Hannibal

2001

Action / Crime / Drama / Thriller

147
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Rotten 39% · 172 reviews
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 62% · 250K ratings
IMDb Rating 6.8/10 10 293221 293.2K

Plot summary

After having successfully eluded the authorities for years, Hannibal peacefully lives in Italy in disguise as an art scholar. Trouble strikes again when he's discovered leaving a deserving few dead in the process. He returns to America to make contact with now disgraced Agent Clarice Starling, who is suffering the wrath of a malicious FBI rival as well as the media.


Uploaded by: OTTO
May 29, 2023 at 07:46 PM

Director

Top cast

Gary Oldman as Mason Verger
Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter
Julianne Moore as Clarice Starling
Ray Liotta as Paul Krendler
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU 2160p.BLU.x265
851.43 MB
1280*720
English 2.0
R
23.976 fps
2 hr 11 min
Seeds 42
1.80 GB
1920*1080
English 2.0
R
23.976 fps
2 hr 11 min
Seeds 87
5.89 GB
3840*2160
English 5.1
R
24 fps
2 hr 11 min
Seeds 41

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by Movie-12 7 / 10

Doesn't come close to the quality of the original, but Anthony Hopkins's performance saves the movie. *** (out of four)

HANNIBAL / (2001) *** (out of four)

By Blake French:

Some movies are born to inspire sequels but "The Silence of The Lambs" is a movie that does not need a sequel. The Academy Award winning thriller earned ubiquitous critical acclaim, therefore a continuation is nearly incapable of living up to its standards. To make things worse for the highly anticipated sequel "Hannibal," the original film's director and main star bailed out, leaving Ridley Scott ("Gladiator") and Julianne Moore ("Magnolia") filling their places in the credits. It is hard to imagine how this movie could possibly succeed. But the exceptionally beautiful filmmaking, strong performances, intriguing story, and moody atmosphere provoke more nail-biting moments than most thrillers these days.

The story of "Hannibal" does not compare with "The Silence of the Lambs." It replaces tension-filled sequences of psychological terror with scenes featuring some of the most grotesque images and realistic gore to ever make its mark on the big screen. This film relies heavily on the shock factor of such extreme graphic violence, although such content is never excessive or relentless. It has perfect timing. The sheer presence of Anthony Hopkins, in another horrific and career defining performance, often creates enough terror for several movies. "Hannibal" knows that and frequently gives the character more freedom than he had in he first film. But I am not so sure that is a good thing; is it more terrifying listening to Hannibal Lecter discuss his disgusting actions or to actually see him perform such disturbing behaviors?

The film takes place ten years after FBI agent Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster then, Julianne Moore now) interviewed convicted mass murdering cannibal Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins) while searching for another disturbed killer. Present day: Clarice is involved with a drug bust shoot-out that leaves many dead. Justice Dept. Official Paul Krendler (Ray Liotta), is about to punish her when she gets a call from a the unrecognizably deformed surviving victim of an attack by Lecter. His name is Mason Verge (Gary Oldman), a wealthy recluse who asks that Starling be placed back on the case of the Cannibal, who has been on the loose for ten years.

The movie investigates a lot more than Clarice's experiences with Hannibal Lecter. The script actually consists of two separate stories, one detailing the revenge scheme of Mason, whom is still angry with Lecter after he caused the removal of his face and partial paralysis. The other takes place in Italy, where an inspector named Rinaldo Pazzi (Giancarlo Giannini) is out to claim a multimillion dollar reward for providing authorities with proper evidence leading to the arrest of a local, who turns out to be none other than Lecter himself. Obviously this man does not know what he is in for, and ends up losing his cuts for the money…literally.

Parallel stories are always interesting, but are easily sidetracked with certain characters and or events. What keeps this movie intriguing is the consistent focus on Lector; everything in the story seems to revolve around him. Then again, "Hannibal" is also quite pointless because it solves nothing. Without giving away the ending, I will say that we are once again left pondering about Lecter. Most any movie that provokes thoughts is worth seeing, but "Hannibal" forgets the first film, takes a stand on its own, and once again sets us up for another unnecessary follow-up.

The most apparent conflict many audiences with have with "Hannibal" is the absence of Jodie Foster. Julianne Moore is most definitely a capable and challenging actress, and plays the role of Starling with exuberance and clarity. But Foster is simply better in the role and we miss her dearly. Anthony Hopkins saves the movie; the actor is so intense and grisly in his subtle and classy manner, he once again qualifies as an award nominee. Thank goodness he returned for the role; without Hopkins, "Hannibal" would be nothing but underdone carnage.

Reviewed by CrazyArty 6 / 10

Fabulous location but plot disappoints

Years after his escape in 'Silence of the Lambs' a wealthy surviving victim continues to hunt for Hannibal Lecter. Stars Anthony Hopkins and Julianne Moore as Clarice Starling.

The plot builds slowly. Hopkins is excellent in this role but Moore seems a poor substitute for Jodie Foster.

The film is very gruesome. The final scene is memorable in it's uber gruesomeness.

The location in Florence, Italy is a great bonus but this fun ultimately disappoints after the great original film.

Reviewed by silviopellerani 3 / 10

A waste of time, read the book should definitely be better

No, I can not approve this film with such a good actor as Anthony Hopkins and the rest of the cast including the good Italian ones: Francesca Neri and Giancarlo Giannini.

Unfortunately the film is light years far away from the first excellent one: The Silence of Lambs. The thrilling effect has been substituted by a disgusting and vomiting brain eater scene and some other pigs "corrida" which brings the whole film to a very low level.

It looks like this serial was mainly a commercial experiment without any real interest in trying to match the level of the previous one.

Rating. 3/10

Read more IMDb reviews

8 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment