SummaryIn "Red Dragon" we learned who he was. In "Silence of the Lambs" we learned how he did it. Now comes the most chilling chapter in the life of Hannibal Lecter -- the one that answers the most elusive question of all -- why? (MGM)
SummaryIn "Red Dragon" we learned who he was. In "Silence of the Lambs" we learned how he did it. Now comes the most chilling chapter in the life of Hannibal Lecter -- the one that answers the most elusive question of all -- why? (MGM)
It's a handsome film, but the pace is continually gummy and the set-ups stiff and artificial. Most crucially, nothing in it vanquishes the sensation that we're being sold something superfluous -- like a service contract for a carton of eggs.
The movie is long and even boring at bits,the acting is not always good and some CGI effects are pretty messy but the good scenario,the final act and the interesting story kind of redeem these defaults
Contrary to popular belief, this movie is not about Anthony Hopkins experimenting with Viagra. In fact, the man who made Hannibal Lecter a household name, doesn't so much as have a cameo in this film. Hannibal Rising takes the story to where it's never been before, back to the beginning. We see a young Hannibal in Europe, during WWII, and we learn how he grew into the monster he became. What made this different from the other Lecter films, was that Hannibal is seen as a good guy for much of the film, just out seeking revenge. French film star Gaspard Ulliel is fantastic in his first American film and was the perfect choice to play a young lecter. As a fan of the film franchise, I found this movie fascinating, but as an outsider I can see how some people would find it a bit long and slow.
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.
Bad as Harris' Hannibal Rising screenplay (his first) is, at least it's an improvement on his dreadful book, streamlining its convoluted action and discarding large chunks of unspeakable dialogue.
Silly, slack and unforgivably tedious, Thomas Harris's screenplay is padded with interminable flashbacks and a bombastic score that telegraphs every emotion Hannibal represses. And there are a lot of them.
I liked this film just as much as the other films in the franchise. I think the acting was solid and it was rather graphic (but in a good way). I enjoyed it.
It was ok. Not as bad as the critics say imo. The cast is alright, Gaspard Ulliel is a great choice as the young Hannibal. The plot was ok. It explained a bit more about Hannibal but it wasnt as insightful as I hoped it would be. It never really got interesting either, The little interest there was fades through out the film. Its also a little bit too long of my tastes as well. It was still a decent film though.
This film is a prequel to "Silence of the Lambs" and seeks to tell how the young Hannibal Lecter, affected by the dramatic events of World War II, became a dangerous cannibal. Directed by Peter Webber and written by Thomas Harris, this film has a cast headed by Gaspard Ulliel, Gong Li and Rhys Ifans.
This film is not bad, but its too far from the success and quality of "Red Dragon" and "Silence of the Lambs". It cannot be analyzed as a horror film because never frightens us. Its closer to the thriller or police movies.
It has a dubious script, which explains the reasons why Hannibal is what he is in previous films. This is its first problem: it want to transform a perfect villain in a dubious antihero. The idea simply does not stick with anything that the character will do in the movies played by Anthony Hopkins. The idea of inserting Japanese elements in the story also seems a wrong option, something that does not fit properly, despite the good acting of Li Gong.
In fact, speaking of actors, she seemed to me the best performance of the film, discreet and elegant as called for her character. The actors who played the villains was reasonable. Gaspard Ulliel, in the leading role, is a casting error: although he managed to give its character lots of coldness and cynicism, he wasn't able to give it charisma and sense of taste, striking personality traits of Lecter that are quite visible in Hopkins movies.
The film contains several intense action scenes with moments that may hurt some people's sensibilities, so be warned. Still, its far from violence and gore visible in "Hannibal". Its a film that focuses on action and romance, not on blood. The special, visual and sound effects are good and get better as we approach the end. The soundtrack seemed to be regular, fulfilling its role without stand.
Hannibal Rising is a bad movie. the story doesn't fit in the Hannibal Lecter movie series. what were they thinking giving Hannibal Lecter a backstory? if some told me this psychology thriller set in post world war II France and has nothing thing to do with Hannibal Lecter I would've liked this movie.
Beaucoup d'invraisemblances dans cette jeunesse de Cannibal Lecter, beaucoup de justifications pour justifier la psychopathie de ce fin gourmet qui n'a pas digéré en Lituanie (pendant la guerre) ce qu'on lui a servi...
S'ensuit alors un parcours vengeur des plus banals pour le jeune Lecter qui se délecte de ses anciens bourreaux en France notamment (le pays de la gastronomie). Il est épaulé par sa tante japonaise immigrée adepte du katana (sic !) la magnifique Chinoise Gong Li... encore une invraisemblance grotesque comme le passage au détecteur de mensonges ou le fait qu'Hannibal ait toujours les yeux derrière la tête.
Gaspard Ulliel n'est pas aussi mauvais que l'on s'y attendait mais reste plus à l'aise dans sa pub télé ; heureusement dans le rôle du flicard, Dominic West (Sur Ecoute) relève un peu le niveau. La réalisation s'avère néanmoins des plus soignées mais ne peut compenser l'aspect téléphoné de toute l'entreprise, diluée sur deux heures qui entraînent de ce fait un ennui certain.