Hannibal...

Preacher

Preacher

Swabbie
Banned
Did anyone hear that they're coming out with a Hannibal Lecter "prequel" of sorts?... It's a remake of the movie "Manhunter", only this time with bigname actors (esp. Hopkins as Lecter, so many years earlier in his "career").

I look forward to it, but I think it's a tall order to fill: The book it 's based on is Harris' "Red Dragon" (also the name of the new flick), and it was pretty intense. Also, the movie, despite mostly no name actors, was intense as well.

Question: Did the ending of the book "Hannibal" leave you wanting to puke your guts out? I was sickened that he took such a gripping story and slapped such a hack ending on it in the last 10-20 pages or so (which is one reason I didn't see the movie version, though I understand they rewrote the ending so it's more believable and credible than the book)

Talk amongst yourselves:
 
Now I see where the liver thing came from.

SICKO!

Or is it psycho?

Close enough.:D
 
Silence of the Lambs was disgusting in a well-worked way that made it a great movie. Hannibal (the movie) was just plain disgusting.
 
Starkey is absolutly right!

Silence of the Lambs was long time my favourite movie, because lecter was such a calm, quiet villian. But in Hanibal he talked to much, killed to much and never had an aceptable counterpart...
I hope in Red Dragon we'll see a better Lector again!
 
Originally posted by Dreamer
Starkey is absolutly right!

Silence of the Lambs was long time my favourite movie, because lecter was such a calm, quiet villian. But in Hanibal he talked to much, killed to much and never had an aceptable counterpart...
I hope in Red Dragon we'll see a better Lector again!
Click to expand...

Don't get yer hopes up, as far as any Lecter "action": The movie was pretty good at following the book, and Hannibal was in the Greybar Hotel for the *entire* story(at least in "Lambs", he got out for some limited mayhem in the last segment of the flick)

What I REALLY wanna see is a prequel to Red Dragon: In the book (and the movie) it makes reference to Hannibal's original um, "career" before he got caught, not to mention the harrowing story of his ultimate capture. THAT I'd like to see...
 
Question: Did the ending of the book "Hannibal" leave you wanting to puke your guts out? I was sickened that he took such a gripping story and slapped such a hack ending on it in the last 10-20 pages or so (which is one reason I didn't see the movie version, though I understand they rewrote the ending so it's more believable and credible than the book)
Click to expand...

The ending of the book was superior to the ending of the film. The film ending was just a cop-out, allowing the possibility of a sequal. The book ending was more satisfying and kind of worked, although i do admit it is pretty sudden and could have done with more background.

Silence was the better book and the better film. The problem is that Hannibal was just occasionally, well, silly. The giant man-eating pigs started to sound like something out of a film. The movie Mason Verger just looked like the grinch and was far too human. The movie also omitted Mason's sister and most of Barny. As this sub-plot was one of the book's highlights I was quite dissappointed. Plus Hannibal's Clarice (Julianne Moore, I think) was no match for Jodie Foster in terms of acting ability or charisma.

Manhunter was not a particularly spectacular film and Red Dragon is only as reasonable film, not in the leauge of Silence at all. The film was let down mainly by its direction and soundtrack (which was terrible). The acting was pretty good.
 
Originally posted by jammyo2k


The ending of the book was superior to the ending of the film. The film ending was just a cop-out, allowing the possibility of a sequal. The book ending was more satisfying and kind of worked, although i do admit it is pretty sudden and could have done with more background.
Click to expand...

Um. hate to tell ya, but the BOOK ending seemed so contrived as to be a blatant, gratuitous BID for a sequel... In short, the only logical REASON I can think of why he butchered (no pun intended) the ending like that was so it would be a setup for a sequel. That bastard; I spent 8 hours reading the book during a slow day at work, and he ends it like THAT!. I felt so...*used*

.Still haven't seen the movie, so yer probably right that that *ALSO* left an opening for a sequel, Nonetheless, I bet the movie ending was less blatant
 
Um. hate to tell ya, but the BOOK ending seemed so contrived as to be a blatant, gratuitous BID for a sequel
Click to expand...

In comparison to the film, the book is hardly a bid for a sequal. The esential founding for the end of Hannibal begins in Silence with the essential similarity of Starling and Lector. He plays on the manner in which their minds function and draws apparently insignificant but highly insightful conclusions. The unity of their thought processes is made particularly evident as Starling attempts to achieve empathy with Lector by reconstructing his tastes in food, music etc (excluding the more gory dishes favoured by his cannibalistic interests). The minds of Lector and Starling work at a simlilar intensities. The finale of the novel is rather more satisfying than the ending of the book. I don't want to post spoilers so I won't say what that is. The film is fairly enjoyable to watch but hardly mirrors the experience of the novel, for this reason I found it easy to keep the 2 seperate in my mind, leaving the book unspoiled. The difference in plot construction and the virtual abscence of sub-plots in the movie make the division between the two painfully obvious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top