"Hannibal" is a very unusual, yet strangely compelling and entertaining film in a dark, twisted kind of way. It's not as straightforward as "The Silence of the Lambs", yet people who want a similar kind of experience to that film will not find it in "Hannibal" and are most likely to be disappointed with what they get. In many ways, this is very twisted take on Beauty and the Beast, with Agent Starling as the Beauty and Hannibal the Beast. It's like a dark poem with an undercurrent of maliciousness. If you watch the film without having referring it to "The Silence of the Lambs", you're likely to get in to it a lot more. That said, this film is very engrossing, allowing the audience an opportunity to explore the dark side of humanity.
Ridley Scott is a master filmmaker and although he's made a few duds, "Hannibal" is certainly not one of them. As strange as this sounds, he's directed this film with a certain level of beauty, yet it contains a lot of evil and darkness within it. Sounds strange I know but that's really the only way to describe this film. Audiences are drawn to characters like Hannibal Lecter precisely because he's the ultimate bad guy, and he's charming at the same time. The film manages to capture that feeling perfectly.
Anthony Hopkins is once again at the top of his game. Although he gets to play a few scenes where Hannibal does what he does best, ultimately he's less frightening in this film than what he was in "The Silence of the Lambs". That might have something to do with the fact that he's a free man; the novelty of a caged animal waiting for a chance to escape is far more frightening. Nevertheless, the scene where he dispatches a nosy policeman who wants to capture him for a reward is even more gruesome than anything from "The Silence of the Lambs". But it's not a horror film, and it doesn't really have the thrills of that genre. And this may be where fans of the first film might be disappointed. But if they let that go and enjoy this film for what it is, they won't be disappointed.
The brain eating scene actually felt more like comedy than horror. You get this feeling, "yeah right!". It's a funny, disturbing scene with Hannibal casually describing each component and what it does as he's cutting it out. It's a bit over the top, but seems to fit in to the bizzareness of the story. That, and you know that the guy he's doing it to probably deserves it, especially when Hannibal cuts out the "manners" part of the brain, stating that he doesn't use it any way so he won't be needing it. Very dark and funny, but some might be turned off by it.
Julianne Moore does a more than amicable job replacing Jodie Foster in the role of Clarice Starling. As the producer Dino de Laurentis says in the documentary, this is a completely different film and in some ways doesn't really suit Jodie Foster. I'm inclined to agree. I tried imagining her in this film and couldn't really see it. This film is just too different in tone, substance and style. Moore holds her ground strongly with Hopkins, and creates some interesting by-play between the two characters, if not at the same level as "The Silence of the Lambs". But again, we're not comparing are we?
Other supporting players are all excellent. Ray Liotta as Starling's slimy boss Krendler is perfect, as is an almost unrecognizable Gary Oldman playing one of Lecter's early victims who's out for revenge. In many ways, there aren't that many nice people in this film (save Clarice), and although Hannibal does nasty, evil things, he really is one of the only straight-shooting, honest and polite characters in the film, which I guess is what has made him so likable by a mainstream audience.
This film is a lyrical ride and will take you somewhere altogether different. It won't be to everyone's tastes, but you should give it a go. After all, it's only a film.
0 Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen