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.

No "Silence of the Lambs," but on it's own merits, a decent film. Beautifully filmed with rich scenery. Julianne Moore's Clarice just doesn't compare to Foster's.

If you read the book, you will be very disappointed with the movie. The movie shows no motivation or background for Hannibal's problems. The movie has little depth, and the violent scenes are done with little imagination at all.

Beginning and middle of movie are entrancing, dark, and very scary. Ending is sadistic, gross, and very hard to stomach.

The book was awesome and much more in depth. In my opinion the major downfall of the movie, other than the slight tedium experienced with the Hannibal-less mid section is the ending. It completely bastardized the interplay between starling and hannibal, and the organization that had turned her into their P.R. scapegoat.

This film Rocked!!

Hannibal is the best movie! It's the scariest movie ever!! It was suspensful, and it had a story to it, and I can't wait to see the next Hannibal Lecter movie!

Good movie...good plot...has substance, but lacks a strong storyline...characters are not emotionally strong...suspenseful, and nearly true to the book.

There is a lot shadowing over Hannibal to stop audiences from enjoying it. The critics didn?t think it was too flash, the censors gave it mighty high ratings and most sequels, according to some people?s philosophy, aren?t worth the time. I was really looking forward to seeing this movie and I wasn?t distracted by any of the above. At the start I honestly found Hannibal a little boring, but when the cool detective story comes in it gives the film a little more life. We needed something else to keep the film going however, because it was missing the chemistry of the first. When Lecter finally enters the United States, things heat up. The gore splashes everywhere, the scenes are more exciting, the characters get meatier (in both senses of the word) and the audience will start to get more involved. The detective story in the first hour or so in the film is very well played and neat, the killings in the movie are creative, the cinematography is beautiful and the soundtrack is stunning. At times the film goes a bit off-course and is a wee bit laughable, but it remains enjoyable in the focused parts of the movie, which is a lot of the film, not much of it is really ?bad? bad. Ridley Scott directs the movie fabulously and gives us stylish and memorable scenes. Some scenes in the movie are memorable in a bad way, though, I?ll warn you now. The acting is brilliant, with Julianne Moore fabulous as a more determined but less interesting Clarice Starling; Anthony Hopkins as a scarier and less mature Hannibal and Gary Oldman who is great but completely unrecognizable as grotesque make-up covers his face. Hannibal is a gross, great and gory re-visit to the character we enjoy so much, I recommend it to people who either enjoyed the first film or enjoy very extreme deaths in movies. … Expand

the movie was'nt bad but it also was'nt good it was quite a clever movie though and that hannibal guy freaks me out!.

Not even in the same ballpark as its predecessor, however not without some effect. Whereas Silence Of The Lambs was an almost unbearably suspenseful film, smart and brooding, Hannibal is more just a gore film...but it succeeds in being that. That doesn't mean I liked it much! It was a slow film and not a very involving one. But, when it went for the big macabre knockouts, it delivered and was woozily stomach-turning!… Expand

Not as good as silence but an exciting sequel anyhow.

Wow! Dr. Lecter is still as freaky as ever. I especially loved the brain bit!

The brain scene is awful and disgusting. But Anthony hopkins' terrifc performance almost lifts it from the pits of mediocrity. Moore's charcter sketch is very poor though. but her performance is very good. Not as suspenseful as The Silence of the Lambs but has more gruesome violence than it. Also, Oldman is good but is not recognisable.

Strong in the beginning but slowly went down hill. The last 20 minutes were mostly a joke. The writing was poor, and Hannibal did not have any memorable lines like he did in the first one.

Not nearly as good as "Silence Of The Lambs," but very stylish - and the ending is MUCH better than that of the book.

I was very disappointed. I am a big fan of "Silence of the Lambs," which was a great movie. I waited 2 years to see this film. It was almost like someone just threw in scenes in certain places to make this movie. I didn't like the ending at all!

A dissapointing try to re-unite Clarice and Hannibal, this time it's gruesome violence with no redeeming twist or ending.

It's a freak show, not a real movie. But this kind of freak show is rare.

Missing the lonely fear that forced us to justify ourselves to re-establish psychic security. Resorts to the lamest device available for advancing a crime plot, stupid cops. So we are left with all the insanity, none of the surprises. This Hannibal dude must be caught and imprisoned, no, wait, that's how we got into this mess.

A interesting story for this second in the series. But the Clarice and Hannibal reunion was not as expected. This plot was interesting but it was not very realistic story. The only thing in this movie that scared me was the price to see it.

As good as it possibly could be considering the wretchedness of the source material (i.e. the novel). Performances are fine and appropriately moody direction from Scott. But, ultimately, was any of it really necessary?

This movie barely made a three. How can Universal Pictures ruin a the great "Silence of the Lambs" by releasing this peace of crap. If I ever buy this movie I will throw it in the fire place just to watch it burn. Stupid sequel. And god please don't make a Prequel to "Silence of the Lambs" because the way they made "Hannibal." I'm scared in fear that i'll waste my money agian. Bottom line: DON'T WATCH THIS MOVIE.… Expand

As viewers, we don't hate Giancarlo Giannini's character enough to warrant such a grim fate. The movie punches you in the gut more than it tweaks with your head. All that's missing are a bearded lady and some man-eating pigs. Oh wait--it has those, too.

Make sure you finish your popcorn early when viewing Hannibal for the first time. While most of this film is based on suspense, there is certainly plenty of gruesome horror by the end. Anthony Hopkins revisits his infamous role of Hannibal Lector in this disturbing sequel to Silence of the Lambs. Julianne Moore revises Jody Foster’s character of Clarice Starling. There are also several other new friends to mEAT in this terrifying chapter of the Hannibal Lector tale. Mason Verger (Gary Oldman) is out for revenge for the torture that Dr. Lector put him through many years ago, leaving him grotesquely disfigured. He may have found him with the help of the Italian detective Pazzi (Giancarlo Giannni). Meanwhile, Clarice is also searching for Hannibal after being embarrassed by the FBI for a botched mission. Who will get to him first? Or is it possibly Hannibal who truly has the upper hand? You’ll have to watch to find out. Brilliantly directed by Ridley Scott and excellent editing by Pietro Scalia, this film is truly terrifying in the most fun way. The story is engaging, as it is disturbing. You’ll be telling everyone you know about it, especially the final scene that brings new meaning to the term “food for thought.â€�… Expand

This movie is superb, i strongly believe that those that didn't enjoy it did not or perhaps cannot appreciate its finer points. I don't know what people were expecting but i watched this alone and still gave a round of applause when the credits rolled. Its a deep and interesting story because while Hannibal is a killer, and of course a gruesome cannibal, everyone he killed in some way deserved it, and if youve read the books you will know that the trauma Hannibal suffered as a child goes a long way to excuse him. So the films begs the viewer the question as to his morality, and his punishment if any at all. The viewer perhaps will grow to like Hannibal, and so will be presented with many philosophical quandaries as the film progresses, would they rather see him jailed or free, alive or dead? Hannibals interaction with Agent Starling is a fascinating one, wrought with sexual and psychological tension as agent Starling and the viewer both *feel* that Hannibal wouldn't harm her, but you are never quite sure and neither is she. The pace of the film builds up to a climactic finish which doesn't give itself away until the very end. You are always guessing, will they run away together? will he kill her? will she kill him? will she hand him into the police? will he escape? Watch it and see. I would say that this film doesn't hold your hand, there are a lot of finer details which may be unappreciable to those who haven't read the books or at least seen the "dragon rising" movie which explains Hannibals childhood. Many will be dismayed by the end because they think that Hannibal is meant to be a cardboard cut out villain, he isn't, and they're wrong, this is a fantastic movie.… Expand