Remember the Fox SNL knock-off MadTV? Remember the recurring skit "Lowered Expectations?" Maybe I should have watched a bunch of those before watching Manhunter. I only actually remembered the soft voiced intro and outro to the skits and not that they were about losers dating. I watched a few a minute ago to link onto this post but they were terrible so I won't link them as a courtesy to you all.
I'm skipping the plot summary- if you're reading you watched it.
Let's just bullet some complaints that all admittedly arrive directly from my expectations of the film based on my experience with the characters.
Hannibal Lecter, or Lecktor as its spelled in Manhunter is about my all-time favorite character and Manhunter gave him what seemed like 7 minutes or less of screen time.
Brian Cox comes in a distant 3rd for me in Hannibal performances although I'm not sure it was his fault. I thought his greased back hair looked like a slack-jawed southerner instead of a regal gentleman like Hopkins.
Dennis Ferina is great as a tough recovering alcoholic NYC cop, unfortunately he doesn't work as Agent in Charge of the Behavioral Science Division of the FBI. He's an actor who is always on point reacting but totally unbelievable in a thinking mans role which this should be.
I just don't like William Peterson I don't think he's a very good actor (CSI sucks) and I hated the way he portrayed Will Graham. Fun fact about Peterson- turned down the role of Henry Hill in Goodfellas- thank Christ! When he's introduced to us here he's apparently retired after a mental breakdown following the capture of Lecter and living in a million dollar beach house. His wife (hire Glenn Close- too expensive- hire Glenn Close like- done) must make huge money because I can't imagine former profiler pays that well. He doesn't play the part like someone on the verge of a breakdown- he shows no vulnerability, no fear, no signs that he is torn about re-entering the field other than saying that he doesn't want to go through it again. His interactions with Lecter are confrontational, he's using Hannibal who correctly points out that Will thinks he's smarter than him. Again, my expectations hurt the roles here because the give and take between Will and Hannibal on the NBC series is what makes the show so strong. Will is vulnerable, frail, mentally unstable but undeniably gifted and shares a mutal respect and admiration with Hannibal despite the fact they are adversaries.
Tom Noonan was fantastic. Totally believable, scary and creepy, all the good things. A+ performance as the Tooth Fairy.
I think of the Hannibal series as Psychological Thriller- Manhunter I'd classify as more Intense Thriller which was probably due to some super 80s cocaine. I especially felt that when Will went charging headfirst through the picture window right into a beating from the Tooth Fairy. Made me smile thinking of (NBC series spolier alert) the exact opposite thing occurring when the guy who tried to be an animal charged into a shotgun blast from a waiting Will.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBWSocJMChA
Based on my preconceived notions for everything I'd go C-, but I supposed it was an entertaining movie and had this been my introduction to the series it'd rate higher. I'll settle on C+.
Like Riley, I'm a big fan of the Hannibal Lector property. Silence of the Lambs is one of the handful of times the Oscars got it right. Ridley Scott's Hannibal was the first R-rated movie I saw in theaters, and the first DVD I owned. Red Dragon is not up to those standards and was a pretty bad choice for a pint night, but it stands out as Brett Ratner's best movie by a wide margin. The movie that seems to get overlooked when people talk about Hannibal Lector is Manhunter, probably because it was a commercial failure that only made half its budget back. Manhunter has its moments and it's probably the most auteur-driven of these movies, but it's at the bottom of the Lector-movie list for a reason.
ReplyDeleteReason #1, by a wide margin, is William Peterson. He isn't always bad, and sometimes he's pretty good, but anytime it's just him in a scene, he breaks the movie. He wastes Michael Mann's clever framing by giving this awkward, conversational delivery of his lines, punctuated by an occasional "Didn't you, you son of a bitch!" He has several of these scenes throughout, and each one failed. He cannot act unless he's got someone else to play off of. The diner scene where he's committing to the case, mental health be damned, should be a great scene. It's well-written, well-shot, key to the character, but Peterson is doing something that is making it laughable. I don't know what it is, but he single-handedly drags the movie down.
Some inexplicable choices stick out. When Dolarhyde is putting in his fake teeth, there's a strange break mid-sentence that throws off the tension. Why not say the whole line? The late argument between Graham and Crawford could be directly ripped from any movie or TV show about cops. The movie ends on a freeze frame, like this movie about holding the power of life and death over another person turned into an episode of Full House.
The climactic showdown has a big problem, too. Ratner's version of this story ends with Dolarhyde at Graham's house, holding his family hostage. This happened in the book, too, and Manhunter lays it all out with Lector's relaying of the address. Except it's all cut to give Graham the appearance of a heroic moment, though all he manages to do is get three cops killed. Graham throwing himself through a plate glass window, by himself with no warning to the huge team of cops with him, is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen a cop do in a movie, and that includes Samuel L. Jackson and The Rock jumping off a building in The Other Guys. That Mann allows Graham to kill Dolarhyde, comfort Reba, not get reprimanded, and reunite with his family despite his actions tells me they didn't think about what Graham's actions do to the character, which is to effectively destroy any goodwill he's built to that point. At least we got the great shot of Dolarhyde bursting through the poster.
Which brings me to why these blunders annoy me so much. There is a great movie here, one that could rival Silence and pass Hannibal. The casting of Lector and Dolarhyde is phenomenal. Mads Mikkelson is my favorite Lector, and Cox might equal Hopkins. There's a lot to be said for how average Cox looks. He doesn't have a strange accent or an otherworldly presence. He's just an overweight, middle-aged man who slowly reveals his significant, probing intelligence. He's a predator of young women, not a cheeky avenger of good manners and mediocre cello playing. He's the only version that could work in the real world. The scene of Lector methodically gathering info on Graham is by far my favorite of the film, from the absence of a anny background noise to the way Lector victoriously stands when he gets the address. I might prefer the version of these characters that utilizes human color wheels and 'perfect empathy,' but there's a place for dull, banal evil.
ReplyDeleteTom Noonan as Dolarhyde is perfectly cast. The first full shot of him with the stocking on his head is so strange and arresting. He nails both the intimidating moments and the moments when Reba is breaking him down. He's a guy who's murdered children, but there's a tiny sliver of sympathy for him that peaks through. The possibility that he could give up murdering becomes real, which makes his crushing, perceived betrayal hurt that much more. Joan Allen is also good in one of her early roles, though Emily Watson tops her in Red Dragon.
Sticking with the positives, Mann and his cinematographer put together so many amazing shots, like the shot of Graham in the right third of the screen poring over videotape or the sterile white of Lector's cell before Graham enters. It might reek of the 80's, particularly the synth soundtrack which I'm on record as not being a fan of, but I can overlook it when the movie looks as good as it does. The editing is unnerving, most notably after Lector's note gets decoded and there's an immediate cut to Graham's sleeping wife. The song choices are better than the score, particularly Strong As I Am and Inna-Gadda-Davita.
Michael Mann is one of my favorite directors, and he's laying the groundwork for better movies here, like Last of the Mohicans and Heat. The strong parts just make the parts that are less-than stick out. This is a movie pulled between great and barely tolerable. Anything with Lector or Dolarhyde (exempting the ending) is in the A-range. Peterson thinking about the case and talking to himself is a D. Combined, we're calling it a B-. It also goes without saying that the eventual TV version of this story will unquestionably be the best one.
The alternate universe where Peterson is ruining Goodfellas is one I never want to travel to.
Dropping to a C+. Peterson is pure garbage, and the ending is insane, in a bad way, not in a force-feeding someone-an-ear way.
DeleteYou guys are really into casting.
ReplyDeleteI thought everyone was cast well and did a fine job. The Tooth Fairy and Lector were great. While Riley is not a fan of Will's wife, I thought she was pretty good looking in the movie.
There are two reasons why I really enjoyed this movie. First, it was suspenseful. A few scenes made me nervous/uncomfortable. Second, and more importantly (though silly), is that the characters were actually in a hurry. Seriously, too many movies in which murder is involved seem to crawl along. There was actual hurrying here - loved it!
I loved when Will broke through the glass and that the Tooth Fairy was just off his rocker. But once we found out Tooth Fairy knew where Will lived I thought the director could have really amped it up.
I'll go B. Not sure how people can love Se7en that much more than this one other than the deadly sins part.
PS: BlogSpot is on my nerves.
PPS: I've seen zero episodes of TV Hannibal
TV Hannibal is the best. It's absolutely worth a binge watch.
DeleteI haven't watched Se7en recently enough to take your bait of debating the merits of it vs Manhunter.
DeleteBetter acting overall... better dialogue, story, better editing, better movie.
DeleteSe7en, much more predictable. A more heady movie, but not more suspenseful.
DeleteA Hannibal binge watch sounds like surefire depression, but it is a great show.
DeleteWho cares about predictability if everything that happens is realistic within the world of the movie? I'd rather buy the plot than be surprised by it. Was suspense even the first thing on Se7en's mind, or was it an added bonus? It wasn't funny either.
A "horror" movie should startle the viewer. Se7en doesn't achieve that goal.
DeleteWait, Se7en is a horror movie now? It might have elements of it, but I don't buy it. And agree w/ Kissel on predictability. There are many movies that would completely fall apart if they didn't go as predicted, essentially undercutting the message of the movie. Boyz N The Hood is the recent example we have there - if I would have turned that movie off the second Ricky was going to go to the store, I could have told you exactly what happened b/c Singleton damn near perfectly built that world and its characters. I love a good twist as much as the next person, but knowing the outcome of the movie b/c it was meticulously built to a point does not detract from the overall experience.
DeleteSe7en is NOT a horror movie. It's definitely a heady thriller.
DeleteAs far as predictability, I read an alternate storyboard for the ending. In the alternate version, Morgan Freeman shoots the killer. Pitt says, "What are you doing?" Freeman, "Retiring." Freeman basically saves Pitt's career and life.
Regardless, I never saw it coming that the killer was going to kill Pitt's wife and put her head in a box. I didn't see it coming that he was envious of Pitt. I'm not sure what clues gave you that.
Kissel says it's a horror movie - he's my man.
Delete[SPOILER]
I felt for the last 1/3 of the show that Pitt's wife was a goner. I didn't see head in a box coming until they say it's a delivery driver.
Even if it is Horror, it doesn't have to be scary or frightening... just horrific, which I think we can agree that plenty of elements in the move are. But with that, the idea that somebody can and is doing that kind of thing, and what he actually does to his victims... is generally scary stuff.
DeleteAnother movie I hadn't seen in over a decade.... I didn't have too fond of memories of it, but that could have been because I watched it around the same time I watched other Hannibal movies.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed this movie, but it didn't get me analytically interested. Anybody who has paid some attention to film and television knows that Thomas Harris has created a good story and an iconic character. I haven't read the source material, but each version has given different takes on the tale. It really is difficult to not compare them.
The acting was generally fine for me... even with Peterson's solo scenes. Will is yelling at the killer instead of becoming the killer... so we get "didn't you, you son of a bitch" instead of "this is my design." I thought Cox did a fine job. If we didn't have Hopkins and Mikkelson, we'd probably see him more favorably in the role.... including the slicked back hair, which Hopkins did have. Noonan was excellent, as we all seem to agree on so far. Farina did okay, although I didn't really feel he fit the role.. but I think that's because I've watched Snatch so many times. I thought Joan Allen was pretty good, although a couple times there seemed to be moments you can tell she was pretending to be blind.
The thing that bothered me most.. was the editing. Some of the cuts between shots/scenes were absolutely atrocious. I agree with Jon, the freeze frame was a horrible ending. In fact, the entire.. everybody is happy and things are beautiful and sunsets didn't really do it for me. Maybe it's knowing that Hannibal's story doesn't stop here, even though this part is about Will Graham.
There was definitely some disappointment that more didn't go into Dollarhyde getting Will's address. They got Will's family out of there, but it didn't even seem like Dollarhyde had any intention of going. He was still in St. Louis... not even thinking about Will. It didn't even give us more interactions with Hannibal... what a waste all that was.
Still, The Tooth Fairy/Dollarhyde was a great bad guy and it was a solid story. It might be the worst of the adaptions, but it's still decent enough. It had good suspense and, as Bryan noted, a good sense of urgency. Solid B
I'm trying to think back to scenes and break this down, but I just can't. And I think that's a big problem for this movie as it's an interesting story covered in a blanket of 80's cheesiness.
ReplyDeleteTop Three Most 80's decisions:
1. The synth soundtrack. There is a right way to use synth or electronic music. This isn't one of those right ways. Just because you have a new toy doesn't mean you have to always use it. It actually distracted me and made me roll my eyes a few times. Maybe in the 80's think that it sounds pretty cool, but that's not the tone I'd want for this flick. The tone is best as ominous and tense.
2. William Peterson. He was pretty bad. He's always bad. I've never seen him act well. He is a pure 80's decision. It was like they just said, "Hey. Here's a good-looking guy. He'll be the next big thing because it's the 80's and we determine that stuff ahead of time." He's most often boring and uninteresting. His anger is laughable. His brooding was fine, but mostly that's because -those eyes-. /Smitten Graham is supposed to be a tortured character, but I don't buy it. Peterson's portrayal never convinces me that he's ever really tortured. Rather, he makes all the right "good guy" decisions. That might not be all Peterson's fault, but I'm throwing it in here because in the 80's, there was good and bad and nothing in between. (Source: Rocky IV)
3. Jumping through the window. What. The. Fuck? Why? Graham has been a pretty rational character who thinks through things. That's why Hannibal stuff works. The characters are smart. They think things through. Jumping through a window is about the worst decision ever. This is just a pure 80's excess thing.
Bryan Cox was just fine. He played it confident and coy. Hopkins is more terrifying, but Cox is more subtle. He intimidates you with his looming presence and that slick backed hair. YOU DON'T MESS WITH A MAN IN SLICKED BACK HAIR. He might have been the best things about this movie if it weren't for Noonan.
Noonan brings everything we want out of Peterson. He absolutely nails it as a creeper, but still someone who can live in the real world. Too often movies allow their killers to be super awkward with no emotions, but we're supposed to believe that they can live in the world like a normal person. I suppose it adds to the thrill factor... These killers can be living among us! Like Communists! But really, if they're devoid of emotion, they'd stick out. Not everyone has a dad like Dexter to teach them to mimic and understand human emotion. Noonan gives me enough to know that something is off with him, but he also has some sort of emotion and ability to connect (although we know he obsesses). I did like the scene where he's watching his girlfriend at the door with her friend. In his mind, it's a magical moment of romance. I like that we see it through his eyes for a second. (This leads to my least favorite Noonan moment where he shoots the friend in the yard. It's not a move that is consistent with his character. He does it carelessly in the open. Even if Super Graham doesn't stop him by jumping through the window, he'll be caught via traditional police investigation.)
Whatever. The wife was hot. I don't even remember her lines, which is typical 80's. Pretty weak character, but again, 80's!
Blonde son. Of course. 80's!
Overall, I think this is a solid shot at something good, but it misses the bulls eye for sure. Good story, bad scenes. Interesting characters, some poor acting. The story and the bad guys slightly erase all of Peterson's screen time.
C+
Let’s get this out of the way right now…. (Deep breath)…
ReplyDeleteI have never watched anything Hannibal Lecter related.
Zip. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Beyond parody stuff, never really seen a single thing involving Lecter. So, unlike Bobby who brought it up, I don’t have anything to compare Brian Cox to really! Good times! That said, Lecter was the best part of the movie for me. Cox played the role of a creepy psycho-genius very well, even if the entire thing involving Will’s family wound up being much ado about nothing. Like Kissel mentioned, the scene of him finding Will’s address was very well-done, with Cox playing it like it was just another day in the office or something. I can completely understand why Silence of the Lambs was made after this. Lecter is pretty much the only carryover character, and he’s the best character of this movie.
Not going to discuss Noonan much as I agree with the group. The scene where he is doing “research” while Reba sits beside him is so creepy yet amazing. I don’t know if I agree Francis Dollarhyde could exist in the real world. He’d definitely be the guy left off the Happy Hour E-mail at work if nothing else.
Not going to discuss William Peterson either b/c again, we agree. What a trainwreck. I feel like if we were still in college, yelling “WOULDN’T YOU YOU SONOFABITCH!!!!” would become a running joke throughout the Fiji house.
Not going to discuss Michael Mann b/c, yeah, three for three in agreeing. There were some fantastic shots throughout the movie.
I love a good cat-and-mouse story, so I enjoyed the plot here quite a bit. I found the execution pretty sloppy though. Now, I know we’ve all heard Manhunter compared to last year’s version of The Great Gatsby, but hear me out. Anna dragged me to the theater to see Gatsby. We both enjoyed it, but primarily because it was a good story – neither of us particularly liked any of the acting and the pacing was pretty bad. I came to the conclusion that the movie was not good because its only redeeming quality was a classic American story that all involved with the movie had no part in creating. That’s kind of how I feel about Manhunter. If anyone asked me to recommend it, I’d probably tell them “well, the movie is fine, but I bet the book is great, so just read/listen to that instead.” It’s not the same level of overall trainwreck Gatsby was, but it is definitely trading on its source material moreso than anything it did.
+ Great story
+ Cox and Noonan are fantastic
- Peterson is distractingly bad
- Self-monologue feels like a sloppy storytelling device
- Plot just didn’t feel well executed
Grade: C
Jack Crawford is another carry over from this movie to the rest. I already mentioned though that as the Director of Behavioral Science Division of the FBI you need to be a cerebral, heady character- watch Silence, then Hannibal movie then Hannibal TV. I feel like I watched Red Dragon while I was drunk so I have no memory of it. Ferina is so far behind the other Jack Crawford's in this regard that he was a major distraction for me.
DeleteYeah it's pretty tough to buy Farina in that role. Miscasting definitely.
DeleteThe worst actor race clearly has another entrant. Who's the early front-runner?
ReplyDeleteMiranda July, Tara Reid, William Peterson. Could be forgetting someone but those stick out the most.
My vote's for Tara so far... Even though the movie was intentionally bad, she's just horrible. I noted in my initial review that July was weak, but I still think that her performance was good enough to convey the type of person her character is... and while Peterson wasn't good, I wasn't distracted or turned away by him either. I'd probably throw Gosling into the ring for Only God Forgives, but I'm not sure anybody could have added anything to that role... and i remember some of you being down on Emilie Hirsch in Killer Joe
DeleteI think July has to be specially considered as she wrote and directed that thing. So you can spin it as that was her vision alone and look what we got, or she was over her head. I can't decide which.
DeleteI'd go Peterson though. That was jarring how bad he was. Granted, I might be grading Tara Reid on a curve, or I've seen Van Wilder about 12 times too many.
I'm assuming worst lead & worst supporting are separate awards? If so, Tara might belong in supporting as she isn't really in a large amount of that movie. And I know no one agrees with me, but Ice Cube belongs in the worst supporting discussion.
DeleteIce Cube saves himself in the end.
DeleteJuly is definitely worse than Peterson. Her character was flat and boring when she was supposed to be dynamic and whimsical. She failed. Peterson at least brooded.
Reid was really bad, but it's so hard to judge because of the movie.
Don't forget about Lady Gaga in Machete Kills. Mel Gibson was pretty bad in that as well.
So to quote... I don't know who... you could say Ice Cube "worked his way back up to a zero." I guess I'll accept that.
Delete"You done worked your way back up to zero."
DeleteWilliam The Refridgerator Perry
I like how so much of our discussion eventually gets to either Grantland or the Adam Carolla podcast
DeleteRiley pointed out that Cox didn't get much screen time... but Hopkins only had 16 minutes on screen in Silence of the Lambs.
ReplyDeleteI knew someone would raise that point. Even though he was on screen only 16 minutes his presence was cast throughout. Not Cox' fault and I don't remember the source material enough to know whether this was a direction Mamhunter chose to go in, but Hannibal was a completely peripheral character in this movie and aside from missing out on the scene with Cox on the phone they could've cut him altogether and had the same movie. I just felt it was an opportunity lost here.
DeleteAnother reason cutting Dolarhyde at Graham's house was such a mistake. Giving Lector the last word undercuts the corny ending, makes Dolarhyde smarter, raises the stakes on other characters. It hurts my brain to know Brett Ratner made a better version of this than Michael Mann, and Ratner nailing the ending is the main reason for that.
DeleteRotten Tomatoes on Manhunter is 94% while Red Dragon is 69%. Granted, 189 reviews for Dragon vs. 33 for Manhunter.
DeleteMichael Mann's career when he writes & directs:
ReplyDeleteThief (1981): 96% on Rotten Tomatoes; 78 on Metacritic
The Keep (1983): 31%; 14
Manhunter (1986): 94%; 78
L.A. Takedown (1989): TV movie; no scores
The Last of the Mohicans (1992): 94%; 76
Heat (1995): 86%; 76
The Insider (1999): 96%; 84
Ali (2001): 67%; 65
Miami Vice (2006): 47%; 65
Public Enemies (2009): 68%; 70
First off, how many of you got a migraine seeing Manhunter reviewed better than Heat on the internet? Second, how many of those scores look wildly inflated to anyone else? Mann has another writer/director credit for next year, releasing in JANUARY. I'm going to nominate Mann, Ridley Scott, & Coppola for the "Directors who clearly lost their fastball Mt. Rushmore." Someone please fill out the fourth spot for me.
Woody Allen, right? M. Night Shyamalan!
DeleteAnd maybe we're not giving Manhunter enough credit for the time it was made. I guess psychothrillers perhaps hadn't really been done much by 1986.
Some of those 80's movies are skewed b/c there just aren't enough reviews out there. Everyone taking the time to review Manhunter on the internet falls into one of three catgories...
Delete1) Big Hannibal Lecter fan
2) Big Michael Mann fan
3) Unfortunate friend of Sean Riley
Most of the reviews were published around 2006-2007. I can't imagine that many people loving it unless there are some rose-colored glasses involved.
Oh and great call on M. Night. He's definitely at the top of the mountain. He needs his own edifice. Woody still has some life in him if critics are any indication. I know Kissel hated it, but Midnight in Paris did review well, and Blue Jasmine got Cate Blanchett a runaway Oscar win, so it can't be a total mess.
DeleteI don't think M Night counts. He's a pop star who hit #1 fresh out of the gates that was suddenly anointed the heir to the throne and never hit anything approaching that level ever again. I'll even count Unbreakable but that's 2 hits from the first album and shit sandwich after that forever
DeletePeople liked Signs, so 3 hits. How many other writer/director have three pretty big hits both commercially and critically?
DeleteOhhh. Good call. M Night's track record:
DeleteSixth Sense: 85%
Unbreakable: 68% (grossed $92 million)
Signs: 74% ($227)
The Village: 43% ($114)
Lady in the Water: 24% ($42)
People are stupid. Signs was terrible.
DeleteThe ending of Signs really blew that movie up. Too damn convenient. I thought the rest of it was at least interesting.
DeleteRiley, we aren't talking about your opinion though. Clearly most people would credit M. Night with three "good movies."
DeleteThat's what I was worried about with M. Night. Not enough body of work.
ReplyDelete