Hannibal Rising

User Score
4.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 90 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 36 out of 90
  2. Negative: 32 out of 90

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. ChristopherW.
    May 30, 2007
    3
    High production values and evocative imagery and photography aside, this film should never have been made. The entire captivating Hannibal mythos is replaced by ennui and routine. It's just another gory slasher exploitation flick, nothing else. If you love gory slasher exploitation flicks, be my guest. Have at it! All others stay clear!
  2. EmoKid
    Mar 5, 2007
    1
    My first R rated movie and it blew. I was a big fan of the Hannibal series up intill this movie. My simple question is why didn't they start with this movie first and keep them in order? Simple answer as well, If they would have done that then no one would have bothered to pay and see them. I know I sure have wouldn't. I'm glad I didn't pay for my ticket.
  3. JonhB.
    Apr 7, 2007
    0
    This is one of the worst films i have ever seen, and the books not very good either. I think it only takes away the depth from hannibal lecter. The guy sounds french and the story does not fit in with anthony hopkins who sounds british. It is not worth seeing.
  4. Sep 27, 2011
    0
    Hannibal Lecter is the greatest character ever committed to both screen and paper. As such, once Harris finished his other Lecter books, people wanted more. so, like an idiot, he made the biggest mistake he could make: He gave Hannibal Lecter a back story. Not Hannibal Lecter is one of the most enigmatic characters ever. Why does he do what he does? Well, now we know. And boy, am I angryHannibal Lecter is the greatest character ever committed to both screen and paper. As such, once Harris finished his other Lecter books, people wanted more. so, like an idiot, he made the biggest mistake he could make: He gave Hannibal Lecter a back story. Not Hannibal Lecter is one of the most enigmatic characters ever. Why does he do what he does? Well, now we know. And boy, am I angry that I ever found out. Thomas Harris was stupid to write the book, and I was stupid enough to read it. By giving Hannibal Lecter a back story you take away the enigma of the character and by doing so, you take away a lot of what makes him great. I have learned this lesson over and over again: what you imagine is far more terrifying than reality. If you hear someone being ripped apart piece by piece on film, it is far more terrifying than if you see it happening. **** knew this. he was a master at it. so by giving Lecter a back story, you take away some of the terror. some of what made him great. He is still the greatest character of all time, but some of the mystery is gone. would you give Heath Ledger's Joker a back story? F*** NO! That's why he had different stories for how he got his scars. Imagining how he got them is far more terrifying than if they had told you. It seems obvious. So, why the F*** would you give Hannibal Lecter a F****** back story? A reason for the madness?


    Acting: Horrible. And I'm not just saying that because I don't think this movie should exist. It was groan worthy. Gaspard Ulliel tried and failed to get Hannibal Lecter right. see, the character of Hannibal Lecter, emanates an aura of pure evil but at the same time, you are fascinated by him. Ulliel failed to capture that. Also, I didn't like the child actor who played Lecter at age 8. Not that he needed to be evil. He wasn't. He didn't need to be. But he annoyed me quite a lot. I generally don't like child actors that young. with a few exceptions of course. they don't do things right generally. He didn't. 0/10

    Plot: I think I've said all I needed to say about the plot for this film. 0/10

    Screenplay: it disgusted me at points. I mena come on, in one part, Lady Murisaki calls Hannibal "Han." I hated that. It was cheesy. The author, Thomas Harris, wrote the screenplay. well Mr. Harris, you can write books but you can't write screenplays. 0/10

    Likableness: Well, the film has a 0/30 so far from me, I think you know what this is going to get. All I can do is warn you one last time, If you like Hannibal Lecter at all and can appreciate the character. Don't see this movie. Don't read the book. don't look up the plot. if someone is discussing this movie, leave the room. basically, pretend that this movie/book doesn't exist at all.

    Final Score: 0/40. 0% (H) This is the Naseby stamp of hatred. I rarely award this. It is easier for a bad film to win a Razzie award then to get this. I don't give it out often.


    TRIVIA TIME: Actors screen tested for the role of Hannibal include: Hayden Christensen, Macaulay Culkin, Hugh Dancy, Rupert Friend, Dominic Cooper,Tom Sturridge, and Tom Payne.
    Expand
  5. DavidM.
    Feb 12, 2007
    1
    I went to this movie, as many fans of "The Silence of the Lambs" possibly did, with the heady excitement of finding out how such a man as Hannibal Lecter became equal parts erudition and savagery. Lecter himself claims to Clarice that he was always more than just the sum of his experiences, so I figured I would be treated to an even deeper descent into the dark mind of one of the greatest I went to this movie, as many fans of "The Silence of the Lambs" possibly did, with the heady excitement of finding out how such a man as Hannibal Lecter became equal parts erudition and savagery. Lecter himself claims to Clarice that he was always more than just the sum of his experiences, so I figured I would be treated to an even deeper descent into the dark mind of one of the greatest movie villains of all time. Boy, I was wrong. Dead wrong. Hannibal's dire upbringing was handled with the same banality as another of Hollywood's master villains was recently: Anakin Skywalker's transformation into Darth Vader. I have come to the conclusion that these "origin" films are precisely akin to watching David Copperfield perform an astounding magic trick one night, and the next night he tells you exactly how he did it, forever ruining the awe and mystery. Part of the shock and intrigue of a character like Hannibal Lecter is exactly the question I posed earlier: how does a man become equal parts erudition and savagery? "Hannibal Rising" answers this question through a series of gruesome events that paint young Lecter as simply a boy who had awful things happen to him and now, as a French inspector theorizes, "...there is no word for what he is now...but...monster." Gaspard Ulliel has the malevolent sneer down pat, but other than that there is nothing in his character that suggests any connection with Anthony Hopkin's elder Lecter. Li Gong is wasted as the haunted hottie aunt Lecter takes refuge with and learns his first smattering of culture from. This movie was simply created as a way to milk the Hannibal Lecter franchise once more. Skip this one and stick with the fava beans and a nice Chianti. Expand
  6. mattk.
    Jul 9, 2007
    1
    I really hated this movie. The acting is really bad--I'm not a drama student and I don't pretend to understanding acting, but the dialogue, acting, even the accent seems off.
  7. SteveA.
    Feb 10, 2007
    3
    I actually liked the premise of this movie: it was a fitting Hollywood beginning for Hollywood's greatest villian (although, the power of SOTL was its realism). It was the painfully SLOW pacing and bad acting that killed it for me. Gong Li actually acted very well in this movie, although her character was a walking contradiction. The bad guys acted like a bad comedy troupe I actually liked the premise of this movie: it was a fitting Hollywood beginning for Hollywood's greatest villian (although, the power of SOTL was its realism). It was the painfully SLOW pacing and bad acting that killed it for me. Gong Li actually acted very well in this movie, although her character was a walking contradiction. The bad guys acted like a bad comedy troupe (seriously, they acted like an atrocious version of the Mighty Python). The boy who played Lector was just too pretty and sweet natured to play a convincing killer. He portrayed agony very well, but his scenes of evil played out like a bad imitation of Dracula, complete with slicked back hair and the standard Bela Lugosi accent. Also, that bizarre five inch dimple on the left side of his face was distracting (sorry, I had to go there). A lot of the lines were bad, too. The detective, a throw-away character, says that the boy Lector died with his sister, and that he doesn't know what Lector is now, but whatever it is, it doesn't have a name. I've heard this same sort of quote in two or three other bad thrillers. Also, there was the scene where Lector carves an "M" into one of the bad guys, and then he says, "That M stands for my sister, Mischa." And this whole time, I thought it stood for Mickey Mouse...eyes rolling. Expand
  8. J.davidB.
    Feb 11, 2007
    1
    Not just the worst film of the year, quite possibly the worst film ever. it was laugh out loud rotten and worse even than battlefield earth. and! it had a montage!
  9. SamM.
    Feb 8, 2007
    3
    Without Anthony Hopkins, this movie hurts itself. It is awful.
  10. RandyJ.
    Feb 8, 2007
    1
    One of the worst of the year.
  11. EricC.
    Mar 23, 2007
    0
    I'm not really reviewing this movie. It's crap, period. I just want to point out the plost holes in Emo Kid's review.This was your first R rated movie, but you're a fan of the Hannibal series? And the reason they didn't make this movie first isn't because they didn't want to turn hurt their franchise. It's because the book for this movie was written I'm not really reviewing this movie. It's crap, period. I just want to point out the plost holes in Emo Kid's review.This was your first R rated movie, but you're a fan of the Hannibal series? And the reason they didn't make this movie first isn't because they didn't want to turn hurt their franchise. It's because the book for this movie was written long after the previous novels and was just recently published. And it sucks because Harris was pretty much blackmailed in to writing the prequel, and probably intentially made it garbage. Now stop spewing nonsense, Kid. Expand
  12. Mar 2, 2014
    0
    What the hell happened. The series was going so well until this piece of garbage came out. This movie was terrible. If you ever come across it in stores, just walk away don't even look at it.
  13. Apr 24, 2015
    2
    Hannibal Rising is the funniest movie of the year - a true laugh riot. Viewers will be holding their sides to contain the laughter. Forget Borat - if you're looking for something hilarious, this is the movie to see. What's that? It's not supposed to be a comedy. Oops.

    First of all, who had the bright idea of making a Hannibal movie without Anthony Hopkins? That's like making a Pink
    Hannibal Rising is the funniest movie of the year - a true laugh riot. Viewers will be holding their sides to contain the laughter. Forget Borat - if you're looking for something hilarious, this is the movie to see. What's that? It's not supposed to be a comedy. Oops.

    First of all, who had the bright idea of making a Hannibal movie without Anthony Hopkins? That's like making a Pink Panther movie without Peter Sellars. (Yes, they did that and look at the result.) Frankly, after The Silence of the Lambs, the only reason to see the Hannibal movies was because of Hopkins. Secondly, using the critically panned novel by Thomas Harris as the template was another bad move. To his credit, Harris manages to make the screenplay worse than the novel.

    Hannibal Rising effectively demystifies one of the 20th century's most iconic cinematic villains, stripping away his icy intellect and turning him into just another victim of a bad childhood. With its trifecta of bad writing, bad acting, and bad direction, Hannibal Rising is to Silence of the Lambs as Superman IV: The Quest for Peace is to Superman. Critical miscalculations at every turn have taken this latest (and hopefully last) Hannibal movie beyond the realm of camp and into that special hell reserved for only the most rancid of sequels.

    Hannibal Rising is a gross excursion into bad melodrama, clumsily cannibalizing everything from war movies and vampire flicks to the previous Hannibal films. To call the film's tone uneven would be kind and to consider the lead actor's performance anything close to acceptable would require greater hyperbole than I can produce. There are, however, laughs to be had - all of which are unintentional. Even the movie's self-important style can provide chuckles, but the real humor comes from the overacting and the absurd plot contortions. Not since Kevin Costner's The Postman has a "serious" movie ventured so far into unintentional comedy. In the history of Dino DeLaurentiis motion pictures, this one is second-worst, beaten only by the crapfest of King Kong Lives.

    Based on his performance in A Very Long Engagement, I would have never guessed that Gaspard Ulliel had it in him to act this badly. His performance careens from lifeless to campy with little ground in between, and there always seems to be a smile on his face. One might be willing to accept that he looks nothing like Anthony Hopkins had he brought anything except ridicule to the role. As for the other lead: I'm glad that Gong Li is getting more international exposure via English-speaking parts but I have to believe that her limitations with the language caused her to misread the script. There's no other explanation for why she would appear here, once again playing a Japanese woman. She is, however, Hannibal Rising's saving grace. Her acting is about as good as one could hope for in these circumstances and, at age 41, she is stunning. One other note: you know you're in trouble when comedic actor Rhys Ifans is one of the villains.

    It would be interesting to know how Peter Webber (Girl with a Pearl Earring) became involved in this misbegotten project. His work appears to be that of a director for hire. There's no style evident. Meanwhile, Hannibal's creator, Thomas Harris, has apparently elected to destroy his creation during this outing. Not only does he postulate an absurd reason for the character's later psychosis but he provides an individual who is so at variance with the Anthony Hopkins version that we can't believe they're supposed to be the same man. It would have been better to give the character another name. It wouldn't have made Hannibal Rising any better, but it would have prevented The Silence of the Lambs from suffering guilt by association.
    Expand
Metascore
35

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 30 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 30
  2. Negative: 14 out of 30
  1. Reviewed by: Kim Newman
    40
    Gong Li is welcome as Hannibal's Japanese aunt-in-law/mentor, Gaspard Ulliel isn't a bad young Lecter and Webber's direction is intermittently classy -- but this is a footnote rather than a film.
  2. Who would have thought mass murder and cannibalism could be so dull?
  3. 25
    A sort-of combination of "Lambs," "Batman Begins" and "The Joy of Cooking," Hannibal Rising ostensibly dramatizes the atrocities that turned Hannibal Lecter from loving child to serial killer. But this film is larded up with so many food references that I'm undecided whether this story belongs in a film compendium or a recipe file.