I haven't been this excited over a movie since Phantom Menace, and I was not disappointed, mainly because I had read the book and this was better. That's right, better! Thomas Harris (the author) tried to make the reader feel sorry for Hannibal Lecter. Who the hell wants to feel sorry for Hannibal Lecter? The guy's a freakin' cannibalistic nut job! Second, the ending in the book was 100% inconsistent, unbelievable bull****. The ending of the movie was a billion times better. I think the reason why a lot of people didn't like this film is because they waste too much time comparing it to Silence of the Lambs. Sure, it's a sequel, but the story is very different. The plot is less conducive to pent-up tension and psychological suspense than was Silence. In Silence, we are left to be scared by a woman-skinning transvestite named Buffalo Bill (I don't care what anyone says, Hannibal Lecter was not the villain of that movie). In Hannibal, there are two sources of badness: Hannibal himself and Mason Verger (played by Gary Oldman), whose messed-up face is one of the most revolting things I have seen on a movie screen in my life. The movie is less suspenseful than Silence, and the Italy scenes can drag on a little, but I find it was a great theatrical experience that pushes the limits of what should be shown to the public. Almost threw up, but thankfully did not. Now, I only eat salads.
|9/10||newscott13@ - 400 reviews|
14.2.2001 - age: 26-35
Note: The review posted on this page is a personal opinion of our reader. We are not responsible for its content.