Does Manhunter(Red Dragon) really need to be remade?

[bulletproof]

Manhunter is one of those lost finds that turn out to be a great movie.Now we have to look out for the upcoming version with Edward Norton and Anthony Hopkins that just reeks of Hollywood philophy known as,"this one made $,Lets do it again".Instead of waiting a couple of years to make a good story,they do a remake.Do we need this,or should Manhunter have been re-released?

[countchocula]

Well, I'm looking forward to Red Dragon, but that's only because I was disappointed with Manhunter. It was a bland film that just didn't cater to my tastes. In my eyes, it could definitely use a good polishing. For the life of me, I couldn't accept Brian Cox as Dr. Lector.

[Antonio]

No it doesn't, since MANHUNTER is only 15 years old. And great films like that (and PSYCHO) should not be remade. They should have just done another HANNIBAL sequel instead.

[RogueSpear]

Definately not! Manhunter was good already. William Peterson was great as Graham. After seeing the trailer I don't think Edward Norton quite fits the character.

[This message has been edited by RogueSpear (edited 07-16-2002).]

[Shadow Whisper]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by countchocula:
Well, I'm looking forward to Red Dragon, but that's only because I was disappointed with Manhunter. It was a bland film that just didn't cater to my tastes. In my eyes, it could definitely use a good polishing. For the life of me, I couldn't accept Brian Cox as Dr. Lector.</font>

I have to agree, there is only one true Lector and he is only played by Hopkins. I did however enjoy Manhunter anyways. I would be happy with a special edition that had Hopkins inserted into it. But since Red Dragon has alredy been made I will settle for that.

It should be remembered that Manhunter was not done as a Silance of the Lambs film where as Red Dragon has been (or at least should have been).

[SteveSzyk]

Manhunter was decent, alittle too boring for my tastes. Yes I do think it should be remade, mainly to complete Thomas Harris's trilogy with Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal. He is Hannibal. The trrailer also looks quite good (Although Ed Norton doesn'y look all that great) and they seem to be adding much more scenes with Hannibal, which is a great thing.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">It should be remembered that Manhunter was not done as a Silance of the Lambs film where as Red Dragon has been (or at least should have been).</font>

Good point.

[Cyclonus]

Look, Manhunter is a competently-made film, but little more. Plotwise, it was too long and convoulted to be truly successful for me. I just can't accept Brian Cox as Hannibal Lector. This is one case where I think a remake is in order. Not with just Mr. Hopkins, but also Edward Norton and Harvey Keitel? We have a winner on our hands. I just hope Brett Ratner is up to the job.

[This message has been edited by Cyclonus (edited 07-16-2002).]

[bulletproof]

But did anybody find it uncany that Brian Cox did a good job playing Lector.I like Hopkins version better ,but you have to admit that he nailed it.I like that Harvey Keitel is gonna be in it.He's one of my favorite actors.I like Ed Norton,but I cannot see him doing this.

[heretic]

wait wait what if this version is also good then we will have to very good horror films which has to be better than just one right?

[bulletproof]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by heretic:
wait wait what if this version is also good then we will have to very good horror films which has to be better than just one right?</font>

Very good point heretic.But I always thought that Will Ghrahme and sterling should team up to track Lector Down.2 good films are better than none.
But I don't think Norton will top William Petersen's preformance.

[Razorblade Smile]

Manhunter is a decent enough flick, but by no means a classic. I have no problem with them remaking it. As far as I'm concerned there is only ONE Hannibal Lecter movie and that's Silence. Anything else we get is just a slice of pie on the side.

[malaria]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bulletproof:
Very good point heretic.But I always thought that Will Ghrahme and sterling should team up to track Lector Down.2 good films are better than none.
But I don't think Norton will top William Petersen's preformance.</font>

I agree with everything you say bulletproof. I'd say Manhunter's my fave of the three and Brian Cox was much more unnerving to watch than Hopkins. Hopkins performance has aged badly and after countless parodies now looks (to me anyway) like a jokey pantomime act.
I recently saw a 'making of Red Dragon' on telly and I have to say it looks really AWFUL. I've never particularly liked Edward Norton and was unsuprised to find that he's fuckin' terrible in the part and conveys none of the tortured pathos that Petersen perfected for the role. He seems arrogant and chats woodenly to Lecter like he's having a friendly cup of tea with a neighbor. I s'pose it's a matter of taste thing. For my taste "Hannibal" was a huge betrayal of the character's built up so skillfully in Manhunter and SOTL. And I also thought that the third part in the trilogy should have been Petersen's Graham and Foster's Starling teaming up to track Lecter played by a brand new actor, maybe James Woods (according to the book he was supposed to have had plastic surgery). That would've been kick-ass!

[Cushing]

I'm afraid I don't care for manhunter .I find it highly overrated and ,personally , welcome the remake.

[bulletproof]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by malaria:
I agree with everything you say bulletproof. I'd say Manhunter's my fave of the three and Brian Cox was much more unnerving to watch than Hopkins. Hopkins performance has aged badly and after countless parodies now looks (to me anyway) like a jokey pantomime act.
I recently saw a 'making of Red Dragon' on telly and I have to say it looks really AWFUL. I've never particularly liked Edward Norton and was unsuprised to find that he's fuckin' terrible in the part and conveys none of the tortured pathos that Petersen perfected for the role. He seems arrogant and chats woodenly to Lecter like he's having a friendly cup of tea with a neighbor. I s'pose it's a matter of taste thing. For my taste "Hannibal" was a huge betrayal of the character's built up so skillfully in Manhunter and SOTL. And I also thought that the third part in the trilogy should have been Petersen's Graham and Foster's Starling teaming up to track Lecter played by a brand new actor, maybe James Woods (according to the book he was supposed to have had plastic surgery). That would've been kick-ass! </font>

James Woods is an excellent choice.He rants and rages like nobody else .Who else could they have picked for Will Graham?
Here's a few:
Mickey Rourke
Billy Zane
Guy Pearce
Scott Backula
Michael Madsen.

Feel free to disagree with me.I know that the list above isn't the A list but give them a chance,I bet they could pull it off.

[SAI]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Cushing:
I'm afraid I don't care for manhunter .I find it highly overrated and ,personally , welcome the remake.</font>

Well put. I agree wholeheartedly.

[michael_myers_woman]

Anthony Hopskins played a really good Hannibal Lecture.

[bulletproof]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by michael_myers_woman:
Anthony Hopskins played a really good Hannibal Lecture.</font>

Well said!Did anyone know that before hannibal,he was so sick of fans stopping him,and doing Fava Beans impersonations,that he was gonna turn it down?

Must have had something with a HUGE paycheck?

[Lady Summerisle]

Mickey Rourke should have had the role of Graham in the remake, then I would go see it, but execs won't hire a "tarnished" actor like Rourke. I love Rourke as an actor, and find his work intense, as Peterson was.

The only reason they are remaking MANHUNTER is the money, and the act that new audiences can't handle a movie that has atmoshpere, brains, and a competent director. Mann has a deliberate style many cannot handle. THE KEEP was the same way.

I love MANHUNTER, and felt that even thouugh they changed the book, it gave us a better Lector than the hammy Hopkins. Lector is a subtle killer, and Tom Noonan was an imposing Dollarhyde. But kudos to casting Emily Watson, she equals the talent of Joan Allen.

Other than that, RED DRAGON reeks of Hollywood, and I am offended that anyone would want to remake MANHUNTER, flawed enough as it is.
Brian Cox was the trtue Lector, and not the over the top killer he became. "Okey doky." He never had a cathphrase before Hopkins came in, and his performance has aged badly.

[bulletproof]

What the hell are the producers thinking for the casting of ralph Finnes as Dollarhyde.he is not physically imposing at all.Bad Choice.

I think the producers could have had Brian Cox in a role where he gets to meet hanibal.
It would be a nod to Manhunter!

[HalloweenShape31]

I read the book and really all the times that you see Hannibal in the film is how much he's in the book. For this remake he's gonna be in alot more scenes. I personally think it's unnecesary but I'll definitely see it opening day. The true reason why it was made was to cash in on the HANNIBAL money.

[michael_myers_woman]

what is manhunter does it have something to do with hannibal or something?

[bulletproof]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by michael_myers_woman:
what is manhunter does it have something to do with hannibal or something?</font>

The Novel Red Dragon was filmed as Manhunter,which featured the 1st cinema appearance of Lector.William Petersen played Will grahme,Tom Noonan was Dollarhyde,and Brian Cox was Lector.The movie has style to burn.

[Dark_One79]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by HalloweenShape31:
I read the book and really all the times that you see Hannibal in the film is how much he's in the book. For this remake he's gonna be in alot more scenes. I personally think it's unnecesary...</font>

It has been a couple years since I read Red Dragon, but I remember more scenes involving Lecter than were included in the film MANHUNTER. I wouldn't worry about it. From what I understand they are simply now including ALL the Lecter scenes from the novel in the new film. It isn't like they are creating new scenes involving Hopkins.

But I do agree that the only reason this film is getting made is $$$. I don't have a problem with it, but I don't think it was overly necessary either.

[Jason13thh]

I like Manhunter a lot, it is full of atmosphere and u have a good soundtrack.
The tiger - scene is awsome and full of poesy .
Don't remake it please !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[malaria]

I personally don't buy that an intelligent FBI agent would bear deep psychological scars of an encounter with Hopkin's Lecter.

If you gave me a choice between being locked in a cell with Brian Cox's or Anthony Hopkins' Lecter, I'd fancy my luck with the pudgy old beerbellied shortarse codger anyday. I could take him blindfolded, and with one hand tied behind my back, I KNOW I COULD! He's just a weedy little man. Whichever way you look at it Hopkin's just isn't scary anymore.

If I had to share a cell with Brian Cox tho all quick and sly looking and powerfully built like an express train, why, I think I might just scream like a little girl.

:-)

[bulletproof]

I think Brian Cox could take Lector from Hannibal.However The Silence of the lambs Version would hand Cox his ass.In my opinion.

I think William Petersen could drop Edward Norton very easy.

If it was Brian Cox in hannibal,Stering would have been roasted with some fava beans and a nice.....well you know!