The bottom line on Hannibal to me is, if it wasn't Hannibal Lecter and Clarice Starling, this would just be another run-of-the-mill thriller. The fact that it is the continuation of one of the greatest films of all time certainly lends it a special place in movie history, but standing by itself, it isn't all that wonderful. Hannibal picks up 10 years after the end of The Silence of the Lambs. Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins) is now living in Italy under an assumed name. Clarice (Julianne Moore in the role originated by Jodie Foster) is still working for the F.B.I. but as the movie starts, she leads a botched raid on a drug dealer that leaves her under a cloud of suspicion. At the same time, Mason Verger (an unrecognizable Gary Oldman), one of Lecter's victims, has been trying to hunt Lecter down himself, to exact revenge on the man who crippled him. Meanwhile in Florence, a local police detective (Giancarlo Giannini), is also trying to nail Lecter, for a $3 million reward. All of these stories intersect at different places, with people dying left and right, and an ending that is as gruesome as any ever seen on film.
Speaking of the book, if you've read it, the movie is pretty faithful to the novel. The only differences are a couple characters aren't in the movie (like Verger's sister isn't in it at all), and the relationship between Lecter and Starling is somewhat different. But the scenes from the book are all pretty much in the film. It was hard watching this movie and not thinking of the book, and not thinking of the original film. I personally thought the book was one of the most disappointing things I had ever read. And while the movie turned out better than I expected, since I wasn't expecting a whole lot, that isn't saying much. The movie jumped around too much. There were too many story lines that kept going back and forth. In the original movie, it was Clarice and Lecter going head to head. They played mind games with each other, they fed off each other. It was exciting just watching them talk. In Hannibal, there was very little interaction between the two. Clarice was either by herself, or fighting her own department. Lecter was over in Italy battling against the police detective. Verger kept popping in and out but didn't play a huge role. The one thing about a book is that you can make it as long as you want. That way you can fully investigate every character and allow the reader to get to know them. In the book there was more about Verger and his obsession with Lecter. There was more about Lecter and his dealings with the police. There was more with Clarice and her fall from grace. In a movie, there are time and story constraints. There's no way they could have made a 4 hour film, so certain things had to go. And in doing so, some of the characters became two dimensional.
The Silence of the Lambs is easily one of my personal all time favorites. It was a chilling psychological thriller that had two great actors battling it out on screen using words and thoughts over action. Hannibal has equally great actors, none of whom share the screen as much as they should. There was a lot more violence in this movie, and much of it horrific and just plain nasty. The movie didn't have the same feel or the same edge to it that The Silence of the Lambs had. On it's own, Hannibal was just a so-so film. A movie that had the potential to be a great film, worthy of its status as a sequel to one of the all time great movies. But in the end, it came up short. So overall I think Hannibal is probably worth a see if you're a fan of the original, but don't go in thinking it'll be the same quality because it's not. Got something to say? Say it on the Message Boards. No password needed!
Click on the link for more information on
|
![]() Hannibal $22.36 Hardcover $4.79 Paperback |
![]() The Silence of the Lambs $29.96 DVD |
![]() Manhunter - Director's Cut $29.98 DVD |
![]() Soundtrack $14.99 DVD |
© 2001 Wolfpack Productions