Hannibal (2001)

• 
  
  March 6, 2012

  ironclad1609

  This is probably one of the greatest failures of film history as far as sequels go. Not a bad film per se, but nowhere near the brilliancy of The Silence of the Lambs. Why is that so? I primarily blame the book and script. We all know Ridley Scott knows how to create compelling a... read morend spectacular films. He simply has not much to work with here. Of course author Thomas Harris didn't feel like copying his masterpiece and you have to appreciate it. The new setting of Florence feels too different, the fact that Starling is stuck to her research basement for half the film and we follow an Italian inspector for a while even makes it hard to care for much that is going on in the beginning. Hopkins is still excellent, but even his character does not feel like the Lecter we know. Same goes for Starling, for which Julianne Moore is not to blame. Going a different direction and having characters change for a sequel is fine, entirely failing to add to what was established and play with the elements that were loved is not. What the plot is missing in real suspense it is trying to compensate by gruesome violence and lots of disgusting scenes. The only excellent part of the film is Hans Zimmer's beautiful score he wrote for the (fake) opera the characters listen to. Once it is playing over the end credits, it actually makes you think you've seen a better film than you actually did. Disappointing, even if entertaining.

  Share This Review
• 
  
  September 18, 2011

  TheGame90

  Ridley Scott had no chance in competing with The Silcence of the Lambs....so he did something different....And I think he did it good. Anthony Hopkins is cold as ice. And Julianne Moore is okay. It would have been great with Jodie Foster

  Share This Review
• 
  
  August 8, 2011

  DreamExtractor

  Crap compared to the incredible Silence of the Lambs

  Share This Review
• 
  
  May 1, 2011

  fb100000040220993

  This film experienced a massive drop off in quality compared to it's predecessor, "The Silence of the Lambs". I'm not even sure why a sequel was necessary, especially one as poorly conceived as this. This films blows the subtleties that made the first film brilliant way out of ... read moreproportion. In fact, most of this film was just far fetched. Despite all the gore, it still manages to be boring. Do yourself a favor, like Jodie Foster did, avoid this crap.

  Share This Review
• 
  
  January 28, 2011

  stevenecarrier

  I am a fan of Ridley Scott's "Hannibal," more so than most people. I like the film, for simply, realizing that it can never be Jonathan Demme's "The Silence of the Lambs." There was no way this sequel could ever live up to it's Oscar winning predecessor. Scott knew this from the ... read morestart. What he does here is craft a film that, yes acts as a sequel, but also acts as it's own standalone story. "Hannibal" is so different in tone, style and narrative than "The Silence of the Lambs" that is practically forces you judge it on it's own merits. (The presence of Julianne Moore alone dictates this.) The picture Scott has made is quietly thrilling, visually striking and very atmospheric. "Hannibal" is the definition of an elegant horror film. Where "The Silence of the Lambs" was a procedural thriller, "Hannibal" is a psychological horror film. Anthony Hopkins, Julianne Moore, Gary Oldman and Ray Liotta are all very good here. The film also adds in a very dark sense of humor to the proceedings, finding it's own way of incorporating the sense of macabre so important to the first film. Overall, I really like "Hannibal", it's engrossing, well made and a very interesting way of crafting a sequel.

  Share This Review
• 
  
  January 23, 2011

  Chiefilms

  A few steps down from Silence of the Lambs. Drawn out and the film at times loses itself. Julianne Moore is a good actress but she wasn't a good fit for the Clarice role, didn't work at all like Don Cheadle in Iron Man 2. Gary Oldman's character was quite creepy, just nasty. ... read moreGood classical music backdrop to blend in with the brain eating.

  Share This Review
• 
  
  January 14, 2011

  yona71

  Anthony Hopkins is back in his brilliant portrayal of the killer/cannibalistic psychiatrist Hannibal Lecter. You get much more of an insight of this sadistic yet highly intelligent lunatic by seeing him do his thing. "Okie-dokie".
  Gary Oldman's haunting portrayal of the severely ... read moredisfigured victim of Lecter's(Mason Verger) is so effective that I didn't have a clue it was him until I saw his name in the credits. He gives full credit to the makeup artists because what they did is actually quite hard to look at, but Oldman uses it to his advantage indeed.
  Julianne Moore is perfect in the role of the woman(Clarice Starling) who fascinates Hannibal Lecter in every way. This film isn't the best follow up, but it does have a quality about it that just makes you watch in disbelief. And hey, some of these situations actually allow for some laughs.

  Share This Review
• 
  
  September 29, 2010

  cancercapricorn2002

  Hannibal is a gloriously looking, truly beautiful film about some grim, truly ugly people. It's also a confusing juxtaposition that has torn people between hating it and rather liking it; I myself have seen it three to four times over the years but remarkably, remain in a certain... read more state of not being necessarily too fond of it. Whilst the locations of the Virginian outback and the streets of Florence are shot exquisitely, with a mesmeric soundtrack, most of the characters in Hannibal possess a sense of evil; of wrong-doing; of ugliness, and in two particular male characters of a law-enforcing nature, they can possess these attributes whilst maintaining an outer shell of somewhat rugged handsomeness. This, as the photogenic female lead has to deal with a public shaming following a chaotic opening gunfight, as inner-demons threaten to feast away at her. The film is one-part chase thriller as the titular character remains constantly on the run; one-part journey of redemption; one-part detective thriller as one man goes it alone in tracking someone down and one-part revenge tale.
  
  But there is that sense of pantomime, or melodrama, when Anthony Hopkins' legendary screen character Dr. Hannibal Lecter is revealed as a physical presence for the first time; he turns to face us, the perspective is just to the side of the character of Renaldo Pazzi (Giannini), an Italian police officer, and there is that overly dramatic sense in us knowing who he is but the hapless supporting character not. This is all just before it is revealed Lecter is gunning for a job as a sort of curator at a centuries old library in Florence, and that his predecessor has mysteriously vanished only recently. To a degree, it all sort of works in its own odd little screwball way. Both Harris' 1999 book and this 2001 adaptation seem to warm to the character of Lecter without embracing him, and in titling the film 'Hannibal', the piece moves away from other series titles such as Red Dragon and The Silence of the Lambs; two headings that were linked to both the plight and internal difficulties of the serial killing antagonist The Tooth Fairy and lead Clarice Starling, respectively.
  
  Clarice Starling is indeed back but is played by Julianne Moore, who does a relatively fine job. Curiously, rather than distance itself from 1991's popular and vastly acknowledged work of brilliance The Silence of the Lambs, Hannibal makes the curious decision to evoke immediate, somewhat nostalgic, memories of said film in having Starling play back all the old tapes from when she interviewed Lecter. It's an odd reference to the previous film, an early 'getting out of the way' if you like of texts of old. But there's a sense that the film has its own identity anyway, and eventually comes across as being split into two distinct halves; a sequence, of which, at the beginning of the second half that sees Lecter chased around by some mercenaries employed by disgruntled past-Lecter victim Mason Verger (Oldman). They have it in mind to capture him so that Verger may wreck a horrid revenge, and it's an important sequence, a shifting of power as to where the film's chief levels of antagonism will arise. Previously, Verger was rendered deformed after an altercation with Lecter many years ago; in the process made to look a freak on the outside and just as ugly as on the inside when it arises he had engaged in prior acts of paedophilia, but is now mostly confined to a wheelchair; further still trapped within his huge manner house and vast acres of land.
  
  The multi-strand approach initially sees Lecter based in Italy, giving away his whereabouts following the sending of a letter to Clarice, who is going through her own crisis of confidence with the F.B.I. following a market place shoot out in which an agent is killed. Starling is again struggling with the sexual advances that come with working within the male dominated world in which she operates, with the film making a point as to capture fellow agent Paul Krendler's (Liotta) glances at her in a meeting very early on while later; his physical position within the room they are talking sees him sit himself on a desk, thus looming over a sitting Starling when criticising those of Lecter's kind in that they have a taste for items of a high art nature and therefore are bound to be somewhat strange.
  
  For the best part, the film is a Florence-set pot boiler revolving around Pazzi's attempts at dealing with Lecter who's operating under a pseudonym. The very gradual realisation and plan of action Pazzi puts into operation in capturing Lecter is constructed nicely, director Scott applying a fair amount of menace in having Lecter come across as someone whom may or may not know of Pazzi's plan. Scott additionally applies a variety of long shots at the most heightened of times; a telephone call to the F.B.I. ends with a shot of an entire plaza and that uneasy, mystical sense that someone may by out there amongst the array of busy bodies, observing what he's done; indeed heard the entire conversation if that were at all possible. There's a certain disturbing poetry to most of Lecter's murders in Hannibal, in that each victim evicts some sort of sinful tendency in their aims prior to their demise; be it lust, wrath or greed. It's easier to associate oneself with Lecter in the film as this wondering, loose serial killer but in making those around Lecter so unrelatable, the film rather brilliantly avoids rendering Lecter neither a romanticised figure nor someone we ought to feel natural affection toward. The film is uneven in tone, and pulls out the sort of gross content that sees it severely clash with most of its overall look, but as a pulpy tale of a killer on the loose; a vengeful past victim and a righteous detective on the hunt, Hannibal is in the end a ok film based on a book that I didn't like at all. Its as I said a film that has people who love and hate it so I suggest giving it a watch and judge for yourself

  Share This Review
• 
  
  August 15, 2010

  cosmo313

  As an adaptation, this movie doesn't do the book justice. As a horror/thriller film though, it's pretty decent. It doesn't live up to or surpass its predecessor, but few films can or could.
  
  The location shooting is wonderful, as is the general look. I've actually been to one ... read moreof the locations they shot at in person (the balcony scene with the hanging/disembowling). I've seen the balcony, building, and surrounding area it was shot at, and wandered around there for a while. It was cool.
  
  The story is, I'm not gonna lie, kind of a contrived mess, but it's not that bad. There's not as much depth, and gore is favored above all, but I still have a hard time crying foul on this movie. I guess I just love the cast, locations, and the realism of the gruesomeness. Scott is a great director, but this isn't one of his better films. It's not his worst, but I think they should have kept Demme on board.
  
  Julianne Moore is no Jodie Foster, but her Clarice Starling is still pretty good, and Moore is a great actress in her own right. Hopkins once again delivers as Hannibal, Ray Liotta is a great asshole, and Gary Oldman rocks as the ridiculously creepy and twisted Mason Verger out for revenge. He's unrecognizable, but is definitely unforgettable.

  Share This Review
• 
  
  June 8, 2010

  TheDudeLebowski65

  Hannibal is a different film than Silence Of The Lambs. It definitely lacks the bite in what made Silence such a thrill ride, but this film is still good in its own way. The absence of Jodie Foster brings the film down a notch, but Julianne Moore proves a capable replacement for ... read morethe part. This film features a billionaire wanting to exact revenge on Lector. The film is less thrilling than Silence Of The Lambs, but it's still a pretty good film to watch and does have good scares and thrills, but it's nothing compared to its predecessor. Hannibal is directed by Ridley Scott and he brings Thomas Harri's novel to life and his directing is phenomenal for this film as it is still a terrific film to watch with an awesome climax.

  Share This Review

• Anthony Hopkins as Dr. Hannibal Lecter
• Julianne Moore as Clarice Starling
• Ray Liotta as Paul Krendler
• Frankie Faison as Barney
• Giancarlo Giannini as Inspector Rinaldo Pazzi
• Francesca Neri as Allegra Pazzi
• Zeljko Ivanek as Dr. Cordell Doemling
• Hazelle Goodman as Evelda Drumgo
• David Andrews as FBI Agent Pearsall

Click a thumb to vote on that suggestion, or add your own suggestions.

• 
  The Silence of the Lambs (86%)
• 
  Hannibal Rising (92%)
• 
  Red Dragon (89%)
• 
  Training Day (29%)

• • Dr. Hannibal Lecter: I mus't confess you, I'm giving very serious thought to eating your wife.
• • Mason Verger (uncredited): I have immunity from the Justice Department, and I have immunity from the Risen Jesus. And nobody beats the Riz!
• • Dr. Hannibal Lecter: [in a letter to Clarice] Your job is to craft my doom, so I am not sure how well I should wish you. But I'm sure we'll have a lot of fun. Ta-ta, 'H.'
• • Dr. Hannibal Lecter: Mason Verger doesn't want to kill me any more than I want to kill him. He just wants to see me suffer in some unimaginable way. He is rather twisted, you know.
• • Dr. Hannibal Lecter: Bowels in or bowels out?
• • Clarice Starling: This is from the Guinness Book of World Records, congratulating me on being the female FBI Agent who has shot and killed the most people.

• What meal does Dr. Hannibal Lector request on the night of his escape?  Answer »
• Which actress accepted the role of Clarice Starling in the film Hannibal, after Jodie Foster (who played this character in the prequel, The Silence of the Lambs) turned it down.  Answer »
• What was the name of Hannibal King's vampire hunters group in "Blade: Trinity"?  Answer »
• Who wrote the books 'Silence of the Lambs' and 'Hannibal' which were later made into movies starring Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal 'The Cannibal' Lecter?  Answer »

• 
  Hannibal, The Quiz
  by mrsjohnnydepp1000
  603 taken
• 
  Hannibal Movies
  by Toody
  264 taken
• 
  HANNIBAL
  by moviebuffgirl
  42 taken
• 
  Hannibal
  by thedevilsprincess843
  157 taken

• Hannibal Lecter - Requiem for a Dream
• Hannibal and Clarice
• hannibal's trailer
• Vide Cor Meum
• Hannibal (made by me ^_^)
• Hannibal - Brain scene
• Hannibal/Clarice I hate everything about you

• PrincessOf...
• chuankung1
• Cvalda
• PinkMinkPr...
• irenepen14
• AvantGard3
• valykiss92
• lucas175

• 

  Hopkins 'not reprising Lecter role'

  Posted by matertenebraum
  3 years ago
• 

  Anthony Hopkins back as Hannibal Lecter?

  Posted by matertenebraum
  3 years ago

• 

  Best of 2001 (popular acclaim)

  by darkangeloracl...
  9 Movies
• 

  Supposedly 'Rotten' films I like.

  by lablav
  47 Movies
• 

  All Time Favorites

  by dororai
  16 Movies
• 

  Terror/Horror/Suspense

  by asanaparada
  28 Movies
• 

  My Movie Collection

  by aplgrande
  306 Movies