Develiker terrible... so disappointed.

Listonixio Fresh and Exciting

Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

RipDelight This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

jeffrymiranda-25858 This movie really show how low our most intrinsic instincts may fall. I don't know what it was about but, to me, there were times when Julianne Moore's role was too expected. I think her character could've been better developed by recreating some sort of romance between her character and Hannibal.On the other hand, the settings where this movie took place where absolutely gorgeous. Including a third language in it was a great movie from the director who made some of the the characters look very reliable. As far as Anthony Hopkins acting skills absolutely flawless.Finally, I think it was a bad a idea to twist its ending compared to the novel's one since it left a feeling of inconclusiveness in this movie.

Pauliina The first thing that stood out when I watched this movie is how boring it was. Halfway through the movie, I was checking how much time is left, and wishing that I was sleeping instead. None of the characters were interesting, and the plot was quite thin. The addition of the detective took away time that could have been used to develop Hannibal and Starling.I feel like the character of Hannibal is overrated and underdeveloped. The only things we know about him are that he is a cannibal (for no reason), he likes to kill rude people (for no reason), he's classy (more like pretentious in my opinion), and he can instantly psychoanalyze anyone by just looking at them. A character who knows things that should be impossible to know isn't smart, he's just good at guessing or is the author's pet. And sometimes he really is the smartest person in the room, because everyone else is so stupid. I've seen much better serial killer and genius characters in other movies.The brain-eating scene was one of the most disgusting things I've seen. It was also scientifically dubious. Apparently being a surgeon and an anesthesiologist are included in Hannibal's Gary Stu skills. Watching Starling wobble on high heels on morphine was painful to look at, and cemented my opinion that the Hannibal/Starling romance is disgusting.

Sto'bought Silence Of The Lambs was creepy almost in a classic 1980s fashion like its predecessor Manhunter filmed in the 80s. Hannibal, on the other hand, has an updated feel most likely because of the advancement of film technology from 1991 to 2001. Simply put, films just got better during that decade. Quite a few critics like to contrast Silence with Hannibal, but there is no reason to do this. They are two different story lines shot completely differently from one another. What makes this film stand out over the other are the gruesome gory scenes filmed slowly, deliberately designed to test the squeamishness of the viewer. Silence is an amusement park haunted house where no one ever gets hurt, Hannibal is that same haunted house in which a murdering psychopath lives undetected. I don't recommend this film to anyone who is sensitive to torture scenes or sudden violent death scenes, no matter his or her age. And children should not see this film until they are old enough to fully grasp that there is evil in this world which is beyond what most of us ever experience--at least physically. Psychically is another matter altogether. At the end of the film Hannibal makes the statement that St. Paul hated women. This is patently untrue, but we must consider the source of the statement--a man with a seared conscience who enjoys his kills with as much relish as anyone who immerses himself in his favorite hobby.The blatant child abuse at the end of this film could have been avoided since it added nothing to the story whatsoever. But once again, we must consider the source of the abuse--and steel ourselves against the human nature inside all of us which could, and very easily, create psychopathic destruction given the perfect conditions. More and more the world in which we live becomes that cesspool of perfect bacterial conditions.

Artur Machado Sequel to the acclaimed "Silence of the Lambs", the problem with this movie is that it as such an awful script that nothing else can save it; which is a shame given the big names involved.Ridley Scott is one of the best directors ever, and although he manages some interesting sequences, he is not a miracle worker given the awful script that he has to work with; besides, the pace is slow and for 2 hours, in this regard, less would be more given the awful script that he has to work with.Anthony Hopkins is the only reason to watch this movie, still managing to deliver charisma to his character; the problem are the scenes where he kills: has always to say some 'clever' line before the kill (which is utterly stupid and unrealistic) and some attitudes are inconsistent with his personality and this is because of... you guessed it, the awful script.Julianne Moore does what she can with the awful script and dialogue given to her, but simply can't make forget Jodie Foster.Gary Oldman delivers a bizarre performance, and I mean it as a compliment (he is always good at that :D), and Ray Liota is always cool to watch.This movie is more gory, which I don't mind, but those scenes seemed more comic than frightening, with one exception... the ending...Recomendable just to those really interested in the franchise.