Hannibal

Rating:
Summary: Okey Dokey
Review: A stellar cast and a great director should have made this film one of the most renound sequals to ever grace the big screen. Unfortunatly, the audiance it was shown to has appearently dumbed down, or expected something that no one could give. That unique 'cat-and-mouse' game with Starling and Lecter was what chilled and excited fans to begin with. The novel Hannibal gave critics and fans indigestion, but they were the ones who pressed for a sequal to begin with. "More, more, more!" What did we expect? Lecter said he wouldn't kill Clarice, and that was just odd. "The worlds far more interesting with you in it." Hannibal Lecter. Murderer. Psychopath. Cannibal. He spared her. Why? True Lecter and Starling fans would argue that he loved her. In his own sick way, he did. And they changed the ending for you, aren't you happy yet, you oh doubting critic? I thought the plot was dumbed down for you. The movie is spectacular, the scenens, pacing, and the characters (hey, I liked Julianne Moore in this) but, I think, people were really edgy about Moore replacing Foster. Big Flippin' deal! She did a good job; her accent was good, and the Starling fans who didn't like Lecter said that she was 'true to character.' I don't understand that. Thomas Harris wrote the characters. Whatever he plans to do with them, they are still the same characters. Eight years passed, Starling is of course going to change. I think the two groups of people wanted exactly two different things, so it's impossible to do a fair job of doing both. Scenario #1: Lecter and Starling ride off into the sunset, lovey dovey and happy, somewhat like Harris wrote it to begin with. (My personal choice) Scenario #2: Clarice captures Hannibal, and he goes back to prision. Scenario #3: (What actually happened) Clarice doesn't succumb to Hannibal's desire for her, and instead, tries to catch him. He ends up chopping off his own hand to spare her, and, of course that kiss by the fridge. All about control. Ever aspect of this movie, and it's dilemmas, are about controll. In the words of Thomis Harris, "who had dumbed down? Clarice Starling, or her critics?" Bravo. I agree. 4 stars out of 5.

Rating:
Summary: Hannibal; actors without a proper script
Review: Sequels are rarely better than the original (The Empire Strikes Back is an exception) but most often they are not this disappointing. What will let you down the most is the poor script; too many important scenes from the book have not been used, the final confrontation between dr. Lecter and Starling is ridiculous, it lacks refinement and there are simply too many one-liners that are simply not funny (even though some were obviously intended to be). Great actors (Hopkins, Oldman, Giannini and Liotta) but Moore does never convince as Starling. Jody Foster could not have saved this movie but she might have made it a bit less hard to swallow. Buying this movie is not the best way to spend 20+ dollars. Read the book or get Silence of the Lambs on DVD, in case you havn't got that yet.

Rating:
Summary: A Worthy Sequel That Will Stand on It's Own
Review: First of all let me say that the reviewers have been way too harsh with this movie. I suspect that they are disappointed that it is not a duplicate of Silence of the Lambs. And if that is what you're expecting, you will be disappointed too. But who would want a Xerox of the old movie when you can go see this edgy, well-done next chapter that takes you beyond the jail cell to the very home of Hannibal "the Cannibal" Lector?

Now I must say that Hannibal, while just as suspenseful as

"Silence" is definitely a little less serious. But the slightly irreverent quality of the movie works well, especially to ease you past its more graphic parts. Just when your skepticism is about to surface, just when your "gross meter" has almost reached its limit, the script writers throw in some brilliant black comedy and you find yourself laughing amid the mayhem. It's the writer's way of saying - It's over the top, we know it, sit back and enjoy it.

And enjoy it you do. The background scenery is lavish, the script well polished and the performances skillfully executed. Anthony Hopkins is, as always, brilliant. He glides with cat-like grace through his scenes, wrapped in Lector-esque calm while the body count climbs. He is at once lethal and appealing. Hopkins still manages to play most of his character through the eyes and facial expressions. The effect is so creepy and terrifying you'll find yourself glancing over your shoulder - just in case. Julianna Moore plays Clarice Starling. Ten years after "Silence", her character is written and played with more maturity, more confidence and a more "I'm in control and in your face" kind of energy. Moore does a wonderful job. And, in my opinion, this older Starling is more appealing than the one we saw in "Silence".

That said, let me point out here that there are two weak points to this movie - the characters Mason Verger (played by Gary Oldman) and Paul Krendler (played by Ray Liota). The problem, I think, is not the acting (which is in fact well done), but that not enough time is given to developing their characters. In Harris's book "Hannibal" both men are mean, unscrupulous and vengeful characters. In other words, completely unlikable and extremely hateable. In the book, when both men eventually fall into Lectors hands, you've come to dislike them so completely, that there is a feeling of "Good.They got what they deserved!". In other words, the book manages to create a reluctant sympathy for Lector's motives. The movie, however, never develops the characters of Mason and Krendler enough for the audience to really hate them. As a result the empathy for Lector is lost. In the book Lector is a monster with a tortured soul and a certain twisted sense of justice. In the movie, he's simply a monster.

As to the ending - while it is completely different from the book - I liked it. In the book there is a definite sense of closure. The movie, of course, leaves it open - ensuring that sometime in the future we will once again meet Hannibal Lector. With the ending of "Hannibal" the quasi-romantic relationship between Lector and Clarice is finally pulled out of the shadows, dusted off, and hung out for every one to see. With his eyes boring into hers, his expression both serious and self-mocking, Lector asks "Would you ever say to me, 'Stop. If you love me stop.'?" A declaration of love? Hardly. Rather a titillation -Does he mean it? Or is he simply playing with her head? Though there is an implication that Lector would cause himself harm before he would hurt Starling, there is really no clear-cut answer. The writers wisely leave that mystery for the next Hannibal Lector banquet.

Rating:
Summary: Satisfying
Review: Ridley Scott is a very visual director, he gives a more fanciful and more beautiful image to this movie than Jonathan Demme in Silence of the Lambs. Anthony Hopkins gives another brilliant performance as Dr. Hannibal Lecter, worthy of an oscar nomination. Stirring and violent, Hannibal stands shoulder to shoulder with its honored prequel

Rating:
Summary: What a gripping movie
Review: I had heard mixed reviews about this movie however i same from the cinema transfixed by the horrific scenes produced and the acting very very good, a must to own! dont invite your friends for a chinese though to watch it!

Rating:
Summary: Boring! Stupid! And not bloody at all!
Review: Why did Italy want to cut some "bloody" scenes of this movie?! It's not brutal! Nearly NO blood! That Movie has NO Sense! The Story is brainless and the whole Movie is too long and soo boring! I really understand why Joodie Foster didn't want to put her talent into a Production as this one! This Picture shows us that Sequels are really bad! I was so excited to see that one but then I couldn't wait to go home! It ahs NO suspense!!!!

Rating:
Summary: I think this is why Ridley got passed up...
Review: ... this movie had no tension at any point. That is what is so great about the first two Hannibal Lector films, but Ridley decided to pass that up and go for show everything attitude. Well this failed miserably. In my opinion, I don't think this movie should have ever been made. They should have just let it die in the novel. The only, and I stress ONLY, bright spot in this entire turd is how well Julianne Moore was able to nail Jodie Foster doing Clarice. It was uncanny. That's it I'm DONE.

Rating:
Summary: The Silence is broken.....
Review: I would just like to say first off that this was truely an amazing movie. See, it can't really be compared to "Silence" because the two movies are completely differant. But if I had to choose between the two films, I'd say that "Silence" was slightly better, but "Hannibal" was truely an Oscar-deserving film. The only problems I had with the film were:

1) Jodie Foster wasn't in it.

2) In this film (and in most) it's usually a bad thing to make a villian the main character, because simple human nature makes us root for the main character, even I myself at times in "Hannibal" found myself cheering the good Doctor on, as were many people at the Theater.

Overall, it's one of the best films I've seen in my life. And I am glad that the ending was changed.

Rating:
Summary: Could have been....
Review: This movie could have been the best movie of the new year. Instead we get a very long, borning opening that I must admit, I fell asleep in. Hannibal doesn't kill anyone until one hour and fifteen minutes into the movie. And no matter what anyone tells you, the movie does not have that much gore. I have seen a lot worse. I didn't really care about the killing, but there really is no suspense at all. I didn't care what hannibal was doing in Italy or what C. Starling was doing. When I saw the preview I thought the whole movie was going to be a "catch me if you can" movie. It wasn't that at all. The best part of the movie is the ending, which had the most gore. Anyhow, I thought Ridley Scott would have done a much better job. I like all of Scott's previous flims a lot more.

Rating:
Summary: The return of Lecter was well worth the wait.
Review: Composing a sequel to the Oscar winning thriller 'Silence Of The Lambs' must have been as complicated as putting together 'Star Wars Episode 1". Everything was going to be scrutinized and critqued harshly. The most important thing (to me at least) was that this film did not attempt to IMPROVE on the original... simply FOLLOW UP on it. The differences between SILENCE and HANNIBAL are wide and many. While SILENCE was firmly planted in the cerebral, HANNIBAL dwells deeply in the visceral. In director Ridley Scott's hands, Hannibal the Cannibal comes fully to life, showing us the monster behind the man in more graphic and unsettling detail that the first film only alluded to. Much has already been said about the violent content of the film and indeed it is graphic and gruesome, but it does occur in the context of the film and is not so much gratuitous as it is realistic. Even the film's outlandish conclusion (you'll never hear the expression 'brain food' again without shivering) seems possible. Those of you who have read the book will be pleasently surprised at what screenwriters David Mamet and Steven Zaillian have done here, choosing the source material carefully, excising the unnecessary, and coming up with a thrilling, frightening, funny, and wholly engrossing story (and thankfully changing the book's stupidly absurd ending). Scott bring the film to life, his direction reaching peaks of weightlessness. The story finds Lecter living, incognito, in Florence, Italy, trying to remain anonymous and live out the rest of his life. But he is being sought after by two people. One is Clarice Starling (here played by Julianne Moore) and the other is a former patient of Lector's, the impossibly rich and disgruntled Mason Verger (played by Gary Oldman, disgruntled because Lector once drugged him and ordered him to cut off his own face and feed it to his dogs - which he did, explaining 'it seemed like a good idea at the time). When a small-time Florentine police officer stumbles upon Lector's whereabouts, the chase begins. Ray Liotta turns in a fine performance as Paul Krendler, Starling's nemesis who recieves his comeuppance in a most memorable way. The whole project dazzles, with beautiful locations and heart-pounding score. Mason Verger, in and of himself, is a technical dazzler. A man with no lips, eyelids, or cheeks, he is horrible to look at, like a skull whose remaining flesh is slowly rotting off. The performance of Verger by Gary Oldman is the highlight of the film, never before has a character like this been brought to the screen. Was HANNIBAL worth the ten year wait? Absolutely. Is it better then SILENCE? No. It is different. It is a great thriller, with aspirations towards higher art. And it succeeds. It is a great as a sequel can get and serves the memory of SILENCE well. This will be a must-own DVD.