Directed by:
Ridley ScottCinematography:
John MathiesonComposer:
Hans ZimmerCast:
Anthony Hopkins, Julianne Moore, Giancarlo Giannini, Gary Oldman, Ray Liotta, Frankie Faison, Francesca Neri, Željko Ivanek, Hazelle Goodman, David Andrews (more)VOD (2)
Plots(1)
Ten years have passed since Dr. Hannibal Lecter escaped from custody, ten years since FBI Agent Agent Clarice Starling interviewed him in a maximum security hospital for the criminally insane. The doctor is now at large in Europe, pursuing his own interests and savoring the scents and essences of an unguarded world. But Starling has never forgotten her encounters with Dr. Lecter, and the metallic rasp of his seldom-used voice still haunts her dreams. But Mason Verger remembers Dr. Lecter, too, and is obsessed with revenge. Verger was Dr. Lecter's sixth victim, and though hideously disfigured, has survived to rule a vast financial empire. Verger soon realizes that in order to draw the doctor out into the open, he must use someone Lecter cannot resist as bait: Clarice Starling. (official distributor synopsis)
(more)Videos (1)
Reviews (9)
If I had to rate Hannibal in one word, it would be: worthy. Hannibal is certainly a worthy sequel to a legendary film. It gives Hopkins plenty of opportunity to stay on the screen and to develop a very enjoyable relationship with his favorite agent. Yes, Julianne Moore is different than Jodie Foster, but that's actually a good thing. Clarice has matured a lot in that time, and as an audience bystander, I don't require her to have the same face she had during her studies. The setting of intellectually snobbish Italy also works as a nice touch for me. Now it’s time for Red Dragon.
()
Dr. Lecter returns in bloodthirsty style, but there's no satisfaction this time around. The worst possible start is all the actions of Clarice, whose tired face forced me to fall asleep with every line about "shooting at a woman with a child." Thanks to the perfect Hannibal and the surprisingly skillful Ray Liotta, this seemingly unnecessary movie eventually becomes a sufficiently thrilling thriller, but the lengthy silent parts condemn it to being just a violent patchwork sequel.
()
Oh, man, this somehow went off the rails. Hannibal is far from a bad movie, but hand on heart, what would it all be worth without the evil Anthony Hopkins, who this time stole the show for himself and let others just clean up what he did? It doesn't make much sense either way, but at least it's appealing enough, beautifully atmospheric thanks to Scott's direction and Zimmer's music, and ultimately, of course, irritatingly debatable enough to give clever critics and fans of the first instalment plenty to talk about for a long time. And I can’t say I was disappointed. The absence of Jodie Foster was very hard to swallow and the script is not even close to the first one, but as a great admirer of Sir Anthony's acting I just couldn't get bored even for a moment. And Gary Oldman? You just have to see it. 65%
()
After the tremendous success of The Silence of the Lambs, it was quite logical that we would not have to wait long for the sequel, and both the film studio and the fan community had high expectations due to the attractiveness of the material. To a large extent, these expectations were not fulfilled, although it is true that the first installment of the series set a very high bar. This is mainly due to the screenplay and the quality of the dialogues, where the element of tension - so strong in The Silence of the Lambs - simply did not work in the majority of scenes. It is interesting that even though in The Silence of the Lambs, the main antagonist, Dr. Lecter, was in prison and seemingly completely powerless, every shot he appeared in was charged with emotions and suspense, as well as the dark anticipation of the viewers, whereas in Hannibal, Lecter is free and has a really wide scope of influence, but you rarely feel afraid or drawn into the plot. Lecter lacks one important element, and that is a truly worthy opponent. Perhaps only the scene with the disposal of the pickpocket gets under the skin. The direction itself is skillful, Ridley Scott is experienced, and from what the screenplay gives him, he does a good job. The recasting of Agent Starling is not essential because Julianne Moore is a quality character actress and embodies both the time gap from the first installment and a certain internal transformation of the burnt-out main protagonist. Otherwise, the literary source is more appreciative on the one hand, but also more pandering and with its ending rather a pulp affair, so if the film followed what the book offered, it could have turned out worse. In the book, Agent Starling becomes the lover of Dr. Lecter, and the book ends with a feast where they both savor their defeated enemy... Overall impression: 55%.
()
"What do you think? Does Lecter want to kill her, eat her, fuck her, or what?" - "Probably all of the above. It depends on the order." This is the sequel to The Silence of the Lambs, and it did not reach the high standard of its predecessor, but it does still have something to offer. Hannibal earned my attention with Scott's impressive narrative direction, the gorgeous Florence scenes, the unforgettable "nastiness"... Well, why not? "So what's it going to be - guts in or out?"
()
Ads