Thomas Harris must have been impressed with seeing his characters brought to life in such a flawless way. Let us go down the list of the immediate people who made this story realistic.
EDWARD NORTON as WILL GRAHAM: There was very little wrong here. Norton's performance nearly tops the excellent job he did in Fight Club only 3 years ago. It feels like you are just a fly on the wall during all his scenes because he is able to become the character through body movement and pace, unlike most modern actors who just deliver lines. (yes, Mr. Russel Crowe...I'm talking about you...) ... the only thing that wasn't great about his performance were horrid out-of-character lines that popped up a few times that were even more wretched in the novel...so he actually bettered the character in some ways.
ANTHONY HOPKINS as HANNIBAL "THE CANNIBAL" LECTER: Here, Hopkins proves that, although he is already a great actor, practice makes perfect. His third round as Hannibal Lecter is alot better, smoother and charming than any other role I've seen him in to date. Not much else to say here
RALPH FIENNES as FRANCIS DOLLARHYDE: This was actually the reason I read the book and went to see the first showing of the film I could get to. Being an "avid fan" of the British actor and his filmography, I probably developed a bias right off the bat, but that doesn't change the fact that he was INCREADIBLE in a role that didn't even seem too right for him in the book. He was much better here than in any movie he has ever been in (including, my favorite movie up until OCT 4 2002, Strange Days) and then goes even further than that... I was in awe (as i should be) at his screen presence and emotion in Red Dragon. Ralph, although you can't see me writing this review, "take my word that I'm smiling". (as said in, by far, the most touching scene in movie history)
BRETT RATNER the DIRECTOR: This is someone who obviously knew what he was getting into. Seeing as how Hannibal was a total failure for the sad person who directed that (i think it was Ridley Scott), Ratner made sure that this movie was intense and stylish. Although, and this was the only problem I saw that I can place on the WHOLE film...and I don't really see it as too much of a bad thing, it played like a stage-play as opposed to a movie, Brett decided to capture that essence and put you on the stage as opposed to viewing it objectively. His direction plays like you'd imagine while reading the book.
THOMAS HARRIS the AUTHOR of the NOVEL: You can't give any real credit to Ted Tally because Ted wrote what he read and then cut out the unimportant stuff. The only disloyalty (and I preferred this to the book) was Ted moved one scene up closer to the beginning...and alot of the violence and disturbing stuff was removed (obviously to keep from getting an [NC-17]). This story was interesting, shocking and suspenseful filled with rich characters that you hate and then end up feeling sorry for in the end and characters that you love and then end up felling some apathy towards in the end. (Molly is a big one...she is such a bad person as the story goes on.) Harris would be in awe at how well his book adapted to the screen as opposed to MANHUNTER...which made you hate Dolarhyde as opposed to feel sorry for him, like Harris intended.
All and all, awesome film...although, like a stageplay, somewhat forgettable.
10 out of 10 since the flaws were too minor to even remember after a first viewing....except for the detached and pathetic way Keitel says "christ" when reading the Tattler (I won't say anymore).
EDWARD NORTON as WILL GRAHAM: There was very little wrong here. Norton's performance nearly tops the excellent job he did in Fight Club only 3 years ago. It feels like you are just a fly on the wall during all his scenes because he is able to become the character through body movement and pace, unlike most modern actors who just deliver lines. (yes, Mr. Russel Crowe...I'm talking about you...) ... the only thing that wasn't great about his performance were horrid out-of-character lines that popped up a few times that were even more wretched in the novel...so he actually bettered the character in some ways.
ANTHONY HOPKINS as HANNIBAL "THE CANNIBAL" LECTER: Here, Hopkins proves that, although he is already a great actor, practice makes perfect. His third round as Hannibal Lecter is alot better, smoother and charming than any other role I've seen him in to date. Not much else to say here
RALPH FIENNES as FRANCIS DOLLARHYDE: This was actually the reason I read the book and went to see the first showing of the film I could get to. Being an "avid fan" of the British actor and his filmography, I probably developed a bias right off the bat, but that doesn't change the fact that he was INCREADIBLE in a role that didn't even seem too right for him in the book. He was much better here than in any movie he has ever been in (including, my favorite movie up until OCT 4 2002, Strange Days) and then goes even further than that... I was in awe (as i should be) at his screen presence and emotion in Red Dragon. Ralph, although you can't see me writing this review, "take my word that I'm smiling". (as said in, by far, the most touching scene in movie history)
BRETT RATNER the DIRECTOR: This is someone who obviously knew what he was getting into. Seeing as how Hannibal was a total failure for the sad person who directed that (i think it was Ridley Scott), Ratner made sure that this movie was intense and stylish. Although, and this was the only problem I saw that I can place on the WHOLE film...and I don't really see it as too much of a bad thing, it played like a stage-play as opposed to a movie, Brett decided to capture that essence and put you on the stage as opposed to viewing it objectively. His direction plays like you'd imagine while reading the book.
THOMAS HARRIS the AUTHOR of the NOVEL: You can't give any real credit to Ted Tally because Ted wrote what he read and then cut out the unimportant stuff. The only disloyalty (and I preferred this to the book) was Ted moved one scene up closer to the beginning...and alot of the violence and disturbing stuff was removed (obviously to keep from getting an [NC-17]). This story was interesting, shocking and suspenseful filled with rich characters that you hate and then end up feeling sorry for in the end and characters that you love and then end up felling some apathy towards in the end. (Molly is a big one...she is such a bad person as the story goes on.) Harris would be in awe at how well his book adapted to the screen as opposed to MANHUNTER...which made you hate Dolarhyde as opposed to feel sorry for him, like Harris intended.
All and all, awesome film...although, like a stageplay, somewhat forgettable.
10 out of 10 since the flaws were too minor to even remember after a first viewing....except for the detached and pathetic way Keitel says "christ" when reading the Tattler (I won't say anymore).
