Rating: 
Summary: An Essential DVD
Review: I have just finished watching "Red Dragon", "Silence of the Lambs", and "Hannibal", in the order that I mentioned. Then, I saw "Red Dragon" again, skipping all the DVD special features.I first saw "Red Dragon" of course, at the theatre. Nothing beats the silver screen. I loved "Silence of the Lambs", and you'd be surprised hearing this from me that I also loved "Hannibal", but "Red Dragon" is a special film on its own. First, the cinematography is downright simple, yet brilliant. The Baltimore asylum where Dr. Lecter is held is identical to the one you see in "Silence of the Lambs". Second, the acting. Of course, no one else can portray the diabolical Hannibal Lecter, M.D., and Anthony Hopkins does not fail to give such a stellar perfromance. Edward Norton- I'm trying not to be biased here because I'm such a huge Norton fan, but all I can say is that he play Will Graham with so much precision and clarity. He's able to create that suspension of disbelief that is so essential in every film. There are several scenes wherre he asks for Dr. Lecter's advice in the asylum. Carefully watch the scenes where he has no lines, but only facial expressions...the ones where Dr. Lecter tries to dissect him mentally...it's very similar to the scene in "Silence of the Lambs" where Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster) is being dissected by Lecter and she shows this emotion on her face that shows that she's about to get torn but refuses to give in. Norton does a similar effect and it's acting at top notch. In the final scenes, I also loved how Mary Louise Parker cried. It came so naturally, one of those rare crying scenes where you just feel raw emotion in your body. Very electrifying. Third, the editing of this film is not as good as "Silence of the Lambs", but I thought the screenplay was good. Ted Tally should've been at least nominated for an Oscar for this one. The music score by Danny Elfman didn't appeal to me very much. To me, a film requires a very good music score. Something that stays in your mind even days after watching the film. There's nothing to Danny Elfman's music here that stays with me. Howard Shore did a great job at "Silence", because up to now, I can still hear that music in my head and see the face of Clarice Starling. The story plot is akin to the of "Silence", except for the fact that the agent here is not a rookie. The interesting thing about "Red Dragon" is we see how Dr. Lecter interacts with a male agent from the FBI, as opposed to how he interacts with the female rookie agent Clarice Starling. It really gives more depth into the twisted mind of Dr. Lecter. He kills and eats people, because he feels he is doing the public a service. By the time this review is posted, the film will no longer be playing at the theaters, but please, if you loved "Silence of the Lambs", go out and get the DVD of "Red Dragon". You won't regret it.
Rating: 
Summary: A good thing gone horribly wrong.
Review: As another viewer put it: your like of Red Dragon will hinge on whether you've seen the original entitled Manhunter. Have been a great fan of the Lector series for some time now I will be to the point. Edward Norton was absolutly the worst actor to pick for the movie. His protrayl of Investigator Graham seems too young and too clean. He doesn't convey the senese of a seasoned FBI profiler with deamons haunting him. Anthony Hopkins is not given enough time to shine and is badly distorted. Lector is suave and calm. However in Red Dragon his portrayal is more like a drunken, social outcast. In the beginning when we see how Lector is caught, that is the ONLY time we see of who Lector really is. Emily Watson plays Reba as a sex/socially deprived woman who'll open her life up to anyone who says more than two words. Absolutly the wrong protrayal of the book character who was poised, professional, and confident. Harvey Keitel's portrayal of Grahams boss, Jack Crawford, is good but if your not careful you might think of him as Grahams father. Philip Seymour Hoffman cannot act and was an obvious mistake for this part. The only satisfaction from his character is seeing his fate. Last but not least is Ralph Fiennes. Granted he plays the serial killer Dolarhyde as best as he can but he lacks the ability to scare us. The average person would not be afraid of running into Mr. Fiennes at the grocery store but Manhunter's Dollarhyde (played by the brillant Tom Noonan) would give anybody the creeps. Finally the movies script lacks heavily in it's linking of the different chracters and plots. You sometimes get the feeling it was produced by a highschool creative writing class, not a professonal screenwriter. In an effort to get every last iota of detail from the book into the movie we are deeply left out in the cold by the trival portrayal of climatic scenes, important moments, and the critical PIVITOL moment of the entire movie. I was deeply dissapointed. Manhunter draws you in and you move with the characters. You feel apart of them and when you reach the movies grand climax, you are overwhelmed with that same awe and power as the characters. Red Dragon however lets this pass as though it were as stoplight changing at a busy intersection. All in all I did not like the movie. Greg Finnes gives a good performance and worth comending. Dollarhydes book description (and in Manhunter) is excellent, yet this portrayl seems to lack that underlinning fear that we expect from an insane serial killer. This movie is more akin to a novice director, a slap-shot cast with little acting ability, less time to perfect their parts, and overall a bad movie to waste your money on. Despite the low budget and relatively unknown cast of Manhunter, it succeeds in drawing you in, exciting the imagination, and giving us the creeps as trillers SHOULD. Bottom line: If you like serious, well acted, movies that don't insult your intelligence and leave you hanging, see Manhunter. However if you want a cheap thriller for a party, see Red Dragon.
Rating: 
Summary: Just one more for the road!!
Review: Just the same thing with another name!!
Rating:
Summary: good movie
Review: I saw this in the theaters and I loved it!!! I saw all of the hannible movies and this one lives up to the standards of the first two.
Rating: 
Summary: Too short and choppy
Review: The problem with this film is that it's too short. The story starts at the wrong place, at exactly when Lecter is discovered and captured, purely by accident by Norton who is consulting him for advice on the murders.
Is it just me or are we unaware exactly WHAT Lecter did? Unless you read the books or look at the commentary then you don't know. It would've been nice if a half an hour or forty five minutes was given to Lecter's crimes and victims so that we would get a feelign of how evil he's supposedly.
Without that the other killers in this and subsequent films seem gruesomer than the master. It would be nice to see WHY these killers idolize him so much.
Ralph Finnes is good here but has very little to work with as we know he's going to be caught, there's no build-up to what makes one nut love another to the point of them working together to kill their rivals enemies and their families.
Ed Norton is as always sensational in a wearied performance as a man who's seen too much but still cares. Unfortunately the fact that we don't know what he's seen is the problem.
Emily Watson, one of my favorite actresses is ok as the blind woman who is forward with Finnes, thinking he's simply repressed and shy and not the whackjob he turns into. I have a theory about the Hannibal series which I detail in the other reviewes, making this movie important as part of teh triology watched as a whole but not as a stand alone film.
Rating:
Summary: He's back
Review: Indeed, after the horrible Hannibal of 2000, Lecter seems to be finally back in his top form. Here he is again behind bars for what else, eating people. However, we are introduced to Will Graham, the FBI agent who captured Lecter. Ed Norton does a solid job supporting Anthony Hopkins. The great performance of movie is Ralph Fiennes' Francis Dolarhyde. Here we see a man in conflict with himself; deciding to struggle to maintain his humanity or metaphysically transform into the man-Dragon (William Blake's painting). One can hardly feel sorry for this man as he brutally murders two families, but we do gain sympathy after seeing his remorse. Ralph Fiennes has been often an overlooked actor and may even be one of the best in America (his work in The English Patient and Schindler's List were oscar worthy). This film, thank god, stayed away from the pointless gore of Hannibal and may have even surpassed the Silence of the Lambs in terms of depth. These characters are all double sided unlike the pure evil of Silence. Norton is a man with a curse who outwardly seems calm, but inward is struggling to stay in control. Lecter is polite and charming outwardly, but his evil lurks not far from the surface. With the amazing characters and frightening atmosphere, this may just be one of the best movies of 2002.
Rating:
Summary: 'Manhunter' ruined this film for me.
Review: Red Dragon is actually a remake of the 80's Michael Mann version of this story. So I had the characters already set as to my expectations, and Manhunter did a beautiful job with the story to begin with. I'm sure that is what hurt this film for me. It certainly wasn't the casting or the story. This version was a little more 'splashy' than the gritty nature of Manhunter, and the grit I think helped the original movie more than this did. Fiennes was a surprising Dollarhyde. He is truly one of the most gifted screen actors we have. Hopkins is too identified with Lector to not like him, even though his part is scant. Even Norton, who can't seem to fail at a part, gives Will Graham a vulnerability much different than William Peterson's original. I think the casting gives you most of an expecation for a 'bigger' film, which this story can't be. I just felt that the casting and manner the story was told in Manhunter 'fit' better than this one.
Rating:
Summary: thisclose to 4 stars
Review: i couldnt believe that my long ago told joke would become reality.when i first read the book i was foaming at the mouth to see a movie version.lo and behold,mike mann dons the directors cap.i will admit,i fell asleep quicker in other so called suspence/horror movies.to tag this as a tremendous let down would be saying the sears tower is a pretty big building.immediately after waking up and stumbling out of theatre,i told my friend theres a much better version yet to be made.then when the bogus manhunter 2 disc set came out,i gave in hoping much of what wasnt in the movie(like all the good parts)would be here.but nooooooooooo,same snorefest,just more of it for more money.at that point i again stated that someone other than mike mann should redo this.i nearly lost it when i saw the preview for red dragon.nothing really to see but just knowing that there was a remake was thrilling enough.then came the name mark ratner.it sounded familiar.he directed a comedy!!!!!!!i couldnt believe it!!!!!!!and the twerp ed norton in the lead!!!!!!!!my hopes seemed dashed.surprise surprise.......this version was as true to the book as humanly possible without being 4 hours/rated NC17.it had its flaws(norton was toooo meek/hannibal was made to be almost superhuman-took lots of shots to chest that should have killed him)but overall,it was fantastic.this complements the trilogy in prime fashion.im hoping that its ends this way.having this end up like so many franchises before it would be sad.halloween,friday 13,jaws,exorcist,phantasm,etc became running jokes instead of legendary trilogies.actually,most of them should have stopped at part 1(but thats a different rant).i wouldnt mind reading more but to prolong this in movie form would truely be pushing ones luck.RIP hannibal.
Rating:
Summary: The only scary one in the series...
Review: Oh this is so scary. Also recomended is The little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, and Timmy the Tooth.
Rating:
Summary: Hopkins Does It Again
Review: RED DRAGON is one of the best movies if its year, and provides a wonderful capper for the Lecter trilogy. I know that there are a great many fans of MANHUNTER who still feel that it is a better movie, but I am definitely not one of them. Brian Cox is a wonderful actor, but he never captured the true malevolence of Lecter, only his remarkable stillness. Anthony Hopkins is simply (in the words of the NY Times) "the best [screen] actor working in [film] today." Even though Lecter is a minor character in the the original novel, you remember him long after putting the book down. Anthony Hopkins does the same thing for Lecter in the movies. If it hadn't been for the inevitable comparisons between the two films, Brian Cox would hardly be remembered at all for his portrayal of Lecter. Although Tom Noonan is especially creepy as the villain of MANHUNTER, Ralph Fiennes equals, if not exceeds, his creepiness, and Ed Norton brings everything you would expect from an actor of his calibur. This movie is simply a MUST SEE, and I can't wait until the DVD arrives.
| 
