Hannibal

[Taylor Millard]

I've been pondering ever since 'Red Dragon' came out why people didn't like 'Hannibal' as much as SOTL or, now, Red Dragon.

Me personally, I love Hannibal. It's one of my favorite films, and I just like it. I remember when I went into Union Station during the summer and walked around slowly saying, "Are you listening to me, ex-Special Agent Starling...?" but that's beside the point.

I was watching the deleted scenes and realized that most of the deleted scenes would have made the movie longer but also, in my opinion much better. Why? 'Cause it would have followed the book almost to the letter.

The 'Il Mostro' case and Pazzi's involvement there...honestly there were some cool scenes there. It woulda been nice to've have them in there.

Also we could see Anthony Hopkins play the piano and show his musical talent (one of the letter writing scenes has Hopkins playing it with a piece he wrote)...it would've been cool.

The only reason I can think of why it wasn't as good as people would've hoped wasn't the difference in story but the fact there were two screen writers.

How much of Mamet's script was incomplete when he went to start doing 'Heist'? If it was enough then I think that's why the 2nd half of Hannibal goes by real fast.

I'd like to think the movie was going to be like 3 hours long and then because Mamet left it was reduced.

I hope they make a directors cut with some of the extras put back in. I know I'd like to see them in.

But that's just me.

[Sene Unty]

Hannibal was a good movie, I just dont think it was great. It left me feeling unsatisfied.....But then again I haven't seen the deleted scenes, so maybe it would be much better if I did.....

[JonathanLB]

I'm with you, I thought it was great. It's my favorite of the three, actually...

"Make your time! All your bases are belong to us!"

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well I liked Hannible and thought it was a very good movie just not as good as SOTL. Part of this is because I saw SOTL first back when I was 15 and it scared the crap out of me and I am not sure if any film could live up to that experience. Also I think not having Foster in the role of Starling made a difference. She did a terrific job in SOTL and its hard for any actress to follow that performance.

[Gabran Darkysa]

I did not like Hannibal! I thought it was a very poorly made film because Lector was transformed from being brilliant serial killer to being a superhuman serial killer of nearly mythic proportion. The movie was really overthetop and lost much of it's integrity and realism. I have never read the novel but had read Red Dragon and Silence of the Lambs years ago when I went through a period of reading hard dectective novels involving killers such as Harris and Sandford books. The violence in the movie was too gratuitious to the point it was detestable. And Starling, if she half the ex-agent she should have been would have never let that MONSTER walk away with the knowledge she was surely endangering innocent lives. Lector is one sick puppy. I felt the movie was full of loopholes. However I am looking forward to seeing Red Dragon as I have not found the time to go see it yet.

[JonathanLB]

Yeah... whatever.

[Ishiva Ruell]

The point is that SOTL was a very realistic portrayal of a serial killer and FBI investigation. It is completely absent in Hannibal. Maybe Harris should take time to learn hands on with real life detectives or FBI agents. If he is unwillingly to do that than he can watch programs such as 'The New Detectives', 'FBI Files', or even 'Cops' for that matter. And learn just how serious these people pursue their work especially with a subject as serious as Hannibal Lector whom is a serial killer to boot. No agent worth their badge or oath would ever turn down the opportunity to put a cold-blooded killer back behind bars. Not mention the notoriety that would give the agent or detective. Though I would like to think that would not be one of the motivating factors. Rather justice and the sanctity of human life. The movie fails abysmally to live up to SOTL's standards.

[Levi Argon]

Consider this a retraction to some of the comments I have made about "Hannibal" in the past. I bought the DVD last week and have since watched it twice, including all extra features and whatnot. I think it was the producer, Dino De Laurentis, said that "Hannibal" shouldn't be considered a sequel to "Silence of the Lambs" and I am beginning to understand why. Much has changed with regards to the primary two characters in their second outing.

The character of Lecter has had years of remaining dormant and Clarice, years of active duty with the FBI. Both characters will have changed; Clarice has been ravaged and betrayed by the system - Lecter explains all this to her - whereas Lecter is "very healthy" and somewhat mellow. They have come to realise something by the end of the film at least, they need each other, personally, I see Lecter as not only the one lamb Clarice has been trying to save all her career but equally is the one who will rescue her as much as she rescues him. It's all quite charming and touching really.

The more I watch it, the more I begin to appreciate it. Something Nup said not long ago had me thinking too. In this movie we see Lecter as a free man, now he could very well be living in some hideous old shack on the outskirts of some Italian hole feasting off the livers of many census-takers but no, he is a well-mannered, social indvidual who is living a quite yet sophisticated life in the heart of Florence. It's a beautiful contrast with the heinously malicious things for which he is infamous.

Nevertheless, those wicked acts we see him carry out in "Hannibal" are for his protection: Pazzi got what was coming to him for selling him to Mason Verger and Paul Krendler I think his name is got his just-desserts - in Lecter's eyes at least - for his cruelty to Clarice. Despite the ending being so different from the book I still find the symbolism behind cutting off his own hand somewhat endearing in a gruesome sort of way.

So I'm happy to say my opinion of "Hannibal" is rising but it will never match "Silence of the Lambs" in my eyes, as that is my very favourite film.

[Gurney Devries]

Hmmm... I think I might watch both of them again. I absolutely love the character of Hannibal Lecter.

I haven't actually read Red Dragon: Does anyone know if the book goes into more detail about what Hannibal did before his capture?

[Taylor Millard]

Not really. It focuses on Will Graham and his relationship with Hannibal Lecter.

I'm gonna reread it though. It's definately worth the read for sure.

I still wish they'd done the ending of the book...or somehow done it.

In my viewing 'Hannibal' is a twisted love story. Hannibal loves Clarice and she loves him...but neither (in the movies eyes) can have it because of their difference.

Clarice serves order while Hannibal serves chaos.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

ah like what would happen if a Jedi and a Sith were to have a relationship. ;)

Hannibal was too graphic for my tastes. :x

[Jedi Master Carr]

It doesn't go into too much more detail, none of the books have told us everything. The only interesting detail in the book is the horror that are in Hannible's basement that is about it. As far as the RD's Ending I assume you mean the fact that Graham gets stabbed in the face, well I didn't have a problem with that because Crawford did say they could get it fixed and with good plastic surgery I am sure they could, he still might have lost his spleen he was shot a lot. I still don't understand then the quote in SOTL that Graham was a disfigured drunk? I mean I admit he has a lot of scars now, but still. Of course this quote comes from some FBI Agent who might be trying to prepare Clarice for Hannible. Also could there be another sequel? I wouldn't mind seeing one more where they could actually either capture or kill Hannible and finish him off for good maybe have Graham and Clarice team up (which would be cool) but I am not sure if Hopkins would even do it. Maybe if Harris wrote another novel but I don't see that happening. He didn't even want to write Hannible and that is why I think he had the whole brain thing at the end to disgust people so much that they wouldn't want to read another Lectar book.

[Ishiva Ruell]

[i]Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr:
Also could there be another sequel? I wouldn't mind seeing one more where they could actually either capture or kill Hannible and finish him off for good maybe have Graham and Clarice team up (which would be cool) but I am not sure if Hopkins would even do it. Maybe if Harris wrote another novel but I don't see that happening. He didn't even want to write Hannible and that is why I think he had the whole brain thing at the end to disgust people so much that they wouldn't want to read another Lectar book.

That would be fitting to have the scarred Graham come back from retirement and team-up with Clarice to take down Lector. Also, have Graham straighten out Clarice and her weaknesses. The Hannibal movie was just too romantic and unreal in the way it handled Lector and Clarice's relationship IMHO. In reality, Clarice would have been the professional and not destroyed the months (or years) worth of investigation her fellow agents committed to the worldwide search for Lector. If there is to be a sequel, yes bringing back Graham is a definite must as he is the only agent ever to apprehend Lector. I suppose he also has the sense of duty and the spine Clarice doesn't possess.

[Taylor Millard]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
Maybe if Harris wrote another novel but I don't see that happening. He didn't even want to write Hannibal and that is why I think he had the whole brain thing at the end to disgust people so much that they wouldn't want to read another Lecter book.

Harris said in the 'new' introduction to Hannibal the story between Clarice and Hannibal was over. So I doubt we'll see another. And the brain thing didn't disgust me. But I know a lot of people who were like, "NO Clarice wouldn't do that!"

I find that humorous for some reason lol.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Just curious did he say Hannible's story is over? Maybe he want to have Graham take out Hannible or something like that.

[Ishiva Ruell]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
Just curious did he say Hannible's story is over? Maybe he want to have Graham take out Hannible or something like that.


Thomas Harris is a great author and a master of suspense thrillers but one thing he isn't and that is prolific. He has written only a handful of novels. Four specifically, Black Sunday ('75); Red Dragon ('81); Silence of the Lambs ('88); and Hannibal ('99). And has no other known pen-names.

But back to Graham, he was a very appealing protagonist as was the inexperienced but very eager Agent Clarice in SOTL. And the Lector story still remains incomplete. A fourth novel can tie-up all the loose ends and answer all the questions left by Hannibal. The return of Graham would be the greatest highlight introducing new insights to the readers on this character's perspective. However there is no news of what Thomas Harris might be working on next or when he even going to publish a new novel. Did a search on the net and found nothing.

:: sighs ::

[Gurney Devries]

Personally, I think the Hannibal story is perfectly tied up as it is. Hannibal has won his freedom, as we were all secretly hoping for. I think another movie with Starling and Graham teaming up to capture Lecter would be stupid, frankly. It sounds like something out of a bad 70's crossover comicbook. "Superman and Batman team up to catch the Joker!"

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Hey I'd love to see Superman and Batman team up to catch the Joker!!

;)

I was secretly hoping that they'd give him the electric chair, but oh well. :)

[Gabran Darkysa]

Originally posted by Gurney Devries
Personally, I think the Hannibal story is perfectly tied up as it is. Hannibal has won his freedom, as we were all secretly hoping for.

Speak for yourself. I am no fan of serial killers, fictional or otherwise. Neither are any of you I suppose but for this one exception or more. They turn my stomache. Unless it is 'green-blooded' slasher like Michael Myers. I nearly cried when Mason Verger met the instruments of his own vengeance. He had the right idea. :(

[Gurney Devries]

In case the title didn't give it away, Hannibal Lecter is the protagonist of the movie. And, generally speaking, the protagonists always triumph. If we didn't like his character so much, there wouldn't be three movies centered around him.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Verger got what he deserved he was a sick pedophile and deserved his fate. I still would like to see a final where Hannible gets it, somebody that evil should die, maybe we can have just Graham go after him, but this would all depend on Harris really. I knew he wrote very few books but didn't realize it was just four, man he is similar to J.D Salenger (who doesn't write at all anymore) maybe Harris though will be compelled to write another novel, one day.

[Gabran Darkysa]

Answering Gurney-

Hannibal shared none of the brilliance of the two previous novels, save perhaps the great lengths Thomas Harris went through in details that served as nothing but a backdrop. It was reduced to a absurd gore-fest. FBI agents and serial killers falling in love is absolutely ludicrious. It's a travesty of what the first two novels represented. I am sorely disappointed in it.


Answering Carr-

Yes, Hannibal needs to be destroyed or stopped. Too horrific. What I liked most was the originality of the first two books. A convicted criminal mastermind who is a brilliant psychologist and a serial killer that practices cannibalism being consulted or used as a profiler by the FBI to assist in two investigations involving serial killers. That relationship was one of the most fascinating aspects of the novels as it explored these characters and dark world of the criminal mind. Another novel would be very welcome.

(I want Graham to beat Lector again and spank Starling for being a dumb broad. I can see Graham coming back like a possessed man with a new perspective. ;) )

[Taylor Millard]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
Just curious did he say Hannible's story is over? Maybe he want to have Graham take out Hannible or something like that.

He did say it was over yes. He said (and I'm generalizing here 'cause I don't have the book in front of me) but, "It's time to let Hannibal and Clarice move on with their lives..."

I'll get the exact quote later, but yeah the story's over.

Graham going after Lecter again won't happen because he's finished with the FBI...and over.

They did change the ending of Red Dragon. Molly leaves Will and leaves him alone with alcohol. In the books Graham is a drunk and his career with the FBI is over.

I doubt we'll see Graham coming back in a film or a book to hunt Lecter again. Let's let Hannibal and Clarice off and go on with their lives.

Their story is wrapped up and finished.

[Gabran Darkysa]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
I knew he wrote very few books but didn't realize it was just four, man he is similar to J.D Salenger (who doesn't write at all anymore) maybe Harris though will be compelled to write another novel, one day.

I hope so too because he is an outstanding writer. No more Lector and the gang but nonetheless I would like to see him write another novel 'of whatever' soon.

[Gurney Devries]

Hannibal shared none of the brilliance of the two previous novels, save perhaps the great lengths Thomas Harris went through in details that served as nothing but a backdrop. It was reduced to a absurd gore-fest. FBI agents and serial killers falling in love is absolutely ludicrious. It's a travesty of what the first two novels represented. I am sorely disappointed in it. All of which is your opinion, and has nothing to do with what we were discussing. As Carr stated: Mason Verger was a sick, twisted individual who deserved what he got.

Aside from the scene at the end, there was hardly any gore to speak of in the novel. And I don't think it's entirely accurate to say that Clarice fell in love with Hannibal: She still wanted to put him away. For that matter, it's not entirely accurate to call Hannibal a "serial killer" - He killed when he felt the need arose, not at random and not on a regular basis.

[Taylor Millard]

Originally posted by Gurney Devries
And I don't think it's entirely accurate to say that Clarice fell in love with Hannibal: She still wanted to put him away.

True, and let's not forget that Hannibal had her drugged up through the entire end of the book. However, at some point I think she did realized she loved him.

But, I thought Hannibal was a great book. It was the first of the Lecter novels I read, mainly 'cause I wanted to go into the movie and be able to compare notes.

It's far from a gorefest, I thought. Verger is a sick human being, and Krendler was a corrupt, ambitious fellow. Both got what they deserved, which is what we were supposed to believe.

Now did the ending make a lot of people mad? Yup. I had one former boss who was like, "Clarice would never do that!" but remember, she'd been betrayed by almost everyone she ever trusted.

Crawford was dying and his political power was gone, Senator Ruth Martin was beaten, Krendler was in Verger's pocket, and her bosses at the FBI weren't concerned with her.

Lecter was, and if you're drugged up comepletely, and also injured...I don't blame her for staying with him.

[Jedi Master Carr]

About Graham and the Red Dragon at the end his wife hadn't left him, we see him in a hospital bed and thats it, now maybe she leaves him later, I can't remember exactly what SOTL said about him, off the top of my head, I know it said he was a drunk but thats about it, still can't rule nothing out Crichton killed off Ian Malcolm at the end of Jurassic Park only to resurrect him in the Lost World. But it will depend on if Harris even wants to write any more novels. I guess they could still do another movie maybe have Tally do the screenplay (he seems to be the authority on Lectar in film anyway) still not sure if Hopkins would do it either way, have to be a heck of a screenplay, I would think. I guess I want to see one more because I feel Hannible needs to meet his end, I hate to think that he could just get away with killing all those people.

[Gurney Devries]

Let me give you an example: The Sorpanos is probably one of the highest rated TV shows, atm. The story of the show pretty much centers around Tony Soprano himself. Now, this is a man who kills people on a daily basis - whether it be by his own hands, or whether he orders someone else to do it. Yet I garauntee that ratings on the show would drop drastically if they were to kill him off. Why? Because he's the protagonist of the show. He's the guy we're rooting for, even though he's a horrible individual. The same logic applies to Hannibal.

Short of him sacrificing himself for Clarice, I can't think of a good way to end Hannibal Lecter's life. Anything else would leave a bad taste in my mouth.

[Jedi Master Carr]

But Lecter is evil and I don't like him sure I like reading and watching movies about him but I don't like the character because he kills people. Still the point is mute if Hopkins doesn't want to do it.

[Gabran Darkysa]

Originally posted by Gurney Devries
Let me give you an example: The Sorpanos is probably one of the highest rated TV shows, atm. The story of the show pretty much centers around Tony Soprano himself. Now, this is a man who kills people on a daily basis - whether it be by his own hands, or whether he orders someone else to do it. Yet I garauntee that ratings on the show would drop drastically if they were to kill him off. Why? Because he's the protagonist of the show. He's the guy we're rooting for, even though he's a horrible individual. The same logic applies to Hannibal.

Short of him sacrificing himself for Clarice, I can't think of a good way to end Hannibal Lecter's life. Anything else would leave a bad taste in my mouth.

The Sopranos is a nationally television cable network series, of course the producers and writers are not going to kill off Tony. He is the most important character, the lead character. However, movies are different. There is no constant rating wars every season but box office openings and showruns. In addition, the other revenue sales gathered from miscellaneous products such as books, dvds, posters, etc. The studio is going to make a killing whether Hannibal dies or not. They can afford it.

Also, Tony Soprano is an infintely more complex character than Hannibal. Or rather his circumstances are. He is a mob-boss for gawd's sake. It is a means of survival. Lector, on the other hand, kills without provokation or motive. He is a cold-blooded serial killer. An especially grotesque one.

[Gabran Darkysa]

Originally posted by Gurney Devries
All of which is your opinion, and has nothing to do with what we were discussing. As Carr stated: Mason Verger was a sick, twisted individual who deserved what he got.

Aside from the scene at the end, there was hardly any gore to speak of in the novel. And I don't think it's entirely accurate to say that Clarice fell in love with Hannibal: She still wanted to put him away. For that matter, it's not entirely accurate to call Hannibal a "serial killer" - He killed when he felt the need arose, not at random and not on a regular basis.

Incorrect, Lector killed most of his victims because of their moral flaws or weaknesses. Or because he felt he had been disrespected and/or threatened by them in his insane reasoning. None of his victims deserved to die but ... Mason Verger. He was never sane enough to be real psychaitrist. You know a professional that helps others, not serve them with their chianti. A serial killer is a serial killer, no matter how frequently they kill with pattern or no pattern.

[Gurney Devries]

Also, Tony Soprano is an infintely more complex character than Hannibal. Or rather his circumstances are. He is a mob-boss for gawd's sake. It is a means of survival. Lector, on the other hand, kills without provokation or motive. He is a cold-blooded serial killer. An especially grotesque one. You obviously didn't pay attention to the books or movies at all, to make a statement like that. Hannibal, one of the most well fleshed-out, deep and thought-provoking characters every conceived of, and you claim that a generic mob boss that gets anxiety attacks is "more complex".
Incorrect, Lector killed most of his victims because of their moral flaws or weaknesses. Or because he felt he had been disrespected and/or threatened by them in his insane reasoning.How does that contradict what I said? I said he killed when he felt the need arose. He went almost 10 years without killing a person because he felt no need to.
He was never sane enough to be real psychaitristHe certainly was sane enough to profile and help capture several criminals before the events of Red Dragon.

The very fact that you so vehemently defended Tony Soprano, who is far worse than Hannibal Lecter, only serves to prove my point. If we're going to pass judgement here, as you are so keenly doing, then Mr. Soprano has committed far more murders and crimes, has betrayed the trust of even his good friends and is about as unsavory as they come. You singled out Lecter because you felt his fictional crimes are more grotesque and monstrous, not because he kills people.

[Gabran Darkysa]

Originally posted by Gurney Devries
You obviously didn't pay attention to the books or movies at all, to make a statement like that. Hannibal, one of the most well fleshed-out, deep and thought-provoking characters every conceived of, and you claim that a generic mob boss that gets anxiety attacks is "more complex". How does that contradict what I said? I said he killed when he felt the need arose. He went almost 10 years without killing a person because he felt no need to. He certainly was sane enough to profile and help capture several criminals before the events of Red Dragon.

The very fact that you so vehemently defended Tony Soprano, who is far worse than Hannibal Lecter, only serves to prove my point. If we're going to pass judgement here, as you are so keenly doing, then Mr. Soprano has committed far more murders and crimes, has betrayed the trust of even his good friends and is about as unsavory as they come. You singled out Lecter because you felt his fictional crimes are more grotesque and monstrous, not because he kills people.

No, I am a saying mob-boss is a far more complex person and a person in far more complexing circumstances than someone as mundane as a psychiatrist. It is a far more unforgiving profession. Killing is impossible to avoid unless you are suicidal moron. You see, Tony is driven by greed and power. One of his biggest motives is to stay on top. And hits are his insurance.

What is Lector driven by? God only knows, just a sicko freak that deserves a bullet in the head! Likewise I am sure Mr.Soprano has surely killed innocents too, but I am willing to bargain that most of his hits were other mobsters and criminals. Whereas, Lector is just as more likely to eat the paperboy than kill people like himself. They are too fascinating of studies. That last statement was said mostly with tongue-in-cheek. But you get my drift.

Note- I do not watch the Sopranos often. ;)

[Taylor Millard]

What's Lecter driven by...madness? Perfectionism? Maybe a little bit of both?

Harris had it to where Lecter was purposefully nebulous when it came to what drove him. What we do know is he loved Chaos. Which is ironic given the orderliness he lived in.


Whereas, Lector is just as more likely to eat the paperboy than kill people like himself.

No his tastes were for other things. Although if the paperboy kept throwing the paper in his rose bushes, then yes I'm sure he would eat him. :p

Another motivation for Lecter is to enjoy life, and not get caught. Which is why he went to Florence. Quiet life, he could study Italian and Dante...that sort of thing. He only came back to America to see Clarice again (and to bring her back with him).

But that's the way I see it.

[Peter McCoy]

You can't give The Joker the electric chair! He's far too fantastic to do that to him!

[Lilaena De'Ville]

No no, I meant give Lecter the electric chair.

:lol:lol

And remind me never to go to Taylor's for dinner. *shudder*

[Taylor Millard]

I'd love to stay and talk...but I'm having an old friend for dinner...good-bye...

>D

[Hart]

I really liked Red Dragon. It's the first Hannibal movie I've watched, and I thought it was fun. Not a GREAT movie, but it was really fun to watch.

[Taylor Millard]

Go see SOTL and Hannibal now.

And enjoy them...

Like fava beans and a nice chianti. >D

[Lilaena De'Ville]

Hart, you're one of th few people who will see the movies in chronological order. :D See SotL and THEN Hannibal, okies?

[Taylor Millard]

I saw the movies in chronological order. :)

[Bette Davis]

no you didn't. Red Dragon (chronologically FIRST) wasn't even MADE before you saw Hannibal, which is chronologically last.

So, wheras you MIGHT have actually seen them in chronological order, that wasn't your first time ever seeing SotL and Hannibal. Which was what my point was with Hart. So. >D I'm right.

[Taylor Millard]

That's a technicallity :mneh

I still saw 'em in order. :p

And I almost saw 'em backwards too. Infact...I might've seen 'em backwards...I don't remember when I saw SOTL. I think it might've been after I saw Hannibal 4 times in the theater.

[Hart]

I definitely need to :). As soon as I get back to school, I'll hunt those movies down!

[JMK]

Isn't there a fourth part slated to begin sometime soon? If so, what's the premise of that story?

[Jedi Master Carr]

The fourth is rumor and I doubt it will get made Hopkins has said it probably wouldn't do it, but I guess he could change his mind.

[Taro Idol]

I pray they leave the story of Hannibal Lecter untouched now. Red Dragon was fantastic, Hannibal was great and Silence is better than both of them. If you liked Red Dragon you will drool over SOTL, definately best in the trilogy IMO. :)

Edit: This is Gav. Didn't realise Peter hadn't logged out.

[Taylor Millard]

I doubt they'll make a fourth part. As Thomas Harris has said...the Hannbal Lecter story is finished.

[Leeloo Mina]

I think the hannibal movies are alright, I'm not really into them though. I'd like to see Red Dragon.. I'm sort of waiting till it hits the 2 dollar theater here. :crack