Cool News
A Not So Positive look at Brett Ratner's RED DRAGON!
Hey folks, Harry here... It seems that while the majority of the reviews we've gotten have been positive for RED DRAGON there is a dissenting view to be had. Meanwhile, rumors are showing up everywhere about Brett Ratner taking over SUPERMAN from McG with the utterly retarded casting of Keanu Reeves as the Man of Steel... in what would be the worst all time casting decisions ever. Meanwhile, from what I'm hearing, McG still believes he's doing it. What's really happening? We'll see, right now there's a cloud of rumor and very little facts. Here's the not so happy opinion on Ratner's run on Lecter...
Hey all,
Long time reader, first time spy. I’ve seen some Red Dragon reviews on the site and wanted to chime in after catching the film in New York at the AMC Empire 25 in Times Square tonight. It’s a highly problematic film, albeit an occasionally entertaining one. This is clearly the most commercial-minded and obvious movie about Hannibal Lecter yet; Jonathan Demme’s psychological subtlety and Ridley Scott’s visual virtuosity (and Michael Mann’s command of both) are completely lost in the hands of director Brett Ratner. Ratner’s storytelling abilities are clunky and his visual imagination is practically nonexistent.
The film begins rather inauspiciously: a pair of pre-credit scenes at the symphony and a dinner party are poorly conceived and executed, attempting to establish the dichotomy between Lecter’s high-society intellectual tastes and primitive culinary ones. It just doesn’t work; the dialogue is extraordinarily hokey and overly expository. Ed Norton’s consequent character introduction is just sloppy, and his first scene with Lecter as FBI Agent Will Graham unsuccessfully attempts to fit the complexities of a long-standing relationship into a dull three-minute scene. (If Ratner’s work was truly inspired, he would have intercut the scene’s ensuing brawl with the symphony sequence.) The opening credits do much the same thing, using a montage of headlines to lazily fill in long gaps of the story.
It takes some time for Ratner to break his rhythm of two-shot, plot-heavy dialogue scenes, but the pacing becomes gradually less erratic as the story unfolds and Red Dragon at least becomes damn near watchable. His frequent use of close-ups and establishing shots (with locale names helpfully placed over them) does become near soporific, though, and the overbearing score (particularly in the scene when Norton peruses the first victims’ house) is consistently frustrating. The plot isn’t much better, just typical serial killer fodder with a murderer on the loose, the Tooth Fairy, breaking mirrors and slaughtering families in his wake. Norton’s Graham is pressured by his boss – an underused (the key word for the casting in this film) Harvey Keitel – to return to work to assist on the case after a long sabbatical following his capture of Lecter. Graham then looks to Hannibal to help him put the pieces together.
As good as Hopkins is in this near-cameo role, I received the impression that he was just coasting here; all the guy has to do is not blink and speak in a creepy voice and he’ll receive plenty of critical and popular laudation. (Brian Cox’s take on the role in Manhunter has always been more restrained and interesting to me.) Norton seems to be sleepwalking through much of the film, and not consciously as in Fight Club. As the Tooth Fairy, though, Ralph Fiennes turns in some of the most nuanced work in the film, impressive considering the roster at hand. Emily Watson plays Fiennes’s blind sometimes-girlfriend, almost-victim with her typical wide-eyed wonder and compassionate expressions, despite having little material to work with. One of the true crimes of the film, though, is how it wastes national treasure Phillip Seymour Hoffman, who appears briefly as a tabloid reporter and is given very little to say or do; even in his single standout scene, the material is clearly holding him back.
Writer Ted Tally’s script is definitely weaker than his Silence Of The Lambs effort; Red Dragon lacks the latter film’s polished and graceful plot advancement and character exploration. When Graham’s wife and child are threatened in later scenes, I found it tough to care about the outcome because we never have the chance to get to know them as people. They’re both pawns, mere plot elements in Tally’s hands. (When we see Graham’s wife practicing shooting a gun for no particular reason in one scene, you can practically hear Tally shouting “foreshadowing!” from the page.) The allusions to William Blake’s artwork are treated in much the same matter: window-dressing, not enriching elements to the movie themes. The recurrent stabs (pun very much intended) at humor fall flat. While I won’t count the many unintentional laughs Red Dragon provoked (“Antique wheelchairs? Those aren’t the kinds of things you keep around the house!”), the attempts at lightening the film’s mood and Ratner’s unfortunate tendency to aim for the lowest common denominator together undermine the movie’s overall potency. The cumulative blame for Red Dragon must fall on Ratner’s shoulders, whose work here is merely, disappointingly competent – nothing less and certainly nothing more.
Until later, kind sirs,
- Extension 23And here's a reviewer that saw it too and had this to say...
Harry,
I know you've already posted a lot of Red Dragon reviews this week, but after seeing the negative, ridiculous latest I felt inclined to chime in with my lengthy rebuttal:
*This review is completely spoiler-free.*
Cynics, skeptics and purists be damned-- despite being a proud Manhunter DVD owner and huge fan of Thomas Harris' source novel, I am ecstatic to report Red Dragon is a film of enormous psychological and visceral impact which renders Michael Mann's inferior adaptation moot. Whereas Manhunter is hopelessly dated and features a positively awful leading performance from William Peterson, director Brett "Antichrist To Film Geeks Worldwide" Ratner and The Silence of the Lambs scripter Ted Tally have expertly compacted Harris' expansive narrative into an angular, but still dense new entity. Featuring flawless performances from Anthony Hopkins (as good as ever), Edward Norton (with a sorrowful understatement), Ralph Fiennes (creepily effective) in the leads, and a handful of indentative supporting turns (particularly from the always fabulous Philip Seymour Hoffman as a seedy, tabloid journalis! t and the remarkable Emily Watson as an angelic, blind woman), it's not hyperbole to declare Red Dragon the best thriller of the new millennium.
___________________________
The questions nagging most buffs' brains probably are:
1) Could the man behind Money Talks, Rush Hour, The Family Man and Rush Hour 2 actually have crafted a superb, thoughtful, chilling, block of adult entertainment? Could the man behind that rancid quintuplet actually make something that isn't disposable?
A resounding hells, yeah. Red Dragon is the film Ratner will most likely be remembered for (especially since he's allegedly returning to helm Rush Hour 3 soon-- why he'd wanna waste his considerable talent on that shit I do not know) and this movie alone will make for an impressive legacy. Working with famed cinematographer Dante Spinotti (who also shot Manhunter, and is possibly the best DP in the whole business with other credits including Heat, L.A. Confidential, The Insider and Wonder Boys; he has an unrivaled capacity for finding great aesthetic beauty in the mundane), Ratner seems to have taken his cue from Jonathan Demme's lensing on Silence of the Lambs. He favors a lot of simple, centrally-framed close-ups (and with such an astonishing array of actors at his disposal, he has good reason to), each interaction cut together with patient elegance. But don't think this is a visually bland film-- as static as Ratner'! s camera often is, there's a plethora of truly iconic images, masterful, painterly compositions that advance the story in a single shot or two. Plus everything is exquisitely lit and drenched in this gorgeously dirty, high-contrast, heavily saturated, silky foam.
2) Did Ratner overdose on violence a la Ridley Scott & Hannibal?
No way, not even close. While there are necessary sprinklings of graphic horror, Ratner's mantra seems to have been subtly and implication always beat a show-all gorefest. Red Dragon has the perfect amount of bloodshed; enough so you know you're watching a powerful R-rated film about two vicious serial killers, but not enough that the word gratuitous would ever enter into your vocabulary. Again, his model seems to have been Demme.
3) You keep mentioning frickin' Jonathan Demme. Is Red Dragon just a Silence of the Lambs rip-off?
Certainly not, but sadly there will inevitably be those aforementioned cynics/skeptics/purists who label it as such. These are the curmudgeons who are so snobbish and close-minded, that they are unable to accept Brett Ratner--by virtue of his past credits--has actually made a pretty amazing film. These are same the bastards who are unable to recognize that Red Dragon is very faithful to its text, just as Lambs was, and since the two novels are so different the films are inherently as different. These are the same hidebound fiends who are unable to recognize that even though Lambs will always be the apex of Hannibal Lecter film achievements there is still room for other glorious accomplishments (which embrace and pay specific tribute--right down to Dragon's aping of Lambs' small, courier font title cards--to their predecessors). And perhaps these are the same people who maintain that Hopkins' portrayal of Lecter pails in comparison to Brian Cox's Manhunter Lecter, beca! use you quickly realize, these are the people who must always tout the underdog as the superior artistic endeavor even at the expense of actually being accurate...
4) Well if Red Dragon's so fucking great, why the heck will Silence always be the Lecter pinnacle?
Three reasons: A) Any way you slice it, Clarice Starling is a more complex character than Norton's Will Graham. Which is not to say Graham's not very fascinating, he is. But Starling's stiff-as-hell competition, one of cinema's most effective female characterizations ever. B) Consequently, the off-the-charts compelling rating of the Starling/Lecter dynamic is unrivaled. Lecter and Graham have a history and Norton and Hopkins' wonderfully written interplay practically slow-burn the screen, but it still can't quite compare. C) Sheer novelty. The fact that Silence of the Lambs was first, most definitely accounts for a lot. I grew up with Lambs, it's an integral part of our pop-cultural consciousness. I mean, Christ, just how many Lecter thrillers can the Academy award Best Picture to?
5) Wait, so does Red Dragon do anything better than Lambs?
Absolutely. Dragon's Francis Dolarhyde, A.K.A. The Tooth Fairy, is a fuller, richer, more sympathetic portrait of a serial-killing monster than compared to Lamb's drawing of Buffalo Bill. I guess some people get turned off as soon as they hear "sympathetic" used to describe a murderer, worried that means either the film will go through extravagant, obscene lengths to present the killer kindly or else the killer's motivation will be too pat. Neither is a problem in Dragon: Ratner and Tally effortlessly cram just enough Dolarhyde backstory into the mix. A tease here, a unobtrusive hint there and everything pays off. I'm all for ambiguity when crafting villains, but frankly even Demme on Lamb's Criterion commentary track notes that he really regrets not referencing Buffalo Bill's abusive background a little more. (Though one more thing: admittedly, for sheer fear factor, by virtue of being a big movie star Ralph Fiennes just can't eclipse the truly terrifying Ted Levine ! as Bill.)
___________________________
Many people view Ridley Scott's Hannibal as a blight on Hannibal Lecter's character, a blasphemous reduction of everything that made the guy so memorable in the first place. Red Dragon is Lecter's redemption. To all the people that say this film never needed to be made, independent of its innumerable production and acting merits, you mustn't not forget that--at the very least--Red Dragon respects Thomas Harris' original vision of Lecter, while shading in with deft charcoal strokes a few critical (subtle) aspects of Lecter's personal history. I'd argue that Lecter, seen in The Silence of the Lambs alone, is an incomplete characterization. Michael Mann was unable to recognize his biggest asset when transferring Red Dragon from book to screen. As such, he inappropriately pared down Lecter's role in the novel and thus most of us came to know and perversely love Hannibal Lecter through Lambs. This love formed because of the words Ted Tally (courtesy of Thomas Harris) put in Lecte! r's mouth. Well, the master's met his maker one last time. Red Dragon is Hannibal's much-needed return to form. Sequentially Lecter's birth, but literally his swan song.
There's no better way to see him go.
-Jared Sapolin
www.jaredsapolin.com
-
+ Expand All
-
I liked Silence of the Lambs but thought Hannibal was just plain dull. Maybe It'd be better to just read the book and avoid the movie? By the way, FIRST!
-
Finally a review of this movie that sounds competent! I just couldn't believe Rattner would turn this remake into something worth watching. "Manhunter" is (despite the dated music) still the definitive version!
-
Yeah. I can't give Ratner the benefit of the doubt here. I know he's bankable and I've enjoyed the Rush Hour series for what it is but I just have this feeling that it won't come together despite this great cast. Actually, the only reason I still want to see it is to check out how Dante Spinotti is going to lens and light this film in comparison to his DP work on Manhunter. Talk about a stab in the back to Michael Mann. I heard their working relationship fell apart but shit, that's just plain cold! Not really psyched about this. And if it does end being poor, I'll be quite distraught if he gets the Superman gig. Especially since it's rumored that Michael Mann is up for the spot as well. Actually, I think every director's name has been dropped for that job (except Rose Troche and Jamaa Fanaka - but we can hope). Has anyone seen Ratner's NYU short with Mason Reese and The Noxzema Girl that's on the Rush Hour DVD? JUST. PLAIN. PAINFUL.
-
I want this movie to be good, i really do... but what can we expect from Ratner? Is there a quality film in his archives? Don't think so... How the hell did he get this job? Hopefully Norton and Fiennes can save this one.. I loved Manhunter, and i never expected this film would even come close(Micheal Mann is a God)... but lets hope its better then your standard serial killer film(I'm looking at you Bone Collector)
-
Sep 16, 2002 5:16:40 AM CDT
Screw anybody who tries to remake the brilliant work of Michael
by chuckrussel
'nuff said!
-
Sep 16, 2002 5:17:54 AM CDT
Oh and off the subject but...WHAS THERE SOMETHING INCREDIBLY "OF
by chuckrussel
-
Is there any more tired cult of film fans than defenders of Manhunter? Mann's film is very good - one of the most nicely crafted psychological thrillers of the '80s. But the soundtrack is alarming bad - which made the film dated even before the '80s were over. And the film fails to effectively dramatize Will Graham's deductive process - resorting to that laziest screenwirting device of having a character talk to himself. Not helping is that much of Graham's dialouge in this regard has Graham "talking" to the unseen Tooth Fairy - referring to his quarry as "my man" - a hokey cop film touch if ever there was one. And the happy coda with Graham and family on the beach is a real betrayal of the darkness that came before it as well as to the ambivalent end of the book which left Graham truly wounded both physically and psychologically. If Ratner's Red Dragon can at least partially resolve these problems, that'd be enough for me to give it some credit.
-
Personally, I have the greatest of respect for Michael Mann's Manhunter, and I personally loved Hannibal. All this talk about orthodoxy makes just seems silly to me. I will watch this film and see whether it works out to be as good or as better of a film. No matter what, this film will not replace Manhunter, though. It won't need to.
-
And he's played by William Petersen!
-
I have never seen a Ratner film I've liked in the slightest.
-
I hope the new SUPERMAN movie doesn't try to be an update of the old one. Yeah, I know, flame me.
-
The first review sounds like a plant (a negative one from another studio) or just someone with an axe to grind. You can FEEL him straining to put a negative spin on anything possible. I don't buy it.
-
First of all, I consider Silence of the Lambs a modern classic. Just one of those films where everything came together perfectly. It's been so long since I've seen Manhunter that I hardly remember it at all. And I guess that if I HAD loved it, I'd probably remember it better or at least, would 've seen it a second time. So I don't really care that it's been remade. Maybe I'll see it again after seeing Dragon. I'm very impressed with the cast of Red Dragon, but the idea of Ratner as director doesn't instill a lot of confidence. "Ooh, the director of Rush Hour and Rush Hour 2!!" Whatever. As much as I've enjoyed most of Ridley Scott's work, I thought Hannibal was awful. A really "ugly" picture and one of the biggest movie disappointments of my life. And the idea of either McG or Ratner directing a new Superman movie boggles the mind. Oh, and PhantomZoneZod, why would Anthony Hopkins need to be able to pull off a "mid-eastern" kind of personality in order to play Jonathon Kent? Did you mean midwestern or did I miss something? Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing Red Dragon and even though I'm not expecting it to be better than Lambs, hopefully it'll at least be better than Hannibal. I realize that's not saying much.
-
Sep 16, 2002 9:47:11 AM CDT
What's with this weird cult built around Phillip Seymour Hof
by rev_skarekroe
I don't get it. sk
-
Have you even read the book "Red Dragon"?? Your critiques of the film could be made of the book as well...This won't be the perfect movie just like it was not the perfect book..But it should be entertaining..
-
In the Money and Business section of the Sunday New York Times, there was an interesting article regarding "Superman" at Warner Brothers, the various attempts to bring it to the screen, and the executive feuding which occured and which resulted in the resignation of Lorenzo di Bonaventura. I'm sure anyone can still find the article on the N.Y. Times website.
-
Sep 16, 2002 11:02:14 AM CDT
Manhunter, Red Dragon, and WHAT is WITH that TRAILER?
by aliceinwonderlnd
Everybody seems to like the new "Red Dragon", which makes me pleased as punch since I love Thomas Harris' work, and even his mis-steps ("Hannibal") are at least interesting, or far more interesting than 99% of the serial killer fodder we get fed on a regular basis. I love Mann's Manhunter to bits, dated or no, and in contrast to some TBers I liked the way that Will Graham's investigating process is handled. He's out there, he would talk to himself, and certainly he would personalise the killer - the point of the book was that he wasn't that far from his mindset himself, having spent so long there and being unusually empathetic. It's a motif of course that has been so cannibalized in lesser films since that it doesn't have the impact it used to, but it was very strong back in the day. But if somebody filmed it well again (and I have trouble believing Ted Tally would write a shit script, or that any of these actors would blow goats) then yay for us. Actually, my strongest memory of "Manhunter" is when he's falling asleep on the plane and dreaming of Molly, and the folder falls open on his lap and frightens the little girl. The demonstration of tension between his two lives was fantastic, and the shrill background noise of the plane when he wakes was awesome. But it also sounds to me like the negative review is reaching slightly, though I do think the guy believes what he's writing. Sounds to me that a lot of his problems with the film came from the source material, which I do not understand, since the book is very cool. Finally, I saw a trailer for this in front of "Signs" last week and couldn't believe the amount of fucking SPOILERS in it! Jesus! What brain donor cuts these together? It was up there with "What Lies Beneath" which totally ruined every twist in the film! There was also one for "Swimfan", which had the same problem - I don't need to see the movie now. Mind, I'm not sure I was ever going to.
-
But he's wrong for Supes. He is. Superman is an icon. He's built like a brick shithouse and is a mental boy scout. He makes you feel safe, and awed, and slightly overwhelmed and dwarfed. Even bulked up for "The Matrix" Keanu is too lanky to do it. And I'm not one of these superhero facists that insist that Electra has to be Greek because the character is. But Superman is in a class of his own. I also have a problem with him playing John Constantine, but that's an acting thing. I do love Keanu, loved him in "The Matrix", loved him in "Bill and Ted", even liked him "Devil's Advocate", but his range is not what I'd call expansive. Constantine needs to be played by someone with "side", and Keanu doesn't have any.
-
Though I do not agree with the latter reviewer's opinion of Peterson's Will Graham (I found him to be feverishly obsessed and terrified of the obsession at the same time, a perfect mix for Graham), I DO agree with his comment in response to the former reviewer saying that Cox played a better Lecter than Hopkins: "these are the people who must always tout the underdog as the superior artistic endeavor even at the expense of actually being accurate..." To say that Cox plays Lecter more aptly than Anthony Hopkins is an obvious attempt to be different. PUHLEASE. What a stupid thing to say, really. I'm sorry, I don't want to be rude, but that's like saying tasting food is better than eating it!!
-
Jude Law would have been INTERESTING. Ah well.
-
Sorry Guy's watched Silence of the Lambs and while it was a good protrayal of two characters each tryin to get one over the other it did nothing for me. Maybe all the fuss over it was because it was the first time that a female character had been shown in a strong positive role, in dective situation on the big screen.
Its certainly the reason why foster refused to do the sequel becuase essentailly hannibal won that rematch by a convincing margin.
To the people going on about the soundtrack or Manhunter, please just shut up. How the hell is the Doors dated for crying out loud, the soundtrack is appropriate for the when the film is made, te only way it could not have dated is if they ha usd an orchestrail score, if thats the best you can come up with aginst the film please just move on.
The direction and style and the way that graham investigates the crime, has been copied from everything from the X-Files to CSI, and everything in between, you sir know absolutly nothing.
Manhunter is a classic good versus the most extreme evil, slowly building the tension up as the investigator tries to avoid being swamped in the evil that he's is trying to stop, ends in a superb climax, simple effective and the best. Put it this way its the only one I could be bothered to shell money out for on DVD.
Remaking it is just the usual Hollywood balls of extracting every single $$ possible from a franchise. As far as I'm concerned there are some movies that are so damned good they should not be remade, this was one of them.
-
... we finally get the opportunity to debate who is the better Hannibal Lecter (or Lecktor). Oh, how I've waited so long for this opportunity. Or at least I've waited since the last of the thirty Red Dragon reviews that have been on this site in the past 5 days. Or the 50 scoop stories while the film was in production. Or the 1,000 related stories from when Hannibal was in the theater. Or the 10,000 coaxial stories from when Manhunter was re-released on DVD. Or....
For dessert maybe we can debate whether or not Manhunter has really stood the test of time. -
Lecter looks like a buffon
-
Whatever HP inclinations are, the score of Manhunter is just that the score.
The score of the "Exorcist" allows you to Identify what period in time it was made with reasonble accuracy that does not take away the fact that it is a classc film does it?
Mnhuner has a score that contains a Doors track, that is hardly eighties.
As far as I'm concerned the score of Manhunter is the sore of Manhunter, anyone who thinks some how this trakes away from the film should go back to listening to their Britney Spears records and leave us adults alone. -
--Somehow, his opinion has more weight.
-
Sure, Silence of the Lambs and Hannibal earned their well-deserved money and accolades, but by making a Hannibal Lecter movie that's already been done, Universal is basically admitting that they're not trying to break any new ground and they're just aiming for profit now. I think I'll rent Manhunter and save some money, or better yet, read the book!
-
I loved Silence of the Lambs, as everyone did. I had never read the book when I saw the movie in 1990, and of course I read the others immediately after SOTL. Black Sunday is amazing, but of course a very different genre, and quite appropriate considering today's climate. Red Dragon, in my opinion, is Harris' best. Terrifying, sad (the Tooth Fairy is a disgrace of a human being, but his childhood is so sad and disturbing). It's much meatier than the other two, though the plot is a little stagnant compared to SOTL. Anyway, I can understand being skeptical about a re-make, but have no fear. The movie needs to be re-made. Manhunter was an okay movie, but it left out so many important parts of the book, so much was missing. I have a feeling this version will perfect it.
-
Hannibal has more gore and it's used to disturbing effect but you can't blame Ridley for "overdosing" on it as he's adapting the book. Manhunter is a very good film (and YES I liked Miami Vice). It's not a classic but if you read the book Red Dragon you'll probably get more out of the film. It's a tough book to adapt as a lot of the conflict is internal in the mind of Petersen's character. He has to think like a serial killer in order to catch him and risks losing his sanity in the process. The film's scenes of the killer at work in a family's home are very disturbing. By the way, I have no problem with Cox in the role of Lector but I can't really picture him carrying SOTL like Hopkins did. Hopkins brought a classic blend of intellect and politeness clashing with psychotic violence that many others after him have tried copying to much less effect.
-
I'm one of the many Cox apologists running around these boards, but I do cheerfully admit that Hopkins was a better Lecter (sp? who cares!) for the purposes of SOTL. I can't imagine the Cox Lecter going to that much trouble for Starling, and I certainly can't imagine him bothering to call her once he's made his escape. Cox's attitude was a little more, say, "fuck you," while Hopkinses was "fuck you, dear."
-
Take a shitty director and surround him with a great cast, DOP, and scriptwriter, and that's what you'll get.
-
Why does everyone call "Manhunter" dated? It's a movie made in the 80s that takes place in the 80s. If it feels 80s that's because it frickin' is, morons. Is "Silence of the Lambs" dated because it was made in the 90s? Is "Taxi Driver" dated because it was made in the 70s? Is "Maltese Falcon" dated because it was made in the 50s? Thought not. Quick copping opinions from stomptokyo.com and come up with yer own, knuckleheads.
-
The above was posted before reading other posts regarding "Manhunter's" "datedness," and was intended as a direct response to this page's second review of "Red Dragon."
Just sayin' so's I doesn't git dragged into any flamewars, chuck. -
Just kidding. Moriarty wouldn't have FORGOTTEN COMMAS before "you fuck" and in between worse and ineffective. Moriarty also isn't lazy...to...seperate...his...ideas...like...you...you...goddamn...Inefective...JACKASS. ALso, MO wouldn't use the shit similes like "...the currency of a pissed off supply teacher"????
That is today's lesson, fucko. You may now return to normally scheduled talk-back....
P.S. MO also wouldn't ever have use clit-ches like "chip on shoulder". -
and I found a few nits. Oh yeah, and you're a big stupid dummy! -
I didn't write Manhunter is "hopelessly dated" because it was made in the 1980s and it's now 2002. Put simply: Manhunter has aged very, very poorly. Many aspects of it feel absurd when viewed today. The production design, the score, the music, the oppresive neon lighting all reek of a odd, long-lost culture in a distracting, can't-concentrat-on- the-film sorta way. As an artifact Manhunter is enjoyable, sure. But Taxi Driver and The Silence of The Lambs are truly timeless-- they feel just as fresh and vital today as they did when they were made, whereas Manhunter has grown tepid. Red Dragon shares this timelessness which is why I'm certain it will eventually eclipse Manhunter in popular opinion.
-
I don't give a shit about the movie. Anyone who uses words that big on a website called aintitcool is a true asshole. You fucking asshole.
-
My respect for the talent of Chris Elliot knows no bounds, he was an absolute genius in those old David Letterman skits. But just having him sitting at the table in a couple of scenes in Manhunter didn't help the movie any. It was an ok movie, nothing special. I thought it seemed more like a pilot for a Miami Vice spinoff, I keep waiting for Don Johnson to show up and consult with Will Graham on the case. I guess Brian Cox did an alright job as Lector, it's hard to tell because as the character is presented in the movie, he's just a quick way to advance the plot, almost as if he was thrown in as an afterthought. Now if Chris Elliot had been given the role of Hannibal Lector, that would have been memorable. Of course if you did that you would have to have Letterman as Will Graham, Paul Schaffer as Jack Crawford, Larry Bud Melman as Dolerhyde, Hal Gurney as the sleazy journalist, and I guess Biff Henderson could throw on a wig and be the blind chick. Gee, I hope Jackie O is reading this, I know how he loves these wacky casting ideas.
-
... that song at the end when Graham reunites with his family makes me cringe. I think the rest of the music and style works well, though. (I even have the soundtrack.) I remember seeing "Manhunter" when it was first released. It utterly blew me away. I'd never seen a movie that interwove music and imagery that densely before. It still works for me today so well that I find myself thinking, "Hey, they didn't do that scene right" when I watch the trailers for "Red Dragon."
-
That's just hilarious! I wonder how many people here actually get that?
-
... but I really enjoyed the first review, and can't wait to see the movie so I can agree with it wholeheartedly.
-
Let's be honest. The original source material is an airport paperback, no better and no worse. In the hands of great director, like Demme, it can be elevated. In the hands of an average director it fall back to being, well, average.
-
First of all, MALTESE FALCON was made in 1941, not the '50s. Second, and more importantly, no, TAXI DRIVER, SILENCE OF THE LAMBS and MALTESE FALCON are not dated because they were truly great to begin with, unlike MANHUNTER which is a decent movie, except for the fact that the soundtrack makes you want to commit hara-kiri with a plastic spoon-fork.
-
I guess "Maltese Falcon" felt like a 50s movie because it was just so ahead of its time.
By the way, I have a plastic fork. I can send it to you with a copy of the soundtrack if you like. -
Pop quiz hotshot! This is your wake up call!!! I am the last son of Krypton!!! Whoa. Are you saying that I'm faster than a speeding bullet? Whoa. Luthor, let's not do this. Not here, now now. I've got no problem with you man. We're just two cool guys with no problem. Whoa.
You can just smell the shit stink on this already.
-
You know what? You're both hawks, you both like ass. Go fight on your own time. You aren't funny.
-
I'm talking to "Bladerunnerunit" and "HP," who obviously spread cheeks for each other.
-
Jesus, Bladerunnerunit, you are a pathetic arguer. Please give it up. For future reference, "sucka" is a colloquialism.
-
Where are you from in Portugal man?
-
Yep...i live in the other side of the river, in Lisbon p
-
Nunca fui ao chat...
-
Yes, Bladerunnerunit, I certainly do understand. BUT - if you have a problem with the language, you should avoid using it as an argument device (i.e., 'sucka' vs. 'sucker'). I don't care if you haven't perfected the language, yet...Anyway, this is a movie board, not a language board. Go to an ESL website if you want to discuss your adroitness in other languages. My apologies if I offended your admirable desire to speak a new language.
-
Trabalho em inform
-
Sep 18, 2002 2:06:06 PM CDT
Crockett and Tubbs (with very special guest Glenn Frey), Roll Up
by nocureforfools
so i finally gave in and watched Manhunter after the heated debates here. first of all, although it was better than Hannibal, it was nowhere near as good as Silence of the Lambs. not even close. now, for those people who seem to love Manhunter (perhaps a little too much) i think you are getting confused about what's really good about it -- THE SOURCE MATERIAL. Thomas Harris is a gifted suspense / psycho-thriller writer, hence you have a compelling story with character depth, insight and true horror. unfortunately, you then have Michael Mann's hamfisted design approach; this painfully cheesy attention to exaggerated 80s design which nearly kills the entire movie. for instance: why is everything lit by neon lights? i mean, even the police departement is drenched in neon? cmon now. furthermore, why does everyone live on the shoreline which features breathtaking airbrushed sunsets every single day? why the decision to pick music that would sound dated within 3 years of filming? if all of this crap was stripped away from the film, it would have been markedly improved. for instance, Brian Cox's performance was good as was the man who played Dollarhyde / Tooth Fairy. but the design was just awful. perhaps if Mann made Red Dragon today, with his Miami Vice dorkiness long behind him, he could have made a more immersive film. as it stands, it is good, but not the work of genius some of you say it is. that credit goes to Harris. juxtapose this with Demme's Silence of the Lambs, which is still frightening, compelling and immersive, whose performances are brilliant and who's direction and design is muted to the zeitgeist and therefore is able to retain more of a sense of timelessness (not that it will seem timeless in another 10-15 years, but it certainly has already lasted 10 years without aging). even in terms of early 90s design, Manhunter looks painfully cheesy and dated and that's only after 4 years. not that it was a bad film, i enjoyed it for what it was, but i also recognize that it is not some bold work of cinematic genius. again: praise the pen of Harris for the text. forgive Mann for his hamfisted design approach.
-
Anyway, I do think that the guy who played the Tooth Fairy in the original Manhunter was quite good. He was scary and twisted, and feverish in his own way, much like Will Graham is feverish with his obsession to solve the case. Ralph Fiennes worries me. He is a fantastic actor, nothing beats his acting in Schindler's List. But the Tooth Fairy is supposed to be this huge, deformed, built, cocked guy. Fiennes isn't tiny, I saw him in Hamlet on Broadway and he's not a small guy, but I don't know if he fits as the Tooth Fairy. Hopefully I'm wrong. Any thoughts?
-
I actually do think Scarface is a dated movie. I know most people disagree with that, but I think it's really cheesy. A lot of people also think that the soundtrack is great, and I happen to HATE it. The soundtrack is definitely the problem with Manhunter, as well. The other big problem, to me, is that Mann does not spend enough time focusing on the stalking of the Jacobi family and the other family. That is a crucial part of the fear factor, and it could have added that missing something.
-
Bladerunnerunit sucks almost as bad as the guy who wrote the first review. I can see them now, typing out 700 pages of worthless text, and admiring how smart they are, because they use big words. Sometimes big words in 2 or 3 languages! Yippee! Assholes.
-
HP, forgive me, I don't want to get involved in this hopeless splaying of wit, but isn't that what a review is BASED on? One's reaction to it? You aren't making any sense. So, Blade didn't like Manhunter that much. That's HIS reaction. You loved it. That's your reaction. Please elaborate on the other mysterious basis on which movies are judged. I'm curious.
-
that HP and Bladerunnerunit are the same person. Anyone agree?
-
I thought you guys would be interested in this little blurb from Page Six in the New York Post:
RALPH Fiennes derived a little too much joy out of killing off Philip Seymour Hoffman -
I know its a little off topic but why couldnt they have got Scott Glenn to play Jack Crawford again.
Its not like he was holding out for $20M or something.
Harvey Keitel is a brilliant actor but I associte the charcter of Jack Crawford with Glenn's fine understated performance n SOTL. Agree or DisAgree I dont care -
LOL, by the way...no offense Blade. Okay, I suppose I see your point. But is any opinion truly objective? I guess I can cite an example which would back you up: I really liked Signs (please, no arguments about Signs, this is just an example!), but I am willing to admit that the religious thing may bother some people and even ruin the movie for them. I don't know, I just have a hard time with the idea that movies are anything more than visual inspirations leading to personal opinion. That's it. But whatever.
-
Yes, I wonder the same thing. I was blown away by Scott Glenn's performance. I wondered the same thing in Hannibal. Why waste a good thing? He really fits the part.
-
Why don't you pull your unit out of your retarded sister's ass and join reality? It's kind of hard not to have a superior opinion over someone who derives sexual pleasure from helpless innocents. And by the way, there's a talk-back on a certain board on this website, I won't say which, that says you use your grandmother's face as toilet paper. Is that true? Dennis Farina my ass. You are an illiterate.
-
Back to civilized society. What about Ed Norton? What do you think of him?
-
Sep 19, 2002 9:37:13 AM CDT
The compliment is accepted and returned 10-fold, Bladerunnerunit
by glass
And no, HP, we are not gay for each other, so you can put that old joke back in the closet.
-
Sep 19, 2002 11:28:01 AM CDT
The Most Important Debate In the History of Cinema...
by nocureforfools
is not being fought here. look, guys, discussion about films is one thing, maybe even some good natured insults, verbal sparing is good, BUT all of this anal rape fantasy personal attack stuff has got to go. i mean, who fricken cares? it's a movie! HP, you pretty much started this nonsense and you have not offered one thought on these films other than you really really liked Manhunter and everyone else is an idiot. i mean, seriously, man, are you okay? and what's with the anal shit? just drop it. there are people here, beleve it or not, who actually have some worthwhile things to say (like Blade Runner Unit for instance). even if you don't agree with them, it doesn't call for this playground nonsense. why not offer a counter argument or opinion and cut the personal attacks out? it's pointless and stupid. ++++ in regards to Scarface. it is cheesy. it is dated. and it is Hilarious! i think it is one of the greatest unintentional comedies of all time. and you know that they were all doing sooooo much coke while they were making it that they thought it was brilliant cinema. i think the same thing happened on the set of Showgirls (the only difference being that Verhoven always intended Showgirls to be a satire of Americas retarded approach towards sexuality).
-
I can see your point about Scarface. It IS funny. Especially the part where Pacino is saying to Pfeiffer "Look at you sitting there, all you do all day and night is sit there sucking, and fucking, and snorting..." I know that's not the exact line, and I know that that is one part which is intentionally funny, but it's my favorite. I think Donnie Brasco is another example of a movie that, if it's not meant to be a comedy, it certainly came across as one. I am always shocked when people don't agree with me. How about the hallmark card to his boss? Or the line about Donnie's jewelry "That's a fugazi." Maybe I was really baked, but I found that movie to be hysterical.
-
2001 as funny...hmmm...I don't think I caught the humor in it!!
-
Ok lets look at history here. George Reeves played superman on the old t.v. show and he was murdered. Christopher Reeves played superman in the movies and he can barley move his toes (but i honestly believe he will walk again) Now keanu may play superman in the new movie yea i doubt he would even make past the first day of shooting.
-
First of all, let me say that I think the whole thing is a rumor. I really, really doubt Keanu will be Superman. That being said, I can understand your reservations. I have to admit, I am a fan of Keanu's (Matrix, Feeling Minnesota, The Watcher, The Gift, the one with River Phoenix that I always forget, Bill and Ted, which is an entertaining movie, regardless of the stereotype factor that proceeded it...), but I can see how someone might be afraid that he'll destroy the movie. However, I am willing to keep an open mind. I think he blew us all away in the Matrix, or at least he blew me away, so let's wait and see. And who knows, with the way things are going, Christopher Reeve will probably be back to playing Superman before long!!
-
I'm waiting for the attack-saying you like Keanu is like saying you like Signs-but you are exactly right, Blade. If he's so dumb, how in the hell has his career lasted this long. The answer from some people will inevitably be "he's handsome," or "good managers," but I say he must be pretty smart to HIRE the managers, right?
-
Yes, for instance I don't see Keanu starring in Rocky and Bullwinkle, do you?
Here's my top 10 serial killer list, which I also posted on the other board:
10. Gaear Grimsrud (Steve Buscemi's partner in Fargo)
9. Santa in Silent Night, Deadly Night
8. Nicole Kidman in Malice
7. Brian dennehy in the TV movie about John Wayne Gacy - awesome!!
6. Jennifer Jason Leigh - Single white Female
5. William Defeo - Amityville Horror
4. the Stepfather
3. Leatherface
2. Patrick Bateman
1. Hannibal -
Is this movie just playing it safe, or is it an attempt to apologize to the audience for "Hannibal?" Or is it both?
-
I feel as though I can honestly say that Red Dragon is fail-safe.
-
I agree, Blade. I really liked Hannibal. I don't think it was up to par with SOTL, but I did leave the theater amazed. It was wonderful. Now I shall wait for the influx of abuse...
-
He'll simply say "You liked Hannibal? Why, you must take it from behind!!"
-
I don't know, Blade, sounds like fancy to me. We can only wish...
-
It was pretty clear to me after reading HANNIBAL that Harris wrote it under pressure and possibly under protest. The book is howlingly bad, and seriously bent. Sort of like Harrison Ford's narration in BLADE RUNNER, which is pathetically bad and clearly had to have been done under protest. So how could a movie based on the book HANNIBAL possibly be any good? Apparently is was not and is not. I know I will never see it, altered ending notwithstanding. This new version of RED DRAGON is for a whole new generation of moviegoers who never saw MANHUNTER in the theater and/or couldn't care less about it. No harm in a remake, it's just that it clearly will be skewed to a younger audience. I am too old to want to see a remake of a film that is not even 20 years old.
-
Hannibal was pretty good for the most part. I thought it was a big improvement over the book, Thomas Harris didn't seem to have his heart in it, that was his paycheck book. I think Red Dragon looks great, a return to a truly evil Hannibal, instead of a roguish, misunderstood Hannibal(prefers to eat the rude). Obviously there are people out there that find Manhunter to be a masterpiece, more power to you, but I find it to be to tv movieish. But one thing I will say, even though I loved Scott Glenn as Jack Crawford, and I'm sure Harvey Keitel will do a good job, I will admit that Dennis Farina owns the role, probably because he really was a cop at one time. That was one of the biggest mistakes made in Hannibal, not even mentioning Jack Crawford. That and including the whole brain eating scene, I know they killed a lot of repeat business with that.
-
The movie you're thinking of with Keanu and River Phoenix is MY OWN PRIVATE IDAHO, one of Gus van Sant's good movies from before he insulted the entire film industry with that shittier-than-shit PSYCHO remake. Also, I agree with you and Bladerunner that HANNIBAL got kind of a bad rap; despite its numerous flaws, that last scene alone made me like it more than MANHUNTER. Personally, though, I would have added Mickey and Mallory Knox from NATURAL BORN KILLERS and John Doe from SE7EN to your serial killers list.
-
I thought Harris delivered a wonderfully dark and funny book with Hannibal that he knew would drive the movie-makers nuts. He already had the money for the rights and he made the last book into a Grand Guignol masterpiece for the hell of it. I thought much of the book was played for laughs, not just the story but the prose. A brain is described as looking like "two dogs stuck together". Comic genius. And was it just me that thought it was implied that Starling had contracted Aids in the opening?
-
Mr. Malkovich, you are absolutely right! I wish I could fit John Doe from Seven onto my list! Rayanne, that is an interesting idea about HIV. I think Bladerunnerunit makes an interesting point as well, about the moral sickness, but Blade, that lady in the beginning (the black lady, what's her name, I forget? Amelda something...) she did have HIV, and perhaps Clarice DID catch it from her. There is concern in the beginning that someone will get it - maybe it actually happened. And Bladerunnerunit, you are ABSOLUTELY correct. The end scene is purely for humor's sake and to bring out the beauty and the beast mythology. The whole movie is quite funny. Now, Red Dragon may be for new audiences, but so was Silence of the Lambs! I can't wait to see it. Though I have to say, I am afraid of Ed Norton. I like him as an actor, but someone, I forget who (do I have dementia, I think so!) said he was too young, and I agree. HP, by the way, you are a cock-knocker.
-
How sad! HP sends himself pictures in order to feel appreciate. HP, I wouldn't call you ugly so much as indescribably grotesque and nauseating to imagine. You reek of dung. Garbage.
-
I was just wondering how you guys could have liked "Hannibal" .
I mean, first of all, Jodie's gone. I still like Julianne . But I like Jodie better . anyway.
but we lost the original director : Demme transformed into Scott.
and to put an end to this : this movie is between a chef d'oeuvre and a prequel to a sequel . (??)
So if I had an opinion, it would be : Ridley, if I were you, I would have retired after "Gladiator"
The good thing is, though, this man might direct number 5 of the saga he started (...try and guess)
so just wait, have a drink and a smoke, sit and relax...
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- A hot redhead (not Harry) is set to play lead in Fede Alvarez's remake of EVIL DEAD! -- 166 total posts 166 posts
- UPDATED: Talkbacker Bob Orci tweets STAR TREK old set pics! -- 243 total posts 87 posts
- The Friday Docback Spelunks 'The Caves Of Androzani'!! DOCTOR WHO Story #136, And More!! -- 90 total posts 81 posts
- RIDDICK Sequel Details Via A New Press Release!! -- 84 total posts 73 posts
- Here Comes THE GODMOTHER! -- 71 total posts 71 posts
- Rest In Peace Ben Gazzara -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- INSIDIOUS-ER? -- 120 total posts 42 posts
- ABC Has Cast The Lead In Its Future Nuclear Nation Pilot!! And They’ve Chosen Wisely!! -- 39 total posts 39 posts
- The Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day, you bitch! You never backed away from anything in your life! Now fight! FIGHT! -- 136 total posts 37 posts
- AWAKE, This Season’s Best Broadcast Pilot, Gets NBC’s Old ER Slot March 1!! THE FIRM To Burn Off On Saturdays!! -- 37 total posts 37 posts