Album Reviews
Movies
Concert Reviews

Top 10
Resources
Contact Us

What can be said about Hannibal, a movie in which Hannibal Lecter is merely the third most odious character? in which the audience is supposed to laugh at a young boy unsuspectingly dining on a human brain? and in which the sight of enormous hogs feasting on a live human being is not the film's grossest moment? Simply, the film is distasteful.

Ha ha. What a spectacularly unclever pun I just made, and yet the screenplay for Hannibal, the long-delayed follow-up to Silence of the Lambs, is guilty of far worse. Focusing ever more on Hannibal himself, this sequel tries to be both funny and provocative, but instead winds up as just revolting.

Picking up Lecter's story ten years after his escape, we find him applying for a job in Florence, Italy. There he crosses paths with an Italian police detective named Pazzi (in a fine performance from Giancarlo Giannini, Seven Beauties). Initially, it's a routine matter--the detective is investigating the disappearance of Lecter's predecessor--but Pazzi soon discovers who Lecter is. But instead of contacting the FBI (where agent Clarice Starling is still obsessing over Hannibal), Pazzi tries to capture Lecter on his own.

You see, there's another character involved. Mason Verger, a victim of Dr. Lecter who somehow survived but was hideously disfigured in the process, is hoping to capture Hannibal and exact his own kind of revenge. Offering $3 million in reward, Verger tempts Pazzi into ignoring Starling's entreaties (who discovers what's going on, but only too late) and helping him instead. As you might expect, things don't go according to plan.

The movie's second half shifts back to the U.S., where Hannibal and Starling (who is strangely absent for much of the movie's first hour) and Verger finally cross paths. Unfortunately finding himself in the midst of these three very different agendas is Starling's boss, Paul Krendler (Ray Liotta, Goodfellas). Krendler has the misfortune of being boorish, misogynistic, deceitful, and extraordinarily rude, traits that don't sit well with Hannibal.

If it doesn't sound like Clarice Starling (played this time around by Julianne Moore, Boogie Nights) has much to do, you'd be right. She spends the film's first hour literally pining away for Lecter and the last hour brandishing a gun as she takes off on a ludicrous vigilante escapade. Rumor has it that Jodie Foster turned down the sequel because she didn't like the script, but maybe she figured it wasn't worth her time. Instead of the fascinating and genuinely unsettling conversations Clarice and Hannibal had in Silence of the Lambs, here they mostly chase each other around while periodically re-enacting moments from Beauty and the Beast (an excruciatingly unfortunate homage).

If the script's faults weren't enough, the movie also takes a typically condescending approach to religion, specifically Christianity. But whereas in other movies that might be merely irritating, here it becomes truly offensive. The film's two vilest characters, Verger and Krendler, are both linked to Christianity (Verger goes as far as to say "I have immunity from the Risen Jesus. Nothing beats the Ris."), and Christianity is offhandedly linked to child molestation. Later, a genuinely blasphemous crucifixion metaphor is introduced, which is followed by a revolting pre-"dinner" prayer.

Through it all, Anthony Hopkins and Julianne Moore give solid performances. I'm not sure anyone could pull this Hannibal off with his dignity still intact, but Hopkins comes close. And Moore does what she can with what little she's offered. Apparently, Gary Oldman is Mason Verger (the character's makeup prevents any sort of identification, and the credits are unusually silent), and, if so, he continues his string of interesting villainy.

Director Ridley Scott (Blade Runner, Gladiator) is nothing if not a craftsman. While Hannibal doesn't require the spectacular visuals of a movie like Gladiator, Scott creates a sleek, beautiful look for Hannibal. The squares and columnar architecture of Florence are put to particularly good use, as Inspector Pazzi tries to trap his prey, never quite realizing that Lecter is taking advantage of the open spaces to turn the tables. Cinematographer John Mathieson (Gladiator) uses a subdued lighting palette to nice effect, creating a melancholy and ominous mood. And while Hans Zimmer's score is obvious at times, it's also effective. 

Unfortunately, all of this skill is wasted on a story that is without value. Too often plunging into camp, Hannibal is strangely reminiscent of last year's Titus (another movie starring Anthony Hopkins as a chef with irregular ingredients). That movie, however, gloried in its over-the-top excesses, offering an interesting treatise on the nature of revenge. In contrast Hannibal, like its "hero," wants to be reserved and refined as it simultaneously drags its audience through the sludge of human degradation. That's a main course I don't care for. May I be excused?
 

J. Robert Parks 2/11/2001