Fiction vs. Fiction: Hannibal (2001)

 Before you ask, 'No, I haven't read the Book in the time since I wrote about The Trench.'

That said, the Wiki on the Book is very thorough and, well, I'm either going to do this now or never.

Hannibal was released in 1999 and the Film followed in 2001.

As noted in my Review, the Film was rewritten over 15 times to coax Jodie Foster back.
When you read about the Book, you'll know why she said 'no' and why this was required in the first place.

Let's take one last bite out of...

***VS***

What's the Same?

The core Story remains unchanged here.  

The big moments- like the Dinner Scene and the Hanging- are in both.

It's still about Hannibal being hunted, taking out his hunters and confronting Clarice once again.

What happens when they interact at the end...is a bit different in the Film.

What's Different?

In the Book, Lecter returns to a Home that he somehow rented under a fake name.  On top of that, he got plastic surgery to disguise himself.

In the Film, he goes to Krendler's House and wears a hat sometimes.
He lures her to the House in the Book but takes her there himself in the Film.

In the Book, he fixates on Clarice Starling now as she reminds him of his dead Sister.  She'd be a key part in Hannibal Rising, which wouldn't be written until 2006 (which was only done to appease Dino DeLaurentiis).

His plan is to brainwash her, remove her personality and make her into a version of his Sister.  Gross.

Speaking of gross, Verger's Assistant in the Book is his muscle-bound, lesbian Sister named Margot.  She wants his...essence to create a child with her lover, since she's infertile. 
I misread who the recipient would be at first, which was obviously much grosser.

He has a put-upon Doctor in the Film.

Verger has Barney (the Guard) working for him as well in the Book.  He's gone by Act 1 of the Film, simply selling Lecter merchandise and being told off by Starling.

Verger is killed by the Pigs he trained to possibly eat Lecter. 
In the Book, well, how can I say this nicely?  He has an unpleasant thing put in one end of him and a different, also unpleasant thing put in the other end of him.
Also, his Sister takes the sample from this.  Gross.

Here's where things get *really* controversial...

In the Book, Starling falls for Lecter (after he lets her talk to the exhumed skeleton of her Father!!!!), offering to be his lover if he lets her personality stay intact.  He accepts and they live happily ever after in Buenos Aires, funded by Margot.

In the Film, Lecter cuts off his hand to escape the handcuffs put on him by Starling.  They don't live happily ever after.

Final Thoughts

I'm not upset by most of these changes.  Can you blame me?

After watching the Film, I was annoyed by how it all played out.  I had to read what happened in the Book.
It's worse- it's so much worse.

Yes, Film Starling loses all agency in Act 3, with the simple act of putting the cuffs on to do a thing for her.  It's disappointing.
Book Starling goes off to live with the Cannibal Murderer and abandons her entire life.  It's character assassination.

Dino De Laurentiis supposedly knew that Jodie Foster would turn this down after reading the Book in 1999.  She genuinely expressed interest in doing another Film as Starling as late as 1997.

I did read that parts of this were adapted- with many changes- in Hannibal on NBC.  I still haven't watched it.
Given that it covers everything BUT Silence of the Lambs (due to rights issues), I'll have to someday.  Maybe once we're past November.
That and the Book version of Hannibal Rising, which I already own.

For now, I'm done with 'the late, great Hannibal Lecter' for a while.  

Skip the Book.
Skip the Film- just less, I guess?

Forgotten Sequels: Hannibal (2001)

Trump keeps bringing up Hannibal Lecter.  I need to get rid of this DVD.
It's a win-win!

2001's Hannibal was the long-delayed Sequel to The Silence of the Lambs based on the 1998 Book of the same name.  The Film allegedly had around 15 Rewrites in order to convince Jodie Foster to return.

So now Julianne Moore is playing 'Clarice Starling.'
By the way, does anyone remember the 2021 Show about her?  It was only 3 years ago.
Nobody?

The Film tells the tale of Clarice as an FBI Agent and Lecter's vacation in Italy.  Is it a coincidence that Dino De Laurentiis held the rights to these stories and Thomas Harris set the Book there?

To see how over a dozen rewrites can't make you great, read on...

In 2001, a rich guy- Gary Oldman disguised as a wad of chewed up gum- is a rich guy obsessed with Lecter, buying stuff from the Guard.

For what it is worth, Frankie Faison got THREE paychecks out of this role, coming back for the Prequel.

Meanwhile, Starling is an FBI Agent leading a raid to take out a drug dealer.

One of the Cops blows things, leading a few Agents to be killed and the Dealer is shot while her baby was strapped to her.

She did nothing wrong, so...

She's publicly shamed for it, with actual News Coverage of this FBI Raid.

Remember how this happens all of the time today- News Coverage of FBI Raids.
Yes, I know that this is based on Waco, but the Book came out 5 years later and this Film 8 years later.

Over in Italy, famous wanted killer Hannibal Lecter is an Art Dealer and Lecturer.

Nobody can tell it is him because he wears this hat.

In the Book, he has plastic surgery, but they didn't bother here.
Enough Book talk- that's for another Article.

Barely a thing happens in the first hour here as we get an Italian Detective (who else- it's Giancarlo Gianini) tries to prove it is Lecter (he's not blind, so...).

To find out that he's the real deal, he looks up the FBI's Ten Most Wanted List and... this sure will be awkward later in 2001, no?

Oldman and his ally Krendler (Ray Liotta) get Starling in trouble by writing a fake Lecter letter (because nobody could figure that out).

In Italy, Lecter realizes that Gianini is working for Oldman and kills him.  He only foreshadowed it so much that it was literally blocking out the Sun.

Lecter escapes to America- traveling internationally as a Wanted Criminal is super easy, barely an inconvenience- and taunts Clarice some more, before he's grabbed by Oldman's men.

She rescues him, but is then hit by an invisible bullet (the guy fell dead and somehow he also shot?).

Bye, agency!

Earlier, we saw him break into Liotta's House and spook his dog into silence.  Symbolism much?

He convinces the Doctor to kill Oldman and leaves with Starling.

She awakens in a dress (ew!) and with her impossible wound closed.
She's drugged still and taken to a famous Dinner Scene.

FYI SNL parodied this with Liotta in 2003.  It's mysteriously NOT on YouTube.

He tries to seduce her (double ew!) and she cuffs herself to him.

He pulls out a large blade and...escapes?

I guess he cut his hand off and got on ANOTHER flight.  He'll return in...nothing.  The End.

Sir Anthony Hopkins.
Sir Ridley Scott.
(Not Sir) Thomas Harris.

How could it all go so wrong?!?

To begin with, the Story is not great.  It is all about how amazing Lecter is and how out of sorts Starling is.  People conspire to hurt her, and she struggles to survive.  People conspire to kill him, and he thrives, always 5 steps ahead.
I can see why Foster and Demme turned this down.

Lecter was always a male Mary Sue (Harry Stu?).  Things didn't change here.  They got worse!

The pacing is the biggest killer here as Scott is way more interested in how to frame Scenes than he is to make interesting ones.  It takes a good hour for a big moment to happen.  Said moments are telegraphed so far in advance that I read them in 1991!

The Film also went out of its way to be extra gross and disturbing.  Mind you, that's still nothing on the Book- again, more on that later.  One of them is memorable- I'll grant you that- but so is, for instance, the 'R*pe Scene from Cannibal Holocaust and that wasn't really necessary either.

This is excess in its truest sense and it even goes out of its way to mess with past Films.  Remember the shocking description of the 'Nurse being attacked' from Lambs?
Well, they show it, taking away the ability to visualize it as truly horrific in your mind's eye.

Joy.

At last, I can put Hannibal Lecter to bed...unless I cover the TV Show.  Not yet- let's go back to the '80s.  Stay tuned...

'90s Class: The Silence of the Lambs (1991)

 Who would have guessed that Politics in 2024 would be a reason to talk about this Film?
Truthfully, I've had the Blu-Ray for a few months now, but with 'Hannibal Lecter' being mentioned SO MUCH on TV, I bumped it up the Queue.

Sorry, Another 48 Hours!

I think most people know the basics, right?  Jonathan Demme- of Stop Making Sense fame- made this adaptation of a Thomas Harris Novel.  It won lots of Oscars.  It was the first time that someone won an Oscar for a Horror Film since the 1920s!

The Film is seen as an all-time Classic?
Does it still hold up?

Let's find out...

Clarice Starling is an FBI Trainee who is hoping to become a full-time Agent.

Since she's Female and unknown the killer, she's sent to get Hannibal Lecter to answer a questionnaire about Serial Killers.

Meanwhile, a killer is on the loose. 

What's not talked about much here is how much of the Plot hinges upon the study of insects!

Holy Phenomena, Batman!

She's helped out on the case by Dan Butler aka Bulldog from Frasier or the guy eaten by a snake (or Satan) on The X-Files.

He was also in Manhunter (?!?)- thanks, Google!

Things escalate when the Daughter of a US Senator is kidnapped by Buffalo Bill.

He didn't target her for that reason though- he just wants what she has on her.
No, I don't mean her clothes.

Try to remember that he was a good guy on Monk for a Decade after watching this.

The case brings Starling back to Lecter on multiple occasions as he gets personal information out of her for vague information about the case.

By the way, did they ever find out that he gave Will Graham's home address away in 1980?
Wait- they also say that he's been in here for 'several years.'  That would make it as early as 1982, no?

So then how did he mangle that Nurse's face here in 1981?!?

Yes, I am nitpicking a Film that won 5 Oscars and is IMDB's #23 on the List of Greatest All-Time Films.  Thanks for noticing.

A bit of drama is milked from Dr. Chilton (who runs the Asylum) wanting to keep Lecter as a prize.

The Film is interesting in the sense that it presents multiple facets of evil- lustful (Prisoner), sadistic (Lecter), controlling (Chilton) and pragmatic (Bill).

Ultimately, in spite of everything going wrong and Lecter escaping (a future Poor Bastards of Cinema), Starling is the only one to find Bill's real location.

She has a tense showdown with him and gets to be an Agent.
Lecter is now on the loose, setting up a Book (which Harris would write in 1999) and a Sequel (made in 2001).

Yes, I am covering that next.  The End.

No question- this is great.

Were you expecting me to trash this one?  Really?!?

I will say that some of the things people say about this one are a bit off.
For starters, Buffalo Bill is such a small presence here.  He's only shown, what, twice before Act 3.  In contrast, Lecter appears more than people imply.

I think his total screentime is still accurate, but it is spaced out more than people seem to say.

It's easy to see why it won the Acting Oscars.  They are both great. 
Scott Glenn and Ted Levine are real standouts too.

If you've never seen it, go into this Film expecting more investigation.  That's not an insult or anything- just being realistic.  You'll still get the standout moments from everyone involved.

Now did this Film also inspire the creation of those Haunted Houses you see on Halloween?

Next up, the Sequel- duh.  I still don't have either book right now (and am way behind on Books), so just enjoy a straight review.  Stay tuned...

Forgotten Prequels: Hannibal Rising (2007)

Who demanded this?!? 
Oh right- Dino De Laurentiis.

That's not a lie or an exaggeration- it's the truth.  He didn't want to lose the License and knew that Anthony Hopkins was not up for more Films.  What was the other option then?  A Prequel.

He went to Thomas Harris and said 'Hey, I'm making another Film.  Can you write it?'  He didn't really have a Story in mind.  Dino said 'Well, I'll do it with or without you.'

That's how we got this Prequel, which was written as both a Screenplay and a Book at the same time.  I have the Book btw.  I hope it is worth the 99 cents!

The Film tells the tale of young Hannibal Lecter, which apparently is a thing now.  How did he turn out this way?  To find out, read on...

In 1944, young Hannibal and his family are trying to live happily by avoiding the tail end of the German invasion of Russian territory.

Of course, we need this Film to be available worldwide, so the Nazis (and their imagery) barely factor into the Film.

Unfortunately, the War finds its way to their Castle (our poor Hero's parents own a Castle BTW) and everyone dies, save for Hannibal and his Sister Mischa.

FYI Mischa is a Male Name in this area.  Did they mean Mascha?

A group of Looters take over the House- hiding out from the off-screen Nazis- and things look bad for them.

So, naturally, they jump ahead EIGHT YEARS to see Hannibal as a young man.

Wait- what?!?

Anyhow, he wounds a kid at a Boarding School...which is in their Castle!

He tracks down his Uncle and his Wife, finding only the latter.  She's Japanese, so she trains him in Bushido.
Also she's played by Gong Li.  Do I have to tell you that she's not *actually* Japanese.

This is how they give us this super-ironic shot of him wearing a mask.  Sigh.

He kills a local Butcher, but gets his Step-Aunt to make him an alibi...in the form of dumping the man's head in front of the Police Station. 

That's some family!

In spite of this, we learn that France is a VERY SMALL COUNTRY, since Hannibal ends up meeting THE SAME DETECTIVE at Medical School a year later- entirely by chance.

What luck?!?

Hannibal, it seems, has been repressing his memories of what happened to his Sister in the Intro, so he takes Sodium Pentathol (which he just happened to have seen the Detective use on a Witness) to unlock his memories.

Mischa is dead and everyone was starving, so you can probably guess what happened.

What fun subject matter to discuss, right?!?

His memories intact again, he tracks down the men from that fateful winter (who I guess just left after a while).  In doing so, he also manages to stop at a Border Crossing at a City that is nowhere near any Borders.  Oops.

He catches and kills one guy- the future Night King model (in case that face looks familiar)- to get the info he needs.

He also cuts off his head, since I guess he wants the Inspector to suspect him even more!

He makes a play for the other Cannibals, but he draws too much attention.

The men track down the 'Japanese' Aunt...somehow.

Naturally, she's held captive, since she's both A) the Mentor and B) a Woman.

Hannibal gets on the boat in Paris as it passes under a bridge...which is eerily similar to the ending of Taken about a year later.  Hmm...

Hannibal is confronted by the fact that he may have accidentally been a cannibal too, so he freaks out and kills the remaining bad guy.

Not Japanese Aunt rejects his love as she sees his horrific nature up close, so he fakes his death via boat explosion and leaves the Country.

Nothing of note happens in the remaining 28 years, I guess.  The End.

So, was it worth it?  Was it really?

The Film is...alright.  It's not great.  It's not truly terrible.

The things that would make a Film really terrible- like Bad Acting, Writing, Production Values and the like aren't really here.  There are certainly some questionable choices as far as Writing, but it isn't horrendous.

The Plot plays out oddly with the time jump, the later reveals and just the general flow of it.  Time is also quite vague here in many cases. 
How long is it between the first killing and him going to Paris, for instance?

For better or worse, the violence here is certainly escalated.  It will be good for some of the audience, but certainly alienate another portion.  The fact that so much of the Plot revolves around Cannibalism and Children is another issue, of course.

At its worst, the Film is bleak and grim for being bleak and grim's sake.  At its best, it is allowing a good- sadly now dead- French Actor to show his range.

Speaking of range, the final Ending has a long range, since it- Hannibal confronting the last Cannibal in a far-off Bar after presenting a coin as proof- seems to be an influence for 2010's X-Men: First Class.

Next up, a break from this kind of stuff.  How about some '80s Sci-Fi?  Stay tuned...

Fiction vs. Fiction (vs. Fiction!)- The 3 Versions of Red Dragon

 After seeing both Films and reading up on the Book, it's only fitting to do a full comparison.

It would only be a normal version of this Segment, but things were added for the 2002 Film, so it is...

**VS**

**VS**

What's the Same?

The basic Plot doesn't change between the three versions.  

It is still about Will Graham working briefly with Lecter to try and catch the Tooth Fairy.

His motivations are the same and he's ultimately killed.

What's Different?

In the Book and the 2002 Film, we read/see him capture Lecter.  However, in 2002's Red Dragon, he says that it is due to DNA evidence...which was not a plausible thing in 1980 when the Scene is set.

In Manhunter, we just are told (by Lecter) that he caught him.

In all 3 versions, Lecter uses trickery to get Graham's address and give it to the Tooth Fairy.  In Manhunter, that doesn't pay off like in the other 2 versions, as he just stops Dollarhyde before that could mean anything.

In all 3 versions, there's a Scene with Dollarhyde letting his blind girlfriend touch a knocked-out Tiger.  However, in the Book, she touches the animal in a more...intimate way, for some less than subtle foreshadowing of what would happen with her and the killer.
Both Film versions understandably cut that, at least implicitly.  The 2002 Film does keep the bit that relates to that moment though, so...weird.

In both Red Dragons, Dollarhyde does an elaborate trickery to fake his death, wait a week (give or take) and try to kill Graham at home.

Also excised from Manhunter is an odd Scene where Dollarhyde goes to see the real 'Red Dragon' painting, attacks the staff and EATS IT.
I can see why Mann cut it.

In 2002's Red Dragon, Lecter appears WAY more than he does in either version.  He has multiple meetings with Graham and we see more of Dr. Chilton as well, since they were doing retroactive world-building here.

In the final battle in the Book and Manhunter (despite location changes), Graham is beaten up quite a bit.  He doesn't quite get the graphic face wound from the Book though.
In 2002's Red Dragon, he's beaten up a bit, but no face wound.

Final Thoughts

While I haven't read the Book, so I'm not going to recommend it (yet).  If I go back and read it, I'll Edit this.

Manhunter is a fun, stylish Film that I absolutely recommend.
Red Dragon (2002) is good, but weirdly paced and bizarre.

For me, the better Film is Manhunter.
Fight me.

'00s Class?: Red Dragon (2002)

 There's no property that can't be mined for more gold like it is the Old West!  In this case, it is Red Dragon, the 1981 Book written by Thomas Harris.

In case you somehow don't know, Dragon came out in 1981 and was made into a Film called Manhunter.  In 1988, Harris wrote Silence of the Lambs and that became a Film in 1991.  In 1999, Harris wrote Hannibal and it too became a Film in 2001.

Dino De Laurentiis said 'Let's make Red Dragon again...because money.'  I'm paraphrasing, of course.

Will this (definitely) final Film about Hannibal Lecter be the best?  Is it too much too late?

To find out, read on...

In 1980, Hannibal Lecter is confronted by Will Graham and stabs him, only to stabbed by a bunch of arrows (don't leave those lying around) and gets shot.

In the Book, this happens in 1975.  Obviously, sliding time scale here.

That said, do you buy that 2002 Anthony Hopkins is A DECADE younger here than he was in Silence?

The opening credits proceed to tell us- Tell Don't Show- a whole bunch of things that we'd kind of like to see, like Lecter's Trial, Graham's recovery and even the bit where the rich lady faints in court.

Sure- why not?

At least this lazy exposition dump is also The Tooth Fairy's Diary, so that's...something.

Graham is, of course, called in to try and figure out who the killer is.

Curiously, his Boss is the same one that later recruits Clarice Starling in Silence, but he's not played by Scott Glenn here.  I guess he said 'no.'

In an odd little change, we don't see The Tooth Fairy/Dollarhyde until nearly FORTY FIVE MINUTES into the Film, in stark contrast to an early first appearance in Manhunter.

This version wears fake teeth, which should be a Plot Point...but never comes up.

Understandably, they change the Prison- which was in an Atlanta Art Museum in Manhunter- to look like the one in Silence.

They even got the original Dr. Chilton Actor to come back and it sure is seamless.

***He's definitely the same age here as he was then***

Don't worry- the Blind Lady Pets the Tiger Scene is still here.

To this Film's credit, it's set up better (as her company makes the bulbs that the Zoo uses).

On the flip side, they weren't allowed to actually use a knocked-out/drugged Tiger in 2002, so they just have a Hollywood-trained Tiger play asleep here.

So while Lecter is a minor character in Manhunter, he pops out in at least 4 lengthy Scenes that are spattered throughout the Film.

Do they add anything?  
Not much.

***Again, this 2002 Lecter is definitely younger than the one below***

This one takes an odd turn, at least if you only know Manhunter.

In both Films, he kills a romantic rival of his would-be love.
In this Film, however, he follows that up by SETTING HER HOUSE ON FIRE and killing himself with a shotgun!

...except he didn't do that last part.

He actually shot the already dead guy- feel free to picture the logistics of him dragging the body in, doing his big monologue, stopping to prop up the body and then shoot it- to do his master plan.

Show up at Will Graham's House- since Lecter gave him the address- and try to make him the *real* next victim.

Of course, he wasn't there to see this Film's Chekhov's Gun in the form of Graham teaching his wife to shoot in one Scene earlier.

As such, he's unprepared for her to straight up shoot him, saving the day.

Graham and company go out on their boat some time later and the Film ends with...

F**k you, Movie!

Ahem.  Sorry about that.  I just had to get that one out.

**********

The Film is good, but not great.  Did the Series peak with Silence?  Yes, obviously.

They tried to capture lightning in a bottle again by literally hiring the Screenwriter of Silence AND its Cinematographer to boot.  They also, as noted, got a few Actors to return to make the connection.

How does the Film work on its own merits?  Well, it is really weird pacing-wise as we spend so much time hearing about what the killer might do and think before seeing him far later than you might think.

People talk about how Batman and The Joker don't actually meet until long into The Dark Knight.  Now just imagine if we only ever saw the aftermath of his crimes- like the robbery- for over forty-minutes of screen time.

That's not to say that Fiennes isn't good here.  While I never buy that he has this massive presence (he's still called a body builder), he's good at playing what this Film (and the Book) think an insane serial killer would be.  He's a bit melodramatic, but, again, it is what the Film wants.

I'll say this- setting this in the '80s (for the timeline) doesn't excuse them STILL using the 'calling him gay to provoke him' Plot Point in 2002.  You couldn't re-word it?  Calling him impotent isn't enough? 

My only real gripe here is how much they lean on Lecter at the expense of everyone else.  You didn't have 'the balls' to adapt the Story straight?  Oh well.

Red Dragon is good, but it could be so much better.  It is a Brett Ratner Film, so...that's probably it.  At least the tattoo finally got on-screen this time!

Next time, I keep this theme going by looking at the *actual* last Hannibal Film (until the ineviatable Remake).  Is this one worth a bite?  Stay tuned...