Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics
|
It is currently Tue Jun 18, 2013 6:10 pm
|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 9 posts ] |
|
| Author |
Message |
|
NotHughGrant
Director
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am Posts: 1273 Location: Lancashire, England.
|
 Hannibal - 10 years on
OK not exactly 10 years to the month but here goes -
I am one of the few people I know willing to defend this film. And I think this is because it is easy to dismiss it as a pile of indulgent guff. The problems are clear as day. Exaggerated even. Firstly it is not a thriller in the same way as Silence of the Lambs. perhaps it's not even a thriller at all. More of a sprawling biography. This will quite rightly leave many devoted fans of The Lambs, who were expecting more of the same, somewhat pissed off.
Secondly Jodie Foster not unreasonably decided against the role and although Moore does a diligent job....she just ain’t Jodie Foster.
But I actually think that on its own terms Hannibal is a well crafted and at times fairly beautiful tale. And this is in spite of some of the graphic violence, and what must be the ugliest (in more ways than one) screen character of all time in Gary Oldman's Mason Verger.
I believe that Scott successfully convinced many of us to forgive Hannibal and appreciate him as a human being whose existence, on balance, might just make the world a better place. His mind can be aprreciated and even his own sense of morality can be observed and sometimes understood. It's not a thriller in the context that i understand, but a reasonably fitting end to the legend.
So against much popular opinion, I would say the film is a limited success.
_________________ The question, RAYMOND ... is what.. did you want.. to be?
|
| Thu Nov 03, 2011 9:56 am |
|
 |
|
Vexer
|
 Re: Hannibal - 10 years on
I agree, i'd actually go as far to say i'm one of the few people who actually prefer this film over "Silence". Even if you don't like this film, you at least have to admit that it's better then the incredibly mediocre Red Dragon and the godawful (not to mention completely pointless) Hannibal Rising.
|
| Thu Nov 03, 2011 12:16 pm |
|
 |
|
Evenflow8112
|
 Re: Hannibal - 10 years on
No re-evaluation necessary. Hannibal is the masterpiece I deemed it all those years ago on PCP. If the mood is right, Hannibal is great, even campy, fun, full of rich black humor and plentiful bad-will for humanity. It's nowhere near as good as 'Silence' when you're actually sane/not high enough to discriminate, but it's easily full of more personality than Rattner's musty old rat-trap of a remake, Red Dragon, and it's almost as hilarious pound for pound as Mann-hunter (Brian Cox as a criminal genius? Bahahahaha). I agree with this thread and will gladly post here as opposed to yet *another* fucking 'Guess The Scene I Like!' thread.
|
| Thu Nov 03, 2011 1:02 pm |
|
 |
|
Sexual Chocolate
Director
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm Posts: 1168 Location: New Hampshire
|
 Re: Hannibal - 10 years on
I saw Hannibal when it first came out, and I haven't seen it since. But as I recall, I liked it. I thought it had great visual style and some campy humor. It was certainly better than Red Dragon.
_________________ Death is pretty final I'm collecting vinyl I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.
|
| Thu Nov 03, 2011 1:24 pm |
|
 |
|
MunichMan
|
 Re: Hannibal - 10 years on
Manhunter is the best Harris adaptation. Hannibal and Silence are equal in my eyes, but in different ways. But Manhunter rocks. It doesn't receive near enough the appreciation that it deserves.
|
| Thu Nov 03, 2011 3:34 pm |
|
 |
|
NotHughGrant
Director
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am Posts: 1273 Location: Lancashire, England.
|
 Re: Hannibal - 10 years on
Agreed with everyone that Red Dragon was pointless. For me the worst thing about it was Edward Norton's whiny performance. A nail in the coffin for that man's career.
Hannibal received bad reviews here when it came out and I wasn't too impressed myself first viewing, but it grew on my subsequently and I learned to appreciate it for what it is. I believe that they got the study of the character himself down very well, even where the story itself falls short.
_________________ The question, RAYMOND ... is what.. did you want.. to be?
|
| Thu Nov 03, 2011 5:06 pm |
|
 |
|
Evenflow8112
|
 Re: Hannibal - 10 years on
To the contrary, Manhunter receives so much notice now that it's arguably become overrated in film circles. There is absolutely nothing about that film which elevates it above Silence of the Lambs, and it is merely notches of quality above Rattner's boring mess of a remake. It's a film with good scenes and atmosphere, but it's almost certainly not in the same league as Demme's Best Picture winner. And Brian Cox is NO Anthony Hopkins.
|
| Thu Nov 03, 2011 5:33 pm |
|
 |
|
MunichMan
|
 Re: Hannibal - 10 years on
You're right. Cox was BETTER than Sir Anthony.
|
| Thu Nov 03, 2011 6:11 pm |
|
 |
|
Evenflow8112
|
 Re: Hannibal - 10 years on
Not even close, really. There are those who believe Manhunter is an equal to SotL because of Mann's evocative, moody direction. However, the film is, like most Mann projects, NOT about the acting as much as tone. Cox fits in well (although arguably the true acting standout is William Petersen's troubled protagonist), but the film isn't about or reliant on his performance. Hopkins carries a very good film to the precipice of greatness; It's at the least certainly no question Hannibal was made legend thanks to the 1991 film.
|
| Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:32 pm |
|
|
|
Page 1 of 1
|
[ 9 posts ] |
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: CasualDad, Google Adsense [Bot], Google [Bot] and 3 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|