a psychopath and sees what makes them tick. He, while undergoing depression and pressure from his family, must catch an extremely grisly killer who has his eyes set on happy families. This movie is underrated by all these little Silence of the Lambs patriots and their sniveling little bitchfests.."wahhhh hannibal lector was played by some unknown actor wahhhhhhh and not anthony hopkins so it sucks wahhhhhhhh" You little saps. Brian Cox played a BETTER Hannibal because he was more realistic as an incarcerated criminal. Anthony Hopkins was some little Hollywood fantasy, ask any serial killer expert, Anthony Hopkins performance was appalling. Not to say he's a bad actor, I loved Hannibal, but his little "I'm a serial killer and I'm smarter than you" banter was annoying. So technically Silence of the Lambs ain't on my fav list. Manhunter totally brings out the best of the 80s......the killer, Francis Dollarhyde, falls in love with his blind co-worker (played by a most beautiful Joan Allen) and when they sleep together, the most beautiful song is played. You'll love it, very moody. Manhunter was brilliant. I loved Red Dragon, but I like Manhunter better because it added that 80s twist to it. I don't like Miami Vice, and this was sorta like Miami Vice, but a 2 and a half hour roller coaster episode. See it if you're into cult classics.
Rating:
Summary: Great movie with only a few flaws
Review: Michael Mann took Thomas Harris's first novel RED DRAGON and turned it into a chilling movie that is almost entirely faithful to the book. This film has great character development and the element of pure mind terror. All the actors give great performances, and the movie is great. I suggest you see Michael Mann's MANHUNTER today. Will Graham (William Petersen) is the FBI's semi-retired 'Manhunter' who is called back into service by his former superior, Jack Crawford (Dennis Farina). His job is to track down the serial killer called 'The Tooth Fairy' (because of the odd shape of his teeth)who stalked and killed two innocent families. To catch this sick individual (played hypnotically by Tom Noonan) Graham must do two things that test his sanity. He must visit the reason he tired, and think like the killer. Dr. Hannibal Lecter is merely a secondary character in MANHUNTER. However, his brief appearances are terrifying. I'm sad to say that having seen THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS, I cannot rightly see the talented Brian Cox as our favorite cannibal. He is however a fine actor, and a key addition to this film. This film uses many things to make it great. It uses "mind terror", some scary images, and acid rock. Mann uses acid rock throughout the film and particularly at the stunning climax to fuel the film. The few flaws I saw were that of Dr. Lecter's character, (although to be fair, this is due to my bias on Anthony Hopkins being the better Hannibal)and at some points, the plot falters. Other than that, this is a top of the line thriller. If you enjoy great movies, you must own MANHUNTER.
Rating:
Summary: Two stars out of sympathy.
Review: This movie comes from the book "Red Dragon", an excellent read. However, this is not a good translation of the book. The character central to the book, Francis Dollarhyde, is not explained at all in the movie. You get no real motivation as to why he is the way he is. You don't get the connection to the painting "The Great Red Dragon and the Woman Clothed with the Sun". You don't learn about the abuses of his grandmother. You don't get the explanation behind the teeth that he uses to bite his victims with. These were all very central to the character's development. Without them, he was just a creepy guy. (You get more evil characters out of Batman cartoons.) Instead, the movie focuses more on Will Graham and his journey. He is not that interesting of a person, either. At least, not enough to dedicate a whole movie to. I am a fan of Brian Cox, but he did not ooze the quiet evil that Sir Anthony Hopkins did in "The Silence of the Lambs". So as a whole, the characters were not engaging. And then there is the ending; the big shock at the end of the book was wasted. The movie had the typical stylized Hollywood ending that made me cringe. Not to mention the director's need to linger on a closing shot of the happy-family-in-paradise a good fifteen seconds too long. Michael Mann may have redeemed himself on later movies, but with Manhunter, you got the Miami Vice, 80's quasi-style of directing. Manhunter is not a scary movie, not a taut movie, not a frightening movie, nor an intense movie. What is it then? A dull shell of what could have been. Save your time; read the book.
Rating:
Summary: The ending nearly ruined the whole thing
Review: Briefly, let me just say that I agree with the other reviewers about the well-crafted suspenseful watchability, if not brilliance, of this film, right up until the climax. One of the strongest elements of the book was its ending. It was just as suspenseful and intelligent as the rest of the work, and left me quite satisfied. Furthermore, it was visually interesting enough that it would clearly have worked as well as any other part in the movie. However, for some reason, the filmmaker decided to abandon that ending and replace it with one of the worst anti-climaxes I've seen since Air Force One hit the theatres. Without giving too much away, the ending was full of unrealistic character actions, several gaping holes in the place and time of the plot, and a level of stupidity from the hero and the villain that completely undermined the brilliance that the rest of the movie had created for them. When the credits rolled, I was left with an emptiness that nearly made me forget how much I had enjoyed the rest of the movie. I am refering to the VHS version of this film. I hope that the DVD director's cut fixed this error. If not, be warned.
Rating:
Summary: michael manns' manhunter
Review: the most frightening movie i ever saw, manhunter, was even more scary then the cell or silence of the lambs. the fbi procedures looked very convincing and i think that made the film seem realistic. also the serial killer was a functioning society member with a real cool house quite unlike the jame gumb killer in sotl. and that is what scared me the most. i recommended this on
Rating: 
Summary: Silence of the Lambs--the Prequel
Review: This is a fine film. Just don't expect it to be Silence of the Lambs. Manhunter is based on the book Red Dragon by Harris, the "prequel" to Silence of the Lambs. Hannibal Lecter is not the focus here, though he appears in the film. Instead, it concentrates on Will Graham, the FBI agent who caught Hannibal Lecter and must now catch a killer who murders entire families. Willam Petersen is perfect as Graham, who must reawaken his own personal demons to find the killer. The depiction of Dollarhyde as a colorless, average worker with a really bad obsession is brilliant. The culminating scene, where Graham must track down Dollarhyde, is filled with 70's music (In-a-gadda-da-vida in its pulsating entirety) , weird pyschedelic scenery and some great tension. (think, bad trip.) What disappoints many people is the depiction of Hannibal Lecter by Brian Cox. He underplays Lecter as a cool, cerebral, distant villain. Which is quite appropriate--he's not the central character here. But many people see this film after Silence of the Lambs and want more of Anthony Hopkin's chilling interpretation. That's not in this film. Don't expect a tight thriller like Silence of the Lambs or to see lot of Hannibal Lecter and you will enjoy this version of another Harris novel. This is a different interpretation of Harris' work and it's great. But enjoy it for itself and not in comparison to other films.
|
