1. Rottencore

   10

   Hopkins portrayal of Lecter was not like it's predecessor (Silence of the Lambs)...Making Hannibal feel more like a pompous old geezer with a taste for hedonism and human flesh.… Expand

   • Helpful? 1 of 2 users said Yes.
2. Tss5078

   7

   The thing about Hannibal is that it was a good movie, but there was something just off about it. Anthony Hopkins was simply amazing as he is in most everything he does. The rest of the cast was equally as good, but the story was a bit odd. Out of the four Lecter movies, this is the one that doesn't really fit. I didn't like the whole overseas aspect, although the manhunt was good. Clarice Starling was a completely different character and it had nothing to do with that fact that another woman was playing her. Juliana Moore did a great job, but Starling, wasn't the same Starling we came to love in Silence of The Lambs. Overall I liked the movie and it had some great parts to it, especially the end, but my feeling is that something just wasn't right about it.… Expand

   • Helpful? 0 of 0 users said Yes.
3. Drzewoplot

   7

   I would say: more action, less psychology. Lecter, as an aesthete and connoisseur of art, in some other delivery, with the brain in a box. There is nothing surprised: the relationship between him and Starling must be fascinating, and is also really tasty.… Expand

   • Helpful? 1 of 1 users said Yes.
4. barnet42

   6

   I like more if jodie foster was in this movie , julianne played Clarice badly and wasnt likeable like in the first movie , I understand that Foster dropped out, but they shouldn't have made it without. Moore sucked at this role.… Expand

   • Helpful? 0 of 0 users said Yes.

See all 32 User Reviews