malaria
11-18-2002, 06:59 PM
Just saw Red Dragon today after watching the masterpiece Manhunter. And it was everything I expected it to be. Tawdry, dull and stupid.
I have to admit I haven't read the book but have read SOTL (excellent) and Hannibal (disappointing) and was looking forward to the 'excellent' ending that apparently Manhunter left out.
Tho not perfect the ending of Manhunter was much better. The final shot of the dead Dollarhyde lying on the floor arms outstretched with blood pooling under his arms in the pose of the Red Dragon was peversely beautiful and thought provoking.
The end of Red Dragon was curiously boring. I think Mann made a good call cutting out this ending and making his own.
I said it before when I originally heard about the casting decisions and I'll say it again:
-Ralph Fiennes is no bodybuilder and doesn't look imposing like Tom Noonan.
-Ed Norton can't act. He talks like he is made out of wood. He is one of those smug little piss-ant actors like Christian Slater who I really want to punch.
-I'm convinced Anthony Hopkins is mad in real life. All that money and and exponenially decreasing career sense. It's embarassing.
-Philip Hoffman is a great actor and I was looking forward to seeing him portray the sleasy journo scum. Instead we get a half asleep slob who seems to have just rolled out of bed. In fact everyone in this film seems to have been given valium before stepping in front of the camera.
Where Manhunter oozed style and had a tight script and focused direction RD plays like a messy TV movie.
The plot is all over the place and at times seems to be trying so hard not to be Manhunter that it leaves out vital plot points - without which the story makes no sense.
eg. In Manhunter they hatch a plan where they go to the press and work on publishing a bogus story to get the killer mad and using himself as bait Graham attempts to entrap the killer.
RD doesn't spend a single moment explaining this genius plan and it comes off as if they are just doing it to get the killer mad full stop.
Another instance is when Lector and the killer are secretly corresponding. In Manhunter the FBI discuss the possibly disastrous rammifications of publishing Lector's encoded reply before having the chance to crack his code. What if he incites the killer to kill again? etc.
In RD there's no such discussion. They just print the damn thing and then forget about it while one - ONE!!! - person attempts to crack the code. FUCK-ing ridiculous.
And how did Will know about the killer's mother at the end?
I know Ratner said he wanted to be truer to the book but what's this shit with the killer living at the "Dollarhyde Nursing Home". Maybe I'm missing something and I'm sure this is explained in the book but this isn't explained in the film is it. I'm guessing that his mama owned the nursing home and he inherited it. It's a guess. Was it really neccessary putting this in the film?!
Some shmoes on this board kept ranting about Manhunter not explaining the inner workings of Dollarhyde. What that he was a mama's boy. Why so vital about that?
Mann clearly knows how to make a psychological thriller and Ratner should go back to directing cheap action films coz he's a donk.
Couple other points:
Reba is a bit of a slut what?
Also 40s ragtime jazz isn't a patch on 80s syntho-rock.
I have to admit I haven't read the book but have read SOTL (excellent) and Hannibal (disappointing) and was looking forward to the 'excellent' ending that apparently Manhunter left out.
Tho not perfect the ending of Manhunter was much better. The final shot of the dead Dollarhyde lying on the floor arms outstretched with blood pooling under his arms in the pose of the Red Dragon was peversely beautiful and thought provoking.
The end of Red Dragon was curiously boring. I think Mann made a good call cutting out this ending and making his own.
I said it before when I originally heard about the casting decisions and I'll say it again:
-Ralph Fiennes is no bodybuilder and doesn't look imposing like Tom Noonan.
-Ed Norton can't act. He talks like he is made out of wood. He is one of those smug little piss-ant actors like Christian Slater who I really want to punch.
-I'm convinced Anthony Hopkins is mad in real life. All that money and and exponenially decreasing career sense. It's embarassing.
-Philip Hoffman is a great actor and I was looking forward to seeing him portray the sleasy journo scum. Instead we get a half asleep slob who seems to have just rolled out of bed. In fact everyone in this film seems to have been given valium before stepping in front of the camera.
Where Manhunter oozed style and had a tight script and focused direction RD plays like a messy TV movie.
The plot is all over the place and at times seems to be trying so hard not to be Manhunter that it leaves out vital plot points - without which the story makes no sense.
eg. In Manhunter they hatch a plan where they go to the press and work on publishing a bogus story to get the killer mad and using himself as bait Graham attempts to entrap the killer.
RD doesn't spend a single moment explaining this genius plan and it comes off as if they are just doing it to get the killer mad full stop.
Another instance is when Lector and the killer are secretly corresponding. In Manhunter the FBI discuss the possibly disastrous rammifications of publishing Lector's encoded reply before having the chance to crack his code. What if he incites the killer to kill again? etc.
In RD there's no such discussion. They just print the damn thing and then forget about it while one - ONE!!! - person attempts to crack the code. FUCK-ing ridiculous.
And how did Will know about the killer's mother at the end?
I know Ratner said he wanted to be truer to the book but what's this shit with the killer living at the "Dollarhyde Nursing Home". Maybe I'm missing something and I'm sure this is explained in the book but this isn't explained in the film is it. I'm guessing that his mama owned the nursing home and he inherited it. It's a guess. Was it really neccessary putting this in the film?!
Some shmoes on this board kept ranting about Manhunter not explaining the inner workings of Dollarhyde. What that he was a mama's boy. Why so vital about that?
Mann clearly knows how to make a psychological thriller and Ratner should go back to directing cheap action films coz he's a donk.
Couple other points:
Reba is a bit of a slut what?
Also 40s ragtime jazz isn't a patch on 80s syntho-rock.