| Now, I want you to know I went into the screening
for this movie with base expectations, thinking
this to be a cheapy, handed from director to director
like this year's version of Supernova,
and finally tentatively labelled "A Ridley
Scott Film." Ridley just got Gladiator
under his belt, so I supposed he could afford
to besmirch his name a bit. Everybody would forget
it come time when Oscar nominations were handed
out.
So, basically, I expected this to be a mediocre
film.
Did it exceed my expectations? Yes. But only
barely, which makes it an average film.
First, my grief with the very idea of making
Hannibal. To me, this is basically another
Lost World situation, where an author,
upon seeing his book do so well as a film (in
this example, both Jurassic Park and Silence
of the Lambs), that he decides to crank out
a sequel novel, but only because the film of
the first movie did so well.
You could almost see dollar-sign watermarks on
each page of the book.
My second bit of grief comes with the idea of
making this a villian-oriented movie. Hannibal
Lecter was a fascinating character from the first
two films of the series, and for that reason the
author deigned that just the name alone could
carry a book (and, of course, I'm sure that there
was no doubt a sequel movie would be made,
as well). But let's not forget one thing.. Hannibal
Lecter was never the centerpiece of either
of the previous movies. He was a good plot fixture,
but his job mostly amounted to color commentary.
Was this character strong enough to move from
sideshow to main attraction?
Yes and no. Hannibal Lecter and his sheer ghoulishness
is a lot of fun to contemplate and quite a wince-worthy
experience to actually witness, but what made
him so great was the novelty of the character.
After nearly a decade of pop-culture references
to favré beans and a nice Chianti, Hannibal is
no longer a mystery. He's a cannibal, he's smart,
he's creepy, he's kooky, et al. We know
he's sinister. We know he's smart. We realize
(though we do not feel) that he is supposed to
be alluring in a devilish way, the ultimate Bad
Boy Intellectual.
Is he all of these things? Nah. He's Sir Anthony
Hopkins with a wierd accent who eats people and
occasionally acts as librarian in Florence. And
that's as far as it goes.
As for the rest of the cast? Julianne Moore does
a respectable job as the suddenly redheaded Clarice
Sterling, Ray Liotta is cast as the idiot du jour,
and whoever it was that played the ill-fated Italian
cop was a pretty good cross between Stephen Rea
and Mickey Rourke.
So what's the story? A jilted former-pupil of
Lecter's, performed (more or less) by Gary Oldman,
has set out an obscene reward (some 3 million
smackers) for the capture of Hannibal Lecter.
Alive. (Of course. If he was wanted dead, he could
simply be sniped and it'd all be done with in
half an hour. Alas, the movie is over two hours,
so simple solutions like firearms never enter
the picture).
Alongside that, the FBI has bumped up Lecter
up to the enviable position of one of the Ten
Most Wanted Criminals, which basically serves
as a good plot device to pull Clarice Sterling
back into the game. What's interesting is that
other than pulling her in, the FBI really has
no interest in actually capturing Lecter. Again,
it's a plot device.
So both the FBI (read: Clarice.. goody goody)
and the deformed Oldman are both questing for
Lecter, and I won't reveal how it all turns out,
but anyone who's got a sense of fiction and how
overpowering characters can dominate their authors
can figure out the ending before the movie even
starts.
A word about Oldman: Gary Oldman has perhaps
the best range of any actor going today. From
Sid Vicious to Dracula, the guy just has a wide
spectrum of ability. And what is he in this?
A Bond villain.
I am absolutely not kidding. His plan
is to feed Hannibal to a bunch of oversized wild
boars once he gets ahold of him.
This involves an elaborate capture, an elaborate
setup, and of course the pre-execution explanation
of how he intends to kill Hannibal, which
he tells to Hannibal himself. He also helpfully
points out that the proceedings will begin at
8pm, letting Mr. Cannibal Houdini know how much
time he has to formulate a plan for escape. And
we all know he's good at escaping.
Believe me, even bumbling henchmen come into
play. I expected Hannibal to start spouting about
fava beans and a nice shaken martini.
Boy, sounds like I hate the movie, right? Well,
I don't. Despite the myriad faults of the film,
and the slow start, it does actually get pretty
intense at some points, and of course it never
hurts to have a deadpanning Hopkins next to an
exposed brain. Plus, I mean, c'mon, a good portion
of the movie takes place in Florence. It's beautiful
there.
Yes, there are good elements of horror, and though
there's a lack of suspenseful scenes, the introspection
into the world Hannibal weaves around him is fun
to watch unfold. We see how some people get duped
(Oldman), and how those who should know better
(Moore) allow themselves to get sucked in anyway.
They want the ride just as much as Lecter wants
to give it, and therein lies the thrill.
Should you see it? Eh, I dunno. Don't eat during
it.. some of it was a bit too intense for me,
and I'm one who watches the Faces of Death
tapes because they're "interesting."
It's an okay watching experience, perhaps even
pleasant (in a relative way, "pleasant"
meaning "it doesn't bore you"). You
don't lose anything from going, but you don't
gain much in the process. Check it out at matinee
price. |
