HANNIBAL is the much anticipated sequel to the brilliant thriller "The Silence of the Lambs". The film is directed by Ridley Scott, of BLADE RUNNER and GLADIATOR. Starring in the film is Sir Anthony Hopkins, Julianne Moore, Ray Liotta, Giancarlo Giasomething or other, and Gary Oldman (uncredited).
People coming to see this film expecting another SOTL will be very disappointed. Instead of being about psychological terror, like SOTL, HANNIBAL uses the more modern gore and shock effects to create terror. Julianne Moore does what she can with a poorly written role, in her wooden sort of way. The supporting cast, however, is great. Gary Oldman is brilliant under pounds of makeup as An old patient of Lecter's. Hopkins seems to have fun with the role instead of his creepiness in SOTL. Ray Liotta provides some moments of humour, while Giancarlo Giasomething or other is excellent as inspector Pazzi, he and Gary Oldman are the best parts about the film.
The dialogue is bland, the script is not at all well written. The characters are underdeveloped and unrealistic. The plot is ridiculous after the changes made from the book, and the pacing poor. While SOTL is one of the best and scariest films of time, disturbing and showing how awful humans can be, HANNIBAL seems to have no meaning. I will compare this film to WHAT LIES BENEATH. Both films try to be scary but come up short.
This movie was good, I suppose I would have liked it more had I not read the book or seen SOTL. In the original, Jodie Foster was amazing and Hopkins gave one of film's best peformances ever.
HANNIBAL was more like SOTL than people think, it's just the writing and other aforementioned flaws that make it seem much worse. The film sometimes seemed funny, when it should have been scary. I think that this was done intentionally by Scott and Hopkins.
The art direction and cinematography are first rate, I must mention.
In conclusion, I think this movie was a huge success; ridiculous and laughable at times, which I suspect was intended. Worth a viewing, but definately not great, or even as good as it sounds in my review. 5/10.
People coming to see this film expecting another SOTL will be very disappointed. Instead of being about psychological terror, like SOTL, HANNIBAL uses the more modern gore and shock effects to create terror. Julianne Moore does what she can with a poorly written role, in her wooden sort of way. The supporting cast, however, is great. Gary Oldman is brilliant under pounds of makeup as An old patient of Lecter's. Hopkins seems to have fun with the role instead of his creepiness in SOTL. Ray Liotta provides some moments of humour, while Giancarlo Giasomething or other is excellent as inspector Pazzi, he and Gary Oldman are the best parts about the film.
The dialogue is bland, the script is not at all well written. The characters are underdeveloped and unrealistic. The plot is ridiculous after the changes made from the book, and the pacing poor. While SOTL is one of the best and scariest films of time, disturbing and showing how awful humans can be, HANNIBAL seems to have no meaning. I will compare this film to WHAT LIES BENEATH. Both films try to be scary but come up short.
This movie was good, I suppose I would have liked it more had I not read the book or seen SOTL. In the original, Jodie Foster was amazing and Hopkins gave one of film's best peformances ever.
HANNIBAL was more like SOTL than people think, it's just the writing and other aforementioned flaws that make it seem much worse. The film sometimes seemed funny, when it should have been scary. I think that this was done intentionally by Scott and Hopkins.
The art direction and cinematography are first rate, I must mention.
In conclusion, I think this movie was a huge success; ridiculous and laughable at times, which I suspect was intended. Worth a viewing, but definately not great, or even as good as it sounds in my review. 5/10.