- directed by Peter Webber
The origin of The Silence Of The Lambs' cannibalistic sociopath, Dr. Hannibal Lecter.
If you haven't seen The Silence Of The Lambs, where have you been? It's one of the greatest films of all time. It's the film I credit sparking my serious interest in film. Before that film I can't remember film being anything more than passing entertainment, nothing truly long-lasting, fulfilling or enriching. It totally changed my perception of the medium. Though, I was ripe for the change. If it wasn't that film, it would've been another; Right time, right place... it just happened to be my first.
So The Silence Of The Lambs holds a special place in my heart. There's so much I love about that film, too much to go into now. Like most of the world I fell in love with the film's villain, Dr. Hannibal Lecter. My interest in behavioral science, pathology and sociopathy certainly fueled that fire. There are few fictional characters I feel are as compelling as the good doctor.
Anyway, I've been watching The Silence Of The Lambs recently. I've just been in the mood for that type of thing, for that character. I'd seen the entire series, ...Lambs along with Hannibal and Red Dragon, but I never got around to Hannibal Rising. Unfortunately I didn't catch it in the theatre. Maybe it's more appropriate to say that it's unfortunate that I didn't make the effort to see it in a theatre. Based on the trailers I had the impression it wouldn't stand firm amongst the rest of the films, and in some ways I guess I was right. I'd heard the criticism beforehand, that the film failed the character by humanizing him, that the story stripped away that air of mystery and the supernatural that surrounded Lecter. There was the idea that by explaining the character you were neutering him, making him less threatening and less terrifying. Though, I think any attempt at an origin tale would've been met with the same harsh criticism. I actually found the criticism quite funny, even before I saw the film, kind of a sign of the times... that making a human of this monster would be less horrifying? How 'bout that?
There was this one thread floating about, that this film could've totally been stripped of the Lecter mythos and stood on its own as a pretty standard suspense/horror film. I'm very much in line with this thinking. The film was mediocre at best and in the rare moments it was able to transcend that feeling, it was due to allusions to the existing series. It's a funny thing, the film managed to do nothing... it neither tarnished nor polished my view of the character or the series. I think it had a lot to do with wresting the role from Anthony Hopkins hands, I really never felt I was watching Lecter on-screen. The film itself also exists in another time and in another place that seem absolutely divorced from the world that my Lecter lives in. I'm able to reconcile my disappointments. Then again, I wasn't really disappointed. It's so easy for me to have this film exist in its own space that I don't feel it failed to deliver. It almost feels like it doesn't have to exist?
Anyway, I'm just rambling. I was in the mood and dying for closure so the film managed to deliver in that way. I just needed to watch it to watch it, I needed nothing more. As films go, it wasn't the worst. I enjoyed myself, but if I wasn't craving it... well it's hard to say if I would've enjoyed it in that instance. Like I said, it was pretty mediocre... but that doesn't make it bad. *shrug*
6/10 A must for any Hannibal Lecter aficionado or anyone with a penchant for the macabre and violent. ;)
DS333, meh.
No comments:
Post a Comment