Archives

Trivia

Our Award

Box Office Reports

Release Dates

Links

e-mail

HOME

   
     So, the much awaited sequel is out. Anthony Hopkins reprises his role as the creepy Hannibal "The Cannibal" Lector. Julianne Moore picks up the role of FBI Agent Clarice Starling where Jodie Foster dropped it. I knew when I saw the previews that this movie was not going to live up to its predecessor. Reasons: First, it's directed by Ridley Scott and frankly, I think he was a poor choice as director for the sequel. He seems to rely more on fancy camera work and action to tell his story rather than subtle techniques and dialogue. He's more eye candy than story telling. Next, Julianne Moore. I don't like her, I'll be honest. I might be burned at the stake by the Academy who seem to worship the ground she walks on, but I've never been impressed. List the movies off and not one did I think she did anything exceptional that a hundred other actors couldn't do. With these two big things in mind, this movie didn't appeal to me right away. I was encouraged to go and see it and I was hoping to be happily surprised. I was disappointed instead.
     Right away I'll say the reason this movie got a full star. One half goes to Anthony Hopkins for being wonderful as usual. He is fantastic as you would imagine him to be. The other half is because the movie, from what I understand is pretty accurate to the book, which makes me happy. However, I think this was one of the movie's main downfalls as well. There are some books that don't translate well on to screen. There is too much for an audience to take in and in this case more detail would've been needed to make it believable. As it stands, the scenes that are supposed to be suspenseful turn out comical. Maybe cutting someone's head open, while their conscious, slicing a sliver of the brain out and cooking it in front of them and the victim willingly taking a bite reads well, but it was just plain stupid/unbelievable in the movie. For the skeptics who haven't seen the movie...yes, this happens.
     But, don't get me wrong, there are some definate changes to the book. Clarice and Dr. Lector's relationship does not evolve the way it does in the book. There are also multiple scenes that just don't fit in the movie. For example, why did they go the place that seems like a carnival/mall/airport? The setting is cluttered, and their reason for being there is too. It seems like it was necessary just so the director could get a cool view of Lector swishing past Clarice's hair when he's on the merry go round. Ridley Scott made poor choices thru the whole thing. Another problem the movie had with translation from book to movie was that there was too much going on. From Gary Oldman's bizarre billionaire character with a fetish for boars that eat people, and the muddled Italy setting, to Clarice's new relationship with Lector, and the history of Gary Oldman's character with Anthony Hopkins. There's just too much on the movie's plate, so to speak. The movie is nice to look at, minus the overdone gore (which there is A LOT of), and Anthony Hopkins is fantastic, but that's all this movie has going for it. I highly recommend staying away from this movie unless you are a die hard fan of the books and just want to see it for your own guilty pleasure. It's gross, slow, poorly directed, and just nasty all around.