morrison-dylan-fan
Talking to a friend about what movies she had recently seen,I was intrigued to learn that she had seen "All 3" Lecter movies for the first time. Finding out that she had a box set that did not contain this or the original Manhunter,I was pleased to find one of the films at CEX a few days later,which led to me getting ready to see Hannibal rise.View on the film:Serving up the killing of Hannibal's parents with an over the top Rube Goldberg-style coincidence, director Peter Webber & cinematographer Ben Davis take psychological menace off the menu to cook up a straight-up gorefest. Peeling away to Hannibal's roots,Webber gives the European locations an elegant frosty appearance for the start-point of Hannibal's gentlemanly manner,which gets torn to shreds by the fantastic lashings of gore, sprayed by practical effects beheadings and samurai sword killings.Forced to write the novel and the screenplay at the same time after producer Dino De Laurentiis threatened to bring a hack in to do an origin story, (Mmm...Perhaps not the best way to help someone come up with a good plot Dino.) the screenplay by Thomas Harris shoves atmospheric horror to a side dish,and instead goes for a revenge tale (best served cold!) Sticking Hannibal with flashbacks to his family killers, Harris comes up with a grisly kill list,the episodic outline of which allows for a constant stream of splatter to flow. Faced with Dominic West randomly dropping his French accent as Inspector Popil, Gaspard Ulliel rises above the schlock on show to reflect the pristine, emotionally detached of Hannibal.A Craptastic 7/10.
Eric Stevenson
I am now glad to say that I have seen every Hannibal movie ever made. I guess "Hannibal" is the name of the franchise. This is easily the worst of all these movies and it's so bad even fans of the series hate it. Well, I guess especially fans. This movie starts off by showing Hannibal's origin with how his parents were killed in a crossfire with Nazis. Seems like every origin story involves Nazis nowadays.His sister gets eaten and he goes on to avenge his sister by training with this woman where he learns how to swordfight. Yeah, the movie suddenly turns into "Batman Begins", a weird situation for Hannibal Lecter. The villains in this movie are so pathetic and unentertaining. This series was known for having some really cool villains, even Mason Verger from the supbar "Hannibal". This movie is stretched out over two hours as well. For me, it's just a waste of time. *1/2
arhandasad
While the beginning is quite good, too much is cramped into too little, taking too many liberties with the book. Here are the problems i have with this film1. While Gaspard Ulliel's acting is brilliant as a person who knows he is going to be a vicious serial killer, not good for a damaged person who has still to completely embrace his dark side as in the book. 2. A large part of the book deals with Hannibal trying to remember what happened in the lodge, the cool part about creating a mind palace. In the film, that is given very little time.3. Too much background music.4. The major problem is that the acting and story is set like a prequel. It is as if the characters know already the events of "Silence of the lambs". That is the whole feel of the film.5. Too much grandiose acting. That is one great thing about SOTL that all the films in the Hannibal saga got wrong. All of them tried to be too grandiose. Whereas, SOTL had a more realistic treatment. 6. Lady Murasaki seems smitten by Hannibal and weak. The book however gives her a lot more character.
JÄnis Locis
Yes, it does not have the vibe "The Silence of the Lambs" had, yes it is bloody and brutal, but that is the whole point, it doesn't need to be insanely complex or psychologically thrilling, this movie is meant to be completely different, this is what everybody was always curious about. We all loved Lecter and his mysterious presence, but for all these years nobody knew how he began his cruel ways, in this movie everything unfolds and it really adds to the franchise. So what that it is bloody? From what we have heard in previous films all of them would have needed to be as bloody as this one, since Lecter is considered to be an incredibly sick serial killer, who also, appears to be a cannibal and that is exactly what is showed here. In my opinion Gaspard Ulliel did an awesome job as Hannibal Lecter, he had the vibe of the older version of Hannibal Lecter, played by Anthony Hopkins, of course. This is a decent way to revitalize the franchise, so we are not out of hopes for seeing a sequel to 2001's "Hannibal", Lecter films are not quick to come out and are all in a strange order as we know, so this lays the ground for a new film, maybe in 2020? Who knows.Overall it is very entertaining, shows us what people were eager to know about Hannibal Lecter, his roots, reasons, etcetera. Delivers suspense for sure, isn't just a blatant killer movie, has decent acting. The only weakness in my opinion was how they decided to incorporate different countries here, but everybody seems to speak English fluently, even in 1952 Russia :D I know it sounds funny, but nonetheless, it is worth watching, that is the only notable flaw.
AD
