|
This is us. This is us in America. We have
to know about the monster, we have to demystify the boogeyman. We can’t
be kept in the dark on some things. And of course, we have to know
Hannibal is not a cold calculating killer, but a troubled child whose
family was killed; so he decided to strike back at those who caused it.
No, it’s actually the premise for this; I’m not confusing it for “Batman
Begins.” And like the prequel to “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” we’re just
supposed to believe Lecter became a cannibal one day. How did he become
brilliant? How did he learn to be so conniving? How did he learn how to
escape from basically any place he’s held in? How did he manage to be so
charming? Well, your guess is just as good as my guess is; because the
montages featured do nothing for me. This “origin” really relinquishes
any mystique Lecter once had. And any answers to the mysteries are
utterly unsatisfying. He’s been behind bars and a prisoner all of his
life, which is why he’s so adaptable in cells, and it makes sense, but
for another character. Lecter’s brilliance is once again undermined
through this explanation.
|
Rather than being a genius who can adapt,
he’s simply a common prisoner who is used to the setting
he’s given in the films, and then halfway into the story, he
becomes an avenger who manages to murder criminals, thus
it’s difficult to think of him as a monster. “Hannibal
Rising” is not a terrible film, it’s just an obvious money
gauge for a studio left with nothing else to do with the
character. Rather than lure Anthony Hopkins for more and
more films, they just rewound and attempted an origin, and
pretty much fail. |
|
 |
While the origin here is interesting, it’s
interesting for another character; I prefer to keep Lecter in the dark,
I want his origin to remain unknown, because he’s much more frightening
in that sense. Alas, I didn’t buy everything I saw, and refused to buy
devices fed to us that were so predictable. There’s even an origin about
Lecter’s mask, that’s both ambiguous and rather absurd. He learned how
to be a samurai with a mask that’s awfully similar to the one he appears
with in “Silence of the Lambs.” Why is this important? It really isn’t,
because that’s not Lecter’s primary mode of clothing, it’s just supposed
to be a coincidence that was too hokey for a film intent on taking
itself seriously.
I found it to be one hell of a hokey plot device, and
“Hannibal Rising” was much too familiar to be taken as unique. It’s
literally a page by page take on “Batman Begins,” except with
cannibalism. Lecter’s family is killed, he’s an aristocrat, he crumbles
psychologically, he’s taken in and learns how to fight and build his
strength via a warrior/guardian, and he becomes the monster he hates.
All the while deciding to embody the habits the monsters that tore his
life down possessed. It’s a shame that Lecter’s origin was turned into
such a routine and typical vehicle, and through out it’s such a
disingenuous piece. Hell, I’d take “Red Dragon” over this, any day. I
thought that
was a prequel, but what do I know? And, for the record, I saw the plot
twist involving Lecter’s little sister from miles away.
It’s more of a typical revenge film than it
is a prequel, and it’s undeserving of someone as horrifying as Hannibal
Lecter. “Hannibal Rising” isn’t a bad film it’s just so routine, boring,
and typical, while cribbing shamelessly from “Batman Begins,” in spite
of its production qualities and strong performances.
|
