Hannibal Review
by Michael Dequina (twotrey AT juno DOT com)February 18th, 2001
_Hannibal_ (R) ** (out of ****)
Let's get the most pressing question out of the way: _Hannibal_, the long-awaited sequel to 1991's _The_Silence_of_the_Lambs_, is a huge step down from its Best Picture Oscar-winning predecessor. But then again, expecting a follow-up to completely hold its own alongside one of the classic films of the past decade is perhaps a bit too much to ask, so one hopes _Hannibal_ would at least be a decent film in its own right. Yet it isn't, and that fact, more than anything else, is why _Hannibal_ fails: it is simply unable stand alone on its own few merits--but worst of all, it doesn't work as its own individual, self-contained cinematic entity.
Any admirer of _Silence_ would tell you that it wasn't the primary manhunt plot that made Jonathan Demme's film of Thomas Harris' bestseller so special. While FBI trainee Clarice Starling's (then played by Jodie Foster, who earned an Oscar for her performance) pursuit of serial killer Buffalo Bill was gripping (not to mention it set up a memorably suspenseful climax), the lurid tale was pushed into greatness by the fascinating psychological dance between Clarice and imprisoned madman Dr. Hannibal "The Cannibal" Lecter (Anthony Hopkins, in the film's second Oscar-winning turn). The main story provided the short-term thrills, but what has continued to resonate a full decade after the film's initial release is Hannibal's cerebral seduction of the strong but green Clarice, who was forced to lay bare her most crippling emotional scars in exchange for crucial information about Buffalo Bill.
Hannibal and Clarice's love/hate, respect/revulsion relationship is a remarkably complex one, and by far the biggest sin committed by the _Hannibal_ team of director Ridley Scott (replacing the Oscar-winning Demme) and screenwriters David Mamet and Steven Zaillian (taking over for _Silence_'s also-Academy-awarded Ted Tally) is their failure to satisfactorily reintroduce it. This is an especially damaging move since _Hannibal_'s Clarice is played not by Foster but Julianne Moore. With this film's storyline keeping Clarice and Hannibal apart up until the final sequence (a few brief phone exchanges along the way notwithstanding), Moore isn't given a fair chance to establish any type of chemistry with returning star Hopkins, let alone the intimate yet unsettling one he shared with Foster in _Silence_. Any impact their reunion may have relies almost exclusively on the history established in the first film, and with a new actor in one of the roles, the moment is robbed of virtually any power.
This is, however, no slight on Moore. She's an incredibly gifted actress, and she indeed does a respectable job under very trying circumstances. But the material she's given presents her no opportunity to make the role her own. A large part of Clarice's vastly diminished role consists of her sitting in front of computer screens or watching perfume store surveillance tapes in an effort to locate Hannibal, who is still at large after making a dramatic escape in the ten-year-old events depicted in _Silence_. But Special Agent Starling's connection with Dr. Lecter still runs deeper than your basic G-woman/criminal one, and she obsessively listens to recently recovered tapes of their creepy, years-ago interview sessions. The tapes are obviously a designed as a shorthand device to bring newcomers up to speed on the unconventional nature of their relationship, but those viewers will likely end up more confused as to why Clarice is so haunted by him. With Foster's non-involvement in this film, the pair's more charged exchanges could not be used, so all we hear are some of Hannibal's memorable, if fairly inconsequential in the long run, words from the first film plus some newly-recorded material between him and former asylum orderly Barney (Frankie R. Faison, the only other _Silence_ returnee)--none of which begins to touch on their strange rapport.
The Hannibal/Clarice duet may be what gets moviegoers to buy tickets, but it's mostly a not-too-smoothly integrated sidebar to the main story concern: the gruesome revenge plot of the horribly disfigured Mason Verger (Gary Oldman, hamming it up under layers of very impressive makeup), Hannibal's only surviving victim. Clarice--now a hard-bitten veteran agent with a trigger-happy reputation--already has her hands full dealing with slimy Justice Department official Paul Krendler (a one-note Ray Liotta), but her troubles are compounded when she unwittingly becomes Verger's bait to draw Hannibal out of hiding. But even the vengeance thread takes a back seat in the second act to a subplot involving a police inspector (Giancarlo Giannini) in Hannibal's adopted home of Florence looking to collect Verger's hefty reward for info leading to Hannibal's capture. This portion of the film, in which Clarice is barely seen, is not without its virtues. Giannini is quite good as the guy in way over his head, and Hopkins clearly has fun as the liberated Lecter (who works as a museum curator under the alias "Dr. Fell"). Nonetheless, this subplot is tediously devoid of any suspense, for it's inevitable that the not-so-good cop will be added to the list of Lecter victims.
When that bit of business is finally taken care of, it's back to the States and on to the two confrontations the film has been building toward: Hannibal/Verger and, of course, Hannibal/Clarice. Both are letdowns in different respects. The resolution of the Hannibal/Verger issue is a more conventional disappointment; there's some lackluster action, and a lot of this wrap-up hinges on the sketchy motivation of Verger's put-upon caretaker (Zeljko Ivanek), a woefully underwritten character.
Scott, Mamet, and Zaillian actually do get something right as far as Hannibal and Clarice are concerned, namely a genuinely tense cat-and-mouse chase in a crowded mall, where the two maintain communication by cell phone. But the big moment of truth--their physical reunion--is remarkably unsatisfying, and not just for the reasons mentioned earlier. The final ten minutes--which MGM has gone out of its way to urge writers to not to reveal, and I will not go into detail--are not objectionable because of their extreme violence. What I find so unforgivable about this ending is how it irreversibly changes the tone to one of ridiculous camp. The overdone carnage is obviously played for wink-wink laughs, and that attitude takes over the film right through to the similarly jokey coda (one almost expects the infectiously cheesy early '80s hit "I Eat Cannibals" to be played over the end credits; alas, a tie-in soundtrack opportunity mercifully gone to waste). I'm willing to bet that campy humor is _not_ what moviegoers want when buying a ticket to the sequel to _The_Silence_of_the_Lambs_--especially with that film's chilling Clarice-in-the-killer's-house climax so strongly remembered.
While the screenwriters and director of _Hannibal_ do shoulder a lot of the blame for the largely unappetizing final product, most of it must go to Harris, on whose much-maligned novel the film is based. I have not read it, but from what I understand--aside from the removal of a fairly prominent character and the revamp of the original's controversial ending--the film is a faithful adaptation of the book. So the less-than-scintillating plot, the slapdash characterizations, and the make-a-quick-buck shoddiness of the whole superfluous affair can be traced back to the author, who will just have even more reason to laugh all the way to the bank as _Hannibal_ the movie, like the book, makes its pre-sold killing at the cash register.
©2001 Michael Dequina
Michael Dequina
[email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] Mr. Brown's Movie Site: http://www.mrbrownmovies.com CinemaReview Magazine: http://www.CinemaReview.com
on ICQ: #25289934 | on AOL Instant Messenger: MrBrown23
________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
--
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
