Plot
Based on the controversial sequel novel of the same name, Hannibal is the much-anticipated follow-up to the Oscar-winning The Silence of the Lambs (1991). Anthony Hopkins returns as Dr. Hannibal Lecter, one of the world’s most cunning and feared serial killers, who resurfaces after a decade in hiding to toy with FBI agent Clarice Starling . As Starling’s career flounders thanks to a drug bust gone wrong, Lecter attempts to elude a greedy Italian police detective who’s willing to alert the authorities to his presence in Florence for a price. In the meantime, a maimed but wealthy former victim of Lecter’s named Mason Verger plots to get his revenge on the doctor in a most unusual and grisly fashion.
Analysis
I had heard rumblings about this film from friends and colleagues who had been fortunate enough to catch this on the big screen on it’s UK release. As I stood patiently in the rental line, I tried to put all of this out of my mind, for tonight would be the night I would hopefully see one of the best horror/thrillers ever produced……………..
Some years have past since The Silence of the Lambs hit the big screen, and a lot of water has run under the horror/thriller bridge since then. We have seen some fantastic films in this arena including Seven, The Bonecollector and Kiss the Girls, so to live up to the first film, and the newer incarnations, was always going to be a challenge. Has it once again become the mac daddy of Psycho thrillers, well…errmm, not really.
The first problem with Hannibal is the fact that it seems to have lost sight of what made the first film a classic, raw gut knotting tension. I don’t just mean physical tension brought on by the build up to a climatic scene, but the tension that existed between Clarice Starling and Hannibal Lector. Situations that left one hiding behind a pillow, waiting for Hannibal to lunge and bite off a chunk from Miss Starlings face. Makes for great viewing, even if it never happened. Couple this with the driving plot. Always a winner when crazed serial killers are being hunted down via a paper-thin trial of clues, even better when the authorities are being assisted by yet another crazy psycho. So, in my ramblings was the word plot, which brings me neatly to the second problem. Some might say that a plot is an important factor in telling a visual story. I agree with this theory (to a point) and in this instance I think a good story was essential. Unfortunately, Hannibal is a little lacking on this front. Yes I know the police are hunting for Hannibal and that Mason Verger (a faceless victim of Hannibal) wants to witness the suffering of Hannibal at the trotters of his flesh eating pigs (don’t ask), but the drive behind the story just seems a little weak. Hannibal goes on holiday to Florence, he is spotted and finally kidnapped. He then escapes and cuts off his own hand, the end. I’m not saying that the film is rubbish, far from it. There are some genuinely twisted moments that will delight gore fans. It’s just that Starling and Hannibal spend so little time in each others company that it is almost like two separate stories until almost the end of the film when they collide big style.
| Key Area | Rating (out of 5) |
Comment
|
|
Action
|
|
A hail of bullets in the first 10 minutes and thats about your lot.
|
|
Thrills/
Tension |
|
Gripping in places, including a few well executed chase/hunt scenes through busy markets and shopping malls.
|
|
Violence/
Gore |
|
Yes the gore factor is high when it happens. Just doesn’t happen that often.
|
|
Bare Flesh
|
NONE
|
A nice side shot of Julianne Moore in a slinky black number, but not much else.
|
|
Plot
|
 |
A contrived and detached plot that lacks the personality of it's peers. Some dark and interesting set pieces lift the story from dull city.
|
|
Verdict
Not bad , not great. For me the films saving grace was the gory moments it delivered very effectively. I felt that the story should have wormed it’s way into my head a little more, leaving me in dire need of a shower to wash of the dirt from my grey matter, but alas no such luck. A little too arty farty and not raw enough to compete with it’s class siblings. |
 Should have been much better. A disappointment. |
Facts, figures and boobs
| 1. | In his printed letter to Clarice, Hannibal signs off with "Regards, Hannibal Lecter, M.D." In the voiceover, we hear, "Regards, your pal, Hannibal Lecter." |
| 2. | When Clarice is driving to the train station at Lecter's instruction, he orders her to take her next left. The footage shows her car turning right. |
| 3. | In The Silence of the Lambs it is said that the nurse was attacked when she leaned over Hannibal, preparing to give him an EKG. Here, he is standing handcuffed to the side and then attacks her. |
| 4. | In Italy, public telephones are not allowed to receive incoming calls. |
| 5. | When Lecter closes the fridge door on Agent Starling's hair, a reflection of Agent Krendler is seen briefly where he not only has no tea towel on his head, but also has a complete head. |
| 6. | When Clarice is handing in her gun and badge, her earrings change from studs to hoops and back again. |
| 7. | As the opening credits end, Hannibal's face can be seen in the formation of pigeons on the ground before they fly away. |
|
Movie Pictures
|
|||
|
| What other people thought of this film: - | |
| Dr Martin Vedell |
I think that the film was a relatively disappointing production in the sense that the plot wasn't believeable. The fact that Hannibal is eaten by flesh eating pigs, Clarice's accent was obviously fake, and how can a person with a doctorate of medicine become so aquainted with pre-rennaisance Florence over a period of maybe a few months. The whole film was whimsical.
|
|
|