Silence of the Lambs is an overrated film.

Like Pulp Fiction, Silence of the Lambs was one of the few good films of the nineties. That decade was full of boring arthouse films and mostly stupid blockbusters.

It's not a masterpiece. It's just very quotable, campy and had a delicious performance by Anthony Hopkins. Beyond Hopkins, the acting is not great. The film is on the level of Mommie Dearest in my view.

[quote] I found her Southern accent poorly done and her tight lip distracting.

I found her tight lips distracting, too! I could smell them from my cell!

yeah, no one i know claimed it was a masterpiece.

one thing i do like about it is that, although it fictionalizes and dramatizes the whole serial killer thing, the author did his homework on the subject and used real cases and events as the basis. and there were not a lot of semi-realistic depictions in film/tv as there are now.

Manhunter was even better, in my opinion.

Loved it at the time. Haven’t seen it years - probably worth a revisit.

I think at the time, the thing that impressed me the most was that it seemed like nothing was wasted - or missing. Great story - quite complex! - but well told - no little bells ringing throughout thinking ‘that wouldn’t happen’ or a feeling that there were any unexplained incidents or loose ends left hanging by the resolution.

It’s harder to do than you think. I really enjoyed Ocean’s Eight the other weekend. Stellar cast - and lots of fun. But in terms of a well thought out mystery/thriller/caper film - there were many moments where I thought - that wouldn’t happen or that doesn’t work like that - and it felt like they had sacrificed a lot of little character building scenes for the sake of pacing. It was fun but silly.

Heaps of other films do that too. They leave you wondering about one or more aspects of the plot or whatever - it’s really unstiffying. SOL was very well constructed and resolved.

OP = FALSE PREMISE. And, starts his thread with silly trolling language.

Nobody considers this a masterpiece but most think its very entertaining and done with some slap dash.

It has everything critics and/or audiences love:

- Serial killers as sophisticated anti-heroes.

- Pop psychology.

- Subtle terror (the Buffalo Bill's violence happens mostly off camera, but his more private perversions are laid bare).

- Feminism.

- Underdog overcoming people's skepticism and personal limitations in the most decisive moment of her life.

- And good pop music, thanks to the queer villain.

Compared to the breathlessly overrated Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, SOTL was a masterpiece.

[quote]I found her Southern accent poorly done and her tight lip distracting.

Starling wasn’t a Southerner, she was Appalachian white trash by way of West Virginia.

It’s a great movie. Demme cut his teeth on exploitation, and this is just a very slick (and seemingly classy) take on that genre. Very quotable and watchable still today. Manhunter is the better, creepier movie... but it doesn’t have the ‘Goodbye Horses’ scene.

A really well done thriller with a fantastic performance by Hopkins. Not that complicated.

Frederica Bimmel was the true star of the film.

was she the great big fat person?

Yes Sir she was a big girl.

I imagine many DLers are doing this right now.

The movie is campy, which I love. The actors are all either chewing scenery or giving their best imitations of a wooden board.

The novel, OTOH, is a good read. All of Thomas Harris's books are.

This film is transphobic!!!!!

R9, there a many variations of southern speech. If "Appalachian" was a dialect it would extend up through New York, but it isn't.

The OP gets the hose again.

Manhunter is a MUCH less scary, dry crime show.

LAMBS is the lion.

Manhunter had this scene though

Anyone who thinks Jodie Foster's performance is crap should compare it to Julianne Moore's take on the role in HANNIBAL. Moore is obviously an incredible actress and she gives a great performance, but compared to Foster she's bland and conventional.

Throughout the 90s it was an orthodoxy among snobby film buffs to dismiss SILENCE OF THE LAMBS as a poor (and worse, popular) film compared to MANHUNTER, but the Michael Mann film is so deeply rooted in the style of the time it was made it has, like all Mann films, dated badly. It's a good film, but not that great. SILENCE OF THE LAMBS remains as powerful as ever and it exists in its own gothic, campy, terrifying world. One thing that shows how gripping and well plotted the film is, I think, is that Lector is such an overwhelming presence throughout the film and yet when he escapes you would expect the audience's attention to be on him and unable to concentrate on the Buffalo Bill storyline, but as soon as it cuts away from Lecter's escape and you get about 20-30 minutes of the final act of the Bill story, you completely forget about Lecter and are totally gripped by Clarice and Bill.

Great music, great plotting, incredible acting, unique tone, beautiful cinematography by Tak Fujimoto, compelling and brave use of the first person POV technique, terrifying, campy, serious and comic, unique, etc.

Jame Gumb lives!

So is, The Talented Mr. Ripley.

So is, Moulin Rouge.

So is Call Me By Your Name.

Etc., etc.

Jody Foster has always been a shitty actress, she's way too self aware.

[quote] Jody Foster has always been a shitty actress, she's way too self aware.

She really is. Has anyone here sat through "Nell?"

Jodie and other actresses seem to take on that "intelligent" speaking manner when playing scientists and FBI agents. Two others who come to mind are Gillian Anderson (in X-files") and Holly Hunter (in "Copycat"). Sigourney Weaver seems to speak like that normally, but tones it down for less intelligent roles (like in "Ghostbusters" and "Galaxy Quest"). Jodie really went over-the-top with it in "Elysium." After seeing that it made me wonder how she EVER got any Oscar nominations.

[quote]the author did his homework on the subject

Unfortunately, he did not do his homework on sewing. The film doesn't doesn't know the difference between a dart and a gusset. Also, leather shrinks as it is tanned. One cannot cut an exact shape out of a raw skin and expect it to be the same size when it becomes leather. Also, I cannot think of a single instance where someone of his size would need to insert a football shaped gusset. It doesn't make any sense. (OK, maybe under the arm if he needed extra movement, but it would be about the size of a lemon.)

Also, no one who was that into skins would leave behind perfectly good raw material. Surely he could have done covered buttons with the rest of the skin? Just taking what is needed is not how people who create with a needle and thread think.

is that what the Author did, or the production team?

maybe he was making himself a false pregnancy belly. i believe he was doing what is called a "godet". notsure.

*shrugs

R28, yes, it was in the book as well. A godet is actually triangular in shape and would have made more sense, but either way, neither is a dart.

You know what you look like to me, with your good bag and your cheap shoes ? You look like a rube. A well scrubbed, hustling rube with a little taste. Good nutrition's given you some length of bone, but you're not more than one generation from poor white trash, are you, OP? And that accent you've tried so desperately to shed: pure West Virginia. What is your father, dear? Is he a coal miner? Does he stink of the lamp? You know how quickly the boys found you... all those tedious sticky fumblings in the back seats of cars... while you could only dream of getting out... getting anywhere... getting all the way to the datalounge.

Not overrated at all. Great film, deserved all its Oscars and acclaim.

I thought holly hunter sounded like a hayseed in copycat

I always got mad when people would say "no, it's not a horror film. It's a psychological thriller." People did the same thing with Misery, Get Out, and Rosemary's Baby. The minute a horror film gets any kind of mainstream success or Oscar buzz, it's called a "psychological thriller." These days, they call it "elevated horror" or some shit. Just say it - it's a fucking horror movie. So pretentious. People have to stop looking down at the genre. It's capable of telling very interesting, complex stories. It's not all no-budget creature features and naked teenagers killed by some masked dude with a machete.

I love this movie. They just don’t make movies like this one anymore.

OP should not just get get the hose but also end up like Lt. Boyle. I’ve states all my boundaries!

I thought Foster was great and Hopkins created the creepiest and most interesting movie villain of all time! The "seamstress" was pretty creepy too, and the final great. Trolls on this thread-

This is the DataLounge.

Everything, EVERYTHING is overrated.

The movie is perfect. And if we hadn't been inundated with a million weekly crime procedurals since 1991, it would still seem fresh. Pick another battle, OP.

the grey, crisp, winter-y mood of this movie basically influenced every other "psychological thriller" that came after, in movies and tv.

Why wasn't Precious a bigger star?

I saw the movie when it first came out and it didn't exactly strike me as the greatest film ever made. And while Jodie Foster was okay I wasn't overly impressed with her performance. What I remember most is how creepy Anthony Hopkins character was - he stole the show.

Loved it .

It's a fantastic movie that's only aged better with the passing of time. Hopkins is incredible in particular.

My favourite Jodie Foster performance will always be Contact, though.

I found it quite underwhelming, but in fairness, I'd had years of people hyping it as terrifying. It really isn't scary at all. And by the time I saw it, it had already been ripped off by countless other thrillers, so it seemed slightly cliched. In that sense, it was a victim of its own success.

It makes me cringe when I try to watch it now.

R27 scares me.

is that song in the posted clip the Psychedelic Furs?

It was the first movie to make a clean break from the 1980s aesthetic, and broke all the rules in terms of genre and morality. It invented the amoral anti-hero trope. It had a flawed protagonist who had no idea what the fuck she was doing the entire time (and was still making rookie mistakes till the bitter end). It had a victim who fought back and turned the tables on the murderer. Oh, and she wasn't a starlet. She was chubby and average looking. It brought back the dark, moody symphonic score. The sexuality had a more modern edge to it (male frontal nudity, gender bending). It mashed the slasher horror genre with cop drama.

In short, it was the movie that every movie since then has begged, borrowed and lifted from. That's why it looks "overrated." It was the first.

Jody was all steel. It would have been interesting to see Michelle's take.

Maybe I am evil, but am I the only one who wanted the Senator’s daughter Catherine to be made into a fatsuit by Buffalo Bill at the end? She was annoying as hell!

This movie really did become a phenomenon almost out of nowhere. I remember seeing the poster before it opened and it really didn't give you a clue what it was about. A month later everyone at work was talking about it. It opened in February and still managed to sweep the Oscars, which hardly ever happens. In the long run, like GoodFellas, it was so influential and imitated that it probably looks less fresh now, but Demme gave it a certain eccentric quality that most of its successors don't have.

R27 Well noted, Ilse Koch.

The poster was unforgettable, very haunting. I'm sure that helped the movie in becoming a phenomenon, too.

Silence of the Lambs was probably the reason behind the serial killer boom. I saw it when it came out and I remember liking it, although since I was an art student in love with Jean-Luc Godard at the time I thought the film was too mainstream and lacked edge. A friend of mine was into Thomas Harris and she said his novels were way trashier than the film which is why I've avoided them. I had actually read Red Dragon, the prequel to Silence of the Lambs, years earlier but had forgotten almost everything about it.

I've seen the film like five times over the years and there's no denying it really IS a masterpiece. Pretty much everything in it works, the screenplay, the score, Demme's directing. Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins are perfect. Someone earlier said Foster was all steel but I disagree. She was believable as a vulnerable yet tough young female agent witnessing the horrors of serial killers. Silence of the Lambs is the only film in the series that I really like. As a Miami Vice fan since I was a kid I did actually love Michael Mann's Manhunter, based on Red Dragon, but that's so totally different from the later films that I see it as something totally separate.

Yeah, I actually think Manhunter has more in common with an ultra-stylish 80s crime thriller like To Live and Die in L.A. (or Miami Vice, obviously) than with the later Lecter/serial killer films.

r47 pretty much said it all. Demme was an auteur who mixed and mashed genres with panache, and made interesting moral and political choices. It's full of memorable turns both large and small, and has a lot of gothic flair. It's one of those movies where just about everyone involved was at the top of their game - great cinematography, sets, costumes, music, all of it - just a beautifully crafted movie.

Meh. It has no point.

Let’s not forget Mr Scott Glenn who added to the layers of atmosphere. I loved that casting choice because he was playing against type and that gave him a mysterious air that fit beautifully.

The best part of Jodie’s peformance was the way she absolutely nailed the subtext of the character as profiled by Hannibal Lecter.

I think it goes without saying that Hopkins & Levine were sublime...

The Silence of the Lambs is one of the best films ever. It holds up beautifully, doesn't look dated at all.

Amazing how SOL changed things, so many other movies/tv shows were influenced by it, and in some cases directly ripped it off.

i think the film holds up well because of its depth, its not a superficial film even though it has a happish ending.

i appreciate jonathan demme made an effort to cast a wide range of actors for his films.

.

I'm in the "it's a masterpiece" camp. It is profoundly scary I think. And expertly done on all levels. The design elements in it are incredible. The headless mannequin with the cigarette holder. That basement. Whoa. It all feels so real somehow. The basement of a terrifying serial killer. The nazi quilt. The newspaper articles. The bathtub!? A true house of horrors. Jodie Foster keeps opening up the next door, revealing something more horrible than the room before it. The demented dance music. The dog barking. Katherine Martin screaming. You think it can't get worse. Then BAM the lights go out!? Thrusting us into darkness! Then the night vision goggles. MY GOD. That entire sequence from when he answers the door and she goes into the house onward is just stunning. When she spots the moth!? My God! Brilliant. Also, the film has a gritty, too real, almost documentary feel to it, even though Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins were at the time 2 of the biggest film stars. I don't think it has aged at all. And it does such a number on the audience. We are horrified by Buffalo Bill. And though Hannibal horrifies us too, as we get to know him, he intrigues and fascinates us more. We actually are almost rooting for him. So in the end, we are not so upset knowing Anthony Heald's impending fate. In fact, we're kinda happy about it. After watching all the mayhem we have watched throughout the film. Pretty amazing. I do--I think it is an incredible piece of filmmaking.

R61, you’re right about just about everything except the fact that Hopkins was a big film star. He wasn’t at all. Silence of the Lambs is what made him famous to most Americans.

It had Chris Isaak in a SWAT uniform, so there's that.

If you're too young or you weren't even around yet, Silence of the Lambs was a game-changer and totally original when it was first released. It's been ripped off so many times and we've been inundated with so many serial killer/forensic movies and tv shows since, but SOL was what started it all. It was pretty much a phenomenon back in '91 and changed the way crime/suspense movies and tv projects are made in kind of the same way that Star Wars forever changed science fiction projects.

Tacky and maudlin

It's funny but I never realized that Silence of the Lambs really gave birth to the surge of crime/suspense movies and tv shows.

At the time, I was disappointed by the film because I read the book beforehand. I couldn't put the book down, it was so suspenseful and taut. I found the film slow-moving and too gothic. But I appreciate it much more now.

I think Jodie is terrific in the movie. I think Michelle would have been great too but this was yet another film she turned down.

R62 You are right. He had starred in THE LION IN WINTER, MAGIC and A CHANGE OF SEASONS, but he wasn't a recognizable name to the degree he became after SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. And I forget it was just right before HOWARD'S END and REMAINS OF THE DAY.

I'm in the masterpiece and game-changer camp. It was also one of the rare films adapted from a book that was actually faithful to the tone, complexity and quality of the book despite simplifying the story/characters for time. Clarice has very different life experiences from book to film (in the book she wasn't orphaned by her father's death, her mother was still alive) but the film remains true to the core of her character. And the film was smart and brave enough to keep Hannibal as brilliant but pure evil. The film didn't make the then-common mistake of trying to humanize him or make him seem misunderstood. Even when he "helps" Clarice and seems to genuinely respect her, we never lose sight of the fact that he would not hesitate to kill her if needed (and then eat her for fun). And despite that, the audience perversely roots for him at the end with his escape. (Who DIDN'T want him to capture and eat Chilton?!) That alone sets SOTL apart.

Unfortunately its legacy was ruined by a terrible sequel and not quite as bad prequel. If only the original dream team of Demme, Foster and Hopkins had the foresight to do SOTL and Hannibal back-to-back. Red Dragon they could have let be I suppose since Manhunter was perfectly serviceable, although it would have been interesting to see Demme tackle that one as well.

Demme, Foster and the Lambs screenwriter (Ted Tally) all turned down Hannibal because they didn't like the book.

I remember reading some dissertation (translated from French) about the differences between different types of literature. I wish I could find a correct attribute, since I'm afraid I'll use the wrong terms. But a great novel is a work of art, and resonates with the reader later, while things like murder mysteries, romance novels, pornography and such only give the reader passing pleasure, and are soon forgotten. So I think movies can fall into the same sorts of categories. 'Silence of the Lambs' is a work of art: it resonates with the viewer. There's a reason that a horror show won a Best Picture Oscar (not that that's a reliable indicator). Its excellence couldn't be denied. It may be a horror show, but it's also operatic. The performances are indelible. There are rare horror shows that you can't forget: 'Alien', 'Psycho' heck, even 'Frankenstein' and the older 'Phantom of the Opera'.

True r70. Nearly 30 years later, SOL is still part of our culture, and is still referenced all the time.

(I don't think a spoiler alert is needed, since the book came out years ago). Hannibal the novel has Lecter kidnapping Clarice and she falls in love with him. They start a new life in Buenos Aires and they both are cannibals, it felt like a huge fuck you from Thomas Harris to those who loved SOTL (novel and film). I can see why the SOTL crew didn't want to do it.

I am really surprised that no one wrote a novel about Jame Gumb.

I read that Bryan Fuller wants to turn SOTL into a series, I'd like to see what he would do with it.

At one time Fuller’s plan, had Hannibal not been cancelled, was to adapt SOTL on the show. There’s an issue with rights, however, that still needs to be sorted out as the rights to Lambs is held by a different studio than the rest of Harris’s works.

Why is Anthony Hopkins' Lecter lauded and Faye Dunaway's Joan Crawford ridiculed?

These are the questions I keep asking.

Thanks for the info, R73.

I thought Foster turned it down because they wouldn't pay her what she wanted?

Jonathan Demme wanted Michelle Pfeiffer and Jodie literally begged him for the role. He asked Pfeiffer about 3 times to play Clarice but she said she was uncomfortable with the subject matter. I think she would have been amazing in the role.

Julianne Moore did a good job in Hannibal. She had an unenviable job.. trying to follow up on an Oscar winning role as a completely different actress.

She would have been good, too.

I have a hard time seeing Michelle Pfeiffer as poor white Appalachian trash.

Michelle can be trashy. See scarface

r81, didn't you see Love Field where she played a JFK loving housewife? She would have NAILED Clarice.

Believe it or not, if the film had been made a decade later, I could see DL fave Hilary Swank actually nailing it.

Anthony Hopkins was great, but It's hard to watch Jodie in anything. I find her extremely pretentious and it shows in her acting style.

I never thought it deserved all those Oscars. Anthony Hopkin's performance was pure ham. And Jodie Foster's hillbilly accent is atrocious.

I read the book, which is interesting, if ludicrous. In the novel the cross eyed bug expert invites Starling to come stay at the huge house he shares with his sister out in Maryland. She accepts and at the novel it is implied that she's in bed with him. Ugh.

DL fave Hilary Swank

Playing a frigid butch white trashy type is certainly not beyond the realm of her (limited) acting capabilities^^^

They should have made Buffalo Bill a trans man (biologically female) and had Jodie Foster play that role, and Michelle as Clarice. It would have been sensational.

I'm in the masterpiece camp. This movie is incredible. It was so well done, packs a lot in but doesn't feel long and there is not one boring scene. So many of the scenes are memorable and iconic. Tons of quotable dialogue. A little campy. The best villian. A great protagonist. Both Hopkins and Foster gave perfect performances. With Foster playing Clarice, it is all in her eyes. She conveys so much about what Clarice is feeling and thinking in her eyes. The ending is just EVERYTHING- from the last sequence in Bill's house to the ending phone call. Perfection all the way through!

I can watch it over and over. It feels fresh still.

It is too bad Jodie didn't come back. Her chemistry alone with Anthony was the most crucial part of the movie. I don't think any actress, not matter how good, would have had that with Anthony. Julianne just was not Clarice and did not have chemistry with Anthony. It was a dud.

[QUOTE]Nobody considers this a masterpiece

I consider it a masterpiece. A movie doesn’t sweep the Academy Awards unless it’s a masterpiece.

Sweep? Ok. But plenty of turds win just Best Picture.

ms foster dam ssho is

she has that same monotone drone dead eyes style in all her flix

bizarre biatch

SOTL rocks baby! Fucking classic and never dull. Even Gen Z loves it.

That Madonna poster in Frederica's bedroom is everyTHANG! Jodie is a huge M fan and I think she went outta character for a sec and eye banged the poster.

He shaid ah kin shmell yer cunt.

R9, why compare SOTL to Manhunter? You should be talking about Red Dragon. That’s why Manhunter didn’t have the “Goodbye Horses” scene.

The dance scene was in the book but not the screenplay. Ted Levine insisted on doing it because he felt it defined the character.

This movie kinda shocked people at the time, too. The theater I was in, full to the brim, gasped and pearl clutched like their lives depended on it. I've never experienced that before except when watching the first 15 minutes of Scream in the same theater.

I decided to play it once I saw this thread bumped (the miracle of Apple TV—just a few button presses and I can stream any movie in my collection). It seems like every line of dialogue is a quotable.

We take this kind of movie for granted now but it was groundbreaking for its time. If I was an adult seeing this in 1991, I would’ve been glued to the chair. And all of the effects still hold up as if it was filmed yesterday.

its great in spite of her leaden acting....

after THE LITTLE GIRL DOWN THE LANE

she sukd

To the detractors..go die in a wheelchair fire.

Hopkins was a little hammy in Hannibal and crazy hammy in Red Dragon, but in SOTL he nailed that character perfectly. I read the book first and had a hard time imagining anyone could make Lecter seem real. Brian Cox was fine in Manhunter, but it was a tiny part and you didn't get a full picture of who Lecter was from it. Hopkins made a fantastical character into flesh and blood (sorry for the gross pun). He perfectly captured the ruthless monster behind the polite genteel mannerisms. And it was perversely exciting to watch him unleash the full on cannibalistic evil during his escape scene.

One difference between book and film I was disappointed in though was Lecter's little puzzle clues. In the book Lecter is very funny, twisted and clever, in the film he uses boring anagrams. In the film when Lecter wants Clarice to find Raspail's head, he tells her to "look deep within yourself" and seek out "Miss Hester Mofet." Clarice finds "Miss The Rest of Me" in the Your Self Storage garage. Lame. In the book Lecter teases her by promising her a valentine and later tells her to look in Raspail's car for it. When she finds the car, she finds a book of valentines next to a mannequin with a dildo and Raspail's head on top. In the film when Lecter reveals the "name" of Buffalo Bill to the FBI, he gives them Louis Friend, which only Clarice deduces is Iron Sulfide (fool's gold). Again, lame (especially since there is no fool's gold since they never find a Louis Friend). In the book he gives the name Billy Rubin. Then, after his escape, the FBI discover he left behind a slip of paper that spells Chilton with C33 H36 N4 O6, which they quickly realize is the formula for bilirubin--the "chief coloring agent in shit" and the same color as Chilton's hair. Now why the fuck they didn't use that absolutely hilarious prank by Lecter in the film is beyond me.

Take this thing back to Baltimore.

OP, you know what you look like to me, with your dumb brain and your cheap snide? You look like a rube. A well scrubbed, hustling rube with a little taste. Good nutrition's given you some length of bone, but you're not more than one generation from poor white trash, are you, dumbass OP? And that ignorance you've tried so desperately to project as insight: pure South Florida. What is your father, dear? Is he a coal miner? Does he stink of the lamp? You know how quickly the DL'ers found you... all those tedious sticky fumblings in the back seats of cars... while you could only dream of getting out... getting anywhere... getting all the way to the FBI.

I laughed out loud at that Billy Rubin gag when I read the novel, I agree they should've put it in the film.

I love the movie, I love R61's post and I love Jodie Foster. She and Anthony Hopkins never spoke during filming. Jodie Foster is a bracing enigmatic and very vulnerable screen presence to me. I think she is a fantastic actress, I've never not enjoyed her work. I am not a lesbian or a woman either. She's flinty and limited and admirable and just a little silly always holding so tightly to her strength and dignity. And it is most often always taken from her, ...dangerously or brutally. She's seriously weird. A wonderful different kind of beauty too.

SOTL is a film I've watched at least 20 times. You think you're maybe not going to enjoy it again and then I am back in that world and atmosphere. It's deeply satisfying from start to the last note. I am mad in love with all of them. That's a great film.

It goes without saying that Hopkin's work was genius, but all glory to Demme and Jodie for revealing the fast beating heart of Clarice at the center of the story.

They didn't waste a goddamn minute in this movie. If flows right along, and there are no boring or superfluous scenes. Great filmmaking.

R108 Agree completely. It's gripping from start to finish.

One of the most underrated aspects about the film.. the score, especially the main title.

r110 agreed. Quartet Records released a limited edition expanded soundtrack a few months ago.

The only time we see Clarice in her private life in SOTL she's at home with a black woman, and i think they both are wearing bathrobes. Was that an hint at Clarice's lesbianism? What do you think? I dont think i've ever read an analysis on this movie dealing wth Clarice's sexuality.

That might be part of the reason why Jodie wanted the role so badly.

Not her house, r112, but the dorms at Quantico, the FBI Academy. The other young woman is her classmate and roommate Ardelia. Never got a lesbian vibe from it.

It gets points for creepy atmosphere, music. Hopkins performance deserves a better film.

But Jodie's accent is awful, and some of the other actors think it's a black comedy- way over the top. And the "tranny as psycho killer" genre doesn't do the LGBTQ community any good.

R114: that must be in the book. I haven't read it, I don't even think her room mate and her name are mentioned in the movie. Thanks for clarify that, tho.

In the novel Hannibal, Clarice and Ardelia share a house together.

[QUOTE]One thing that shows how gripping and well plotted the film is, I think, is that Lector is such an overwhelming presence throughout the film and yet when he escapes you would expect the audience's attention to be on him and unable to concentrate on the Buffalo Bill storyline, but as soon as it cuts away from Lecter's escape and you get about 20-30 minutes of the final act of the Bill story, you completely forget about Lecter and are totally gripped by Clarice and Bill.

I noticed that as I watched it last night. You’d think the film would take a steep dive off a cliff after Hannibal escapes yet it remains just as engrossing. That’s the power of the actors involved and the direction of Demme. It doesn’t skip a beat.

Notice that Lecter only has 15 minutes screen time in SOTL... but of course he steals the whole movie.

Let's have a sing-a-long!

Here's a documentary on the making of the film, that has interviews with Demme, Foster and Hopkins.

R115 Oh please. Clarice explains Bill isn't a true tranny and she says trans aren't known to be violent.

[quote]Why wasn't Precious a bigger star?

She was a real bitch to work with.

The star of Precious used to work at a diner here in town. My parents were waited on by her all the time.

Precious was concerned about being typecast as the incongruously adorable companion animal of a vicious serial killer, and preferred to leave the industry.

We need a 5th and final movie with Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins to conclude the story. Hopkins even wrote a screenplay for a sequel that ends with Clarice killing Hannibal.

R126 That would be phenomenal! YES! We do need closure!

What I found endearing is, as bad as Hannibal was, he would never kill Clarice. He really liked and respected her knowing full well she'd kill him. She is his achilles heel.

i remember the after SOTL Hopkins - a respected and talented actor but not a star - literally exploded: he made like 15 movies in the following 3 years.

I was also thinking about a final movie with Jodie and Hopkins. Make it a trilogy—Red Dragon, Lambs and the final film. We’ll just forget everything else. And since Jonathan Demme is gone, Brett Ratner would have to direct it since Red Dragon was the only decent sequel. But I think he was MeToo’d out of the business, wasn’t he?

No thank you to Brett. Jodie would NEVER with that misogynist tool.

Must have been a weak Oscar season. I’ve seen less ham in a ham sandwich.

R132 Nope and it deserved its win. The movie is a gem! Masterfully crafted, executed and acted with all the elements and then some packed into a movie. This movie had it all. Nothing is wasted and nothing falls flat. Every scene is gripping and the subtext is unnerving. Then it gives you a bit of camp to make it enjoyable and accessible. Fucking masterpiece!

i once read an analysis on SOTL and the writer (a scriptwriter and teacher) explained how this story borrowed a lot of elements of classic fairy tales. It was brilliant. Maybe it's on the web somewhere.

r129 No, not literally.

I do remember there was some doubt that a horror movie would win best picture, and some thought it might go to Bugsy or JFK. But I don't think there's any doubt about which film is better remembered today and which one has left the biggest mark on pop culture.

I liked the movie when it came out but watching it now it's just comes off as campy.

I would have been a lifetime Jonathan Demme fan even if he'd only ever made "Stop Making Sense," my (and everyone's?) favorite concert movie and "Something Wild." And then this was released...

One legit cultural criticism of SOTL I think is that it sparked an awful genre of "evil genius mastermind so brilliant he can read everyone else's thoughts" thriller/horror movies. SOTL (book and movie) did a good job of balancing out Lecter's almost superhuman brilliance with a practical reason he'd be able to decipher so much about the case/killer. Lector actually knows Jame Gumb: he met him and learned a lot about him through Lecter's patient Raspail. His "insight" was part keen analysis by a brilliant psychiatrist, but it was also masking the fact that yes he actually knew the guy and recognized his MO, confirmed by the moth in the throat. (Similar framework in Red Dragon--the killer actually contacts Lecter, enhancing his "analysis.")

What the terrible copycat movies did was ratchet up the superhuman brain of the bad guy and then forget to tether it to a real and practical reason they could manipulate everyone around them. Even Hannibal made that mistake to some extent.

For example, as much as I like the film, Se7en is one of the worst offenders. The level to which John Doe can control what the detectives do/find and in what order borders on mind control. And there's just nothing to explain it beyond "ooh, he's so genius!"

I don’t think you can criticize the original for the sins of the copies

SOL is not a good movie.

I love this film and Jodie Foster. Ever since watching "The Little Girl Who Lives Down The Lane" I've had a crush on Jodie. I suppose it is a gay bloke's version of the mancrush.

[QUOTE]One legit cultural criticism of SOTL I think is that it sparked an awful genre of "evil genius mastermind so brilliant he can read everyone else's thoughts" thriller/horror movies.

A movie so good that it spawned practically a whole new genre of copycats. Just bolsters the case for its greatness.

Time for a 'viewing party.'

Totally overrated movie that bore little resemblance to reality. No way would the FBI have enlisted a trainee to help find a serial killer. And Hannibal Lecter is one of the most campy and cartoonish villains in cinema history. He'a a psychiatrist who functions perfectly as a human being...except he's a serial killer who tortures and eats his victims. Yes, I thought this movie was more cartoonish than anything else.

Masterpiece! R133- exactly

It was a brilliant masterpiece, 99,9% perfect. The only thing I didn’t like was Diane Baker as Senator Martin. Jessica Walter would have been the right one to cast in that part.

R145, there's definitely some creative license around the use of the Behavioral Sciences Unit of the FBI, including using a trainee and that those agents wouldn't be the ones going out and actually capturing suspects. But the book and film explain do why Crawford uses Clarice even though it was grossly inappropriate (and subtly demonstrates why he gets away with it). And the BSU in real life was notoriously underfunded and understaffed, adding to the plausibility of the story. Also, Lecter was a composite of a number of brutal serial killers who for a long time functioned perfectly as a human being, such as Ted Bundy and Dr. Alfredo Travino. Lecter reads as a cartoonish character, but so do profiles of Ed Gein and Albert Fish.

Hopkins's performance in this film is not hammy. There's too much genuine and focused intensity there to be ham. His later performances as Lecter do border on hammy, but not in SOTL. One of the great things about the film is that everyone is aware that they're pitching Hannibal as a grotesque on a par with Dracula or Frankenstein, hence the overly gothic dungeon that he's housed in. Yet the intensity of the performances, the writing and the direction keeps the film from veering into the kind of cartoonishness that some accuse it of.

^ Agreed. He's definitely hammy in Red Dragon but sublime in SOTL. Watch and compare clips from the 2 films and you'll see the difference. You also see it when you compare Hopkin's Red Dragon Lecter against Brian Cox in Manhunter and Mads Mikkelsen in the TV series.

By contrast, in SOTL Hopkins is actually rather subtle. He shows us what Lecter is in his posture, his expressions and his piercing eyes, despite the veneer of refinement that comes from his politeness and soothing voice and of course the big brain. By the time we see the monster Lecter lash out and get his face eating on, there's no surprise because we could sense it was there all the time.

I feel like it's half great half camp masterpiece. I really loved Jody Foster's character. Even today it's refreshing to see a female lead who is in no way portrayed as sexy and is truly competent. The Buffalo Bill stuff is just ridiculous and I have no idea how you could not laugh at those parts.

I'm not sure they could have made Hannibal workable even with Jodie but it would have been a better, more enjoyable movie with her and Anthony. I think they could have held out for a better script, maybe?

Well the final Hannibal film script ended very differently than the book, so presumably there was some room to make improvements on the objections they had to the book in the first place.

Even with the changes though, Hannibal (the film) was still over the top ridiculous. The team that made it just didn't have the combined Demme, Levine and SOTL cast ability to make the more outrageous elements of the story work. You have to wonder what Thomas Harris was really up to with that story--did he come to despise his fans and want to fuck with them?

I love SOTL, it toughened my nipples!

R154 Agree, the material in the right hands could have worked better. It didn't have the right tone for starters. The story was over the top and that is why I think the script could have veered from the book more.

They definitely could have hashed a good film from some elements of the Hannibal book. Clarice has a fall from grace, Lecter is free but pursued by a victim or family of a victim who want revenge, Clarice goes rogue to intervene and both protect/capture Lecter. Keep it lean and focused on this very tight triangle (the way they did in SOTL). Eliminate the silly pig nonsense, the Krendler brain dinner party and the other gimmicky murders. With that, the film ending of Lecter sacrificing his hand to escape so that he doesn't have to kill/hurt Clarice becomes quite poignant.

I can't find one bad thing to say about it.

You bitches made me order the Criterion Blu-Ray.

[QUOTE]They definitely could have hashed a good film from some elements of the Hannibal book.

Not with Julianne Moore as Clarice.

R160 No, we've all established it should be Jodie or no one.

I’d like to think the plucky Erin Moran could have pulled it off in a pinch...

The "masterpiece" trolls like R146 and R147 are loony. They probably think Jame Gumb was sexy as hell.

R163, I'd fuck me.

Pfeiffer should have taken the role. Foster, as always is too assured, too alpha, too butch.

R165, Jodie was perfect. Michelle would have been too vulnerable.

Clarice has to be vulnerable but not show it. Foster is incapable of that.

R167 Yet she did all the way to the O S C A R S.

Why is "overrated"? What is it's "rating" to begin with. it's a decently reviewed film that had a big box office and won some awards. It's not overrated. Maybe a few people believe it's a "masterpiece" but that's far from the consensus. OP is just building it up to tear it down.

It has a 95% on Rotten Tomatoes and won Best Picture. All deserving!

It was one of only three films to win The Big Five academy awards: Best Actor, Actress, Director, Screenplay and Best Picture!

It Happened One Night and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest were the other two.

SOTL grossed $272 million on a $19 million budget. And Foster was superb as Clarice.

[quote]OP is just building it up to tear it down.

And the stans simply will [bold]not[/bold] stand for it! I do not know whether to laugh or roll my eyes at the out-of-control gushing on this thread.

I disagree about the Jodie hate for being too assured or steely in this film. Yes, her dialogue is written that way but her delivery reveals a very scared, nervous young woman saying what she thinks she ought to say. It's a good example of acting in that the dialogue is not always the character's truth. I think she's excellent in this film.

The Clarice Starling in the novel was a very tough cookie, always in control. As she's played by Jodie Foster she seems perpetually nervous and trembling and scared. Antony Hopkins was hammy. Neither of them deserved Oscars. But it was a relatively weak year for movies that year. That's why SOTL won so many Oscars. It didn't have much competition.

R174 Sure, Jan

r174 the performances of Foster and Hopkins are still part of our cultural dialogue today, and the characters of Lecter and Starling are iconic. Their lines from the film are still quoted. I would say that their performances in the film were pretty damn good to still be remembered this way, all these years later.

Contrarians always HATE when something is praised a lot. It pisses them off. Then they spend endless amounts of time finding ways to belittle that thing, to pick it apart, to diminish it. SOTL must have triggered OP since it is currently on premium channels all the time.

Wasn't this the first movie where we saw how FBI agents are trained? Offhand, I can't think of another movie before this that showed the inner workings of the FBI.

What about 1988’s ‘Feds’ with Rebecca Demornay & Mary Gross?

R179, weird you should mention that movie. Stanley Kauffmann used this as an example that DeMornay would have been better in Silence of the Lambs than Foster but the difference was that Foster had an Oscar and DeMornay didn't.

Kauffmann's notice of Foster/DeMornay: Another exception: Jodie Foster as the trainee. I have to enter a dissent about her work in general. She got rave reviews, and an Oscar, for her performance in The Accused, but it seemed to me relatively facile, broad acting, in which a woman was not created as much as collected from off-the-shelf choices--accessible to dozens of modestly talented people. Foster was luckier to get the part than she was subtle or original in playing it.

Here again, in Lambs, the role itself does the acting for her, so to speak. Her spare, peck-mouthed face is not a highly expressive actor's mask. Her acting choices, from moment to moment, always seem to come from an available stock. I kept thinking of what Rebecca de Mornay could have done to freshen the role--thought of de Mornay because in 1988 she played an FBI trainee in a piece of tripe called Feds. (Careers and Oscars and all that are sometimes as much a matter of luck as talent.) De Mornay has the almost scary power of concentration that a good actor must begin with; Foster seems to have not much more than industrious application. She fills in the spaces allotted to her by the script, but she never provides more than the expected.

I always thought it was ridiculous and awful. Jonathan Demme's early stuff was *so* much better than this stinking turd. Yet another best picture Oscar winner that has not worn terribly well.

Gotcha!

The film also explored American class issues. The Buffalo Bill case didn't receive much attention and nobody really cared when it was "white trash" girls who were being killed, but then when somebody "important" (the Senator's daughter) was kidnapped, the case suddenly became the FBI's #1 priority and the media went crazy.

When I hear Tom Petty's 'American Girl' I think of this movie. Also this movie and Ted Bundy made me leery to help somebody because it may be a trap.

r181 Kauffmann wasn't praising DeMornay, just using her to prove a point. He found a snarky way to denigrate Foster's performance and tied himself in knots trying to rationalize it.

This revisionism to denigrate Foster's performance is ridiculous. Her performance was brilliant in 1991 and remains brilliant and iconic today.

I find it interesting that Pauline Kael didn't care for the film too much, which is surprising since she was one of Jonathan Demme's biggest cheerleaders early in his career. It's too bad she retired a little bit before the film was released, I would've loved to read her full assessment of the film.

Buffalo Bill is how I picture Erna.

Buffalo Bill has a much better body, R189.

Freddie was so proud of me when I got this job at the bank. Toaster giveaways and Barry Manilow on the speaker all day. She thought it was such hot shit.

Creepiest basement ever!

The revisionism is priceless. Foster not good as Clarice? WTF are you queens smoking? Whitney crack? This film and its performances remain iconic and deserving of their praise in every way.

Another interesting thing to compare is the different approaches to the material by Demme and then Ridley Scott. Demme came out of the Roger Corman stable and he knew that the basic premise wasn't far from the kind of B-movies Corman made and the types of films SOTL was indebted to, so you you get all the grand guignole elements of the film pitched at just the right level, not overly serious or subtle but with enough truth and intensity to transcend Corman fare. On the other hand, Scott is too much of a self-consciously serious and "arty" director to ever pitch his films as anything other than "beautifully photographed", overlong, high production value pictures, and so the ludicrousness of the premise combined with the po-facedness sinks the film.

[QUOTE]This revisionism to denigrate Foster's performance is ridiculous.

[QUOTE]The revisionism is priceless. Foster not good as Clarice? WTF are you queens smoking? Whitney crack? This film and its performances remain iconic and deserving of their praise in every way.

This is the DL, folks. You can’t take everything so seriously.

Pfeiffer is a great actress, but she was too beautiful to play Clarice, IMHO. I haven't read the book, but i guess Clarice is a plain, healthy small town gal, not a california goddess.

The only bad thing you can say about SILENCE OF THE LAMBS is that the furore over its supposed homophobic/transphobic elements lead Demme to make the awful PHILADELPHIA. And I guess the Oscars and respect he got for those two films lead him to make that even worse Oprah movie.

[QUOTE]The only bad thing you can say about SILENCE OF THE LAMBS is that the furore over its supposed homophobic/transphobic elements lead Demme to make the awful PHILADELPHIA.

Bullshit. Philadelphia was going to happen regardless of any supposed backlash to Lambs.

r198 Ah, sorry. It seems that's a myth which I always took to be true. Here's an interview with Demme from a few years ago:

[quote]So did you do Philadelphia after Silence to create a more positive portrayal of the gay community?

[quote]That came because so many of my loved ones were getting sick, including Juan Botas, and my producing partner’s dear friend had AIDS, and we went to Marc Platt, a studio executive who was tremendously concerned with the AIDS epidemic, and we decided to make a movie that would try very hard to introduce new ideas and new perspectives of people with AIDS into the national consciousness. Ron Nyswaner worked meticulously on the script, and then Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington wanted to be in it before even being offered it. On the strength of their involvement, the studio felt they’d go ahead and finance this risky film with gay characters as the heroes. But it didn’t have anything to do with The Silence of the Lambs situation. I see the linkage, and on a certain level, lucky me to have the opportunity to do a very positive gay film on the heels of being accused of making a film that had very stereotypical gay characters.

It is in fact a masterpiece of popular entertainment. It’s not a timeless art pic but then again those are often more intriguing than entertaining.

Demme had an incredible run of pictures up to and including SOTL. Paul Thomas Anderson always namechecks him as a big influence but his pictures are shit on a stick in comparison and he seems to have learned nothing from him.

I'm going to re-watch this tonight while everyone else here is watching the World Cup (snooze).

"Their lines from the film are still quoted."

By who? I don't hear them quoted anywhere. And the only memorable lines I can remember from that movie is the silly one about the fava beans.

The one about the lotion and the basket is quoted a lot, although that is a different character

The bit about the cheap shoes seems to be a DL fav in the spirit of Maggie white and those ‘dirty pillows’

"Saw it once and was underwhelmed. Oh, well."

But, does that mean it's overrated? If so, you're just saying that something should be considered overrated or underrated based on your lone perception of it.

R205 You believe that poster told the truth? Likely, the movie is a fave of his ex and he is triggered by it now.

....

....

Unpopular opinion here: I actually prefer Manhunter to SOTL.

po-facedness?

😂 R208 is hilarious.

Ancient in internet time, but someone made a blog as Jame Gumb:

Remember this from Cable Guy?

Who could forget the "In Living Color" skits?

[quote]Unpopular opinion here: I actually prefer Manhunter to SOTL.

I did as well right after seeing Silence of the Lambs for the first time. I've since realized Silence of the Lambs is superior in practically every way. SOTL is one of those rare movies I truly enjoy rewatching from time to time, but I do it sparingly and only watch it every 3 to 5 years. I've seen Manhunter I guess three times and I don't really want to return there. Jonathan Demme managed to create a very special atmosphere in Silence of the Lambs. It's inviting and somehow comforting. The most terrible things are happening and yet there's something warm about the whole experience. Manhunter is fairly clinical in Mann's Miami Vice way. But still, the tiger scene in Manhunter is awesome.

I guess I found Anthony Hopkins' performance too campy. In fact, SOTL was, in many ways, a very campy movie, while Manhunter had a very cold, stylized 80s feel which I happen to enjoy, as well as Michael Mann's direction.

R216, I was a huge Miami Vice fan as well and I definitely like Mann's 80s Miami style. That's why after seeing SOTL for the first time I felt like Mann was edgier and more artistic. It took a little while to realize that as a movie and as an experience Silence of the Lambs just moves me in ways Manhunter doesn't even get close to. SOTL does have a sort of middle of the road feel to it but it suits it well since the subject matter is so grim.

OP is an overrated DLer

So what if Jodi Foster’s performance was limited, she was still good. Ted Levine was brilliant and truly horrifying in this movie I can’t believe more aren’t commenting on him.

I thought Brian Cox was a much more sinister, believable Lecter than Anthony Hopkins.

How many drinks did it take tonight before you reached that conclusion, R220?

R221 I thought it was crack hits, no?

In the book Catherine Martin is described as a size 12. The other victims were a few sizes larger. Clarice thinks Buffalo Bill must have been stalking these women because you rarely see people that big. Were fat people really that unusual in the 80s?

r215 I could have written your post word for word. MANHUNTER is definitely a wonderful and unique film and I really enjoy watching it, but I've come to the conclusion over the years that SOTL is superior in every way and, like you, I re-watch it every so often (but like you not too often, so as not to ruin the effect it has on me). It's a masterpiece, definitely. And what impresses me about it is that everyone goes out on a limb, artistically. The heightened tone and total commitment of the film's style and the performances is extremely brave because it could so easily have backfired, yet it works. It's a very brave film, in that sense.

I love Anthony Hopkins in SOTL, but in this scene from Manhunter Brian Cox is so much better than Hopkins in Red Dragon.

Same scene from Red Dragon.

Brian Cox scared the bejesus out of me. When William Petersen's character flees down the spiral staircase, I sympathize. And SOTL is overall the better movie.

And I even prefer Dennis Farina's portrayal to Scott Glenn's. It's much closer to the book and makes him a more interesting character. He was a PITA who inspired complete loyalty because he was so good and so dedicated.

Is RED DRAGON worth watching, then? It's the only Lecter film I haven't seen. Mainly because Edward Norton is a cunt and Brett Ratner is a useless director.

Red Dragon was great reading.

I still think My Own Private Idaho should have won that year.

[QUOTE]Is RED DRAGON worth watching, then?

Of course it is. You should be ashamed that you haven’t seen it yet.

I think Red Dragon is the worst out of all the Hannibal movies.

No way is Red Dragon worse than Hannibal. I put it right there with Manhunter. And are you including Hannibal Rising? You can’t possibly think Red Dragon was worse than that.

Red Dragon is worth watching and was a lot better than Hannibal.

Red Dragon is just as good as Manhunter, IMO.

until this thread i totally forgot SOTL had produced sequels. That's how memorable those movies are.

"Is RED DRAGON worth watching, then?"

No. Both Edward Norton and Ralph Fiennes were miscast as Will Graham and Frances Dolarhyde. Especially Fiennes; Ralph Fiennes as the huge, facially disfigured Francis Dolarhyde? He was SO wrong for the part. The only good thing about that movie was Philip Seymour Hoffman as the sleazy tabloid writer Freddy Lounds. He was, as always, excellent.

I’ve never heard anyone complain about Fiennes as Dolarhyde.

Fiennes was a better Dolarhyde than Richard Armitage.

"I’ve never heard anyone complain about Fiennes as Dolarhyde."

That's because "Red Dragon" is such a forgettable movie. I don't suppose you've read the book. Dolarhyde was a huge (he fanatically worked out until he he was so muscular he had a "linebacker's body"), unprepossessing psycho with a speech impediment due to a cleft lip and palate. Pretty faced Fiennes as a character like that? And from what I remember his body wasn't particularly remarkable, either. Tom Noonan looked much more like the way Dolarhyde was supposed to have looked. And gave a better performance, too. He was much more believable than Fiennes.

Noonan is always menacing, but I don’t recall him looking like a linebacker

To Ralph Fiennes' credit he showed cock in the film. Brett Ratner later joked it was so big they had to digitally remove 3 inches of it in post.

"Fiennes, 48, recently told a US newspaper that stripping on screen was easy, adding it was “no big deal”. But when asked about 41-year-old Brett’s claims, he said: “That’s absolutely true. Has he really told you that?”"

Ralph Fiennes is a brit and cut, that was kinda surprising.

The woman who sang 'Goodbye Horses' has been found.

I agree

Peterson was by far the best Will Graham and Manhunter had it's merits but the ending, oh my God the ending.

Will doesn't go out a hero in Red Dragon, He ends up a fool. Bamboolzed by Dolarhde and saved by Molly.

Interesting side note, in all three of the books the villain is taken out by a woman. Molly, Clarice, Margot.

Mads Mikkelsen > Brian Cox > Anthony Hopkins

[quote]I thought Brian Cox was a much more sinister, believable Lecter than Anthony Hopkins.

You’re not fooling anyone, Miss r220 — you just prefer his last name.

I met Noonan at a party in the late 90s — he’s very tall, not skinny exactly, but certainly not linebacker either.

"You've seen these films...." is an insurpassable monologue peerlessly played & shot, and elevates MANHUNTER above both SOTL & RED DRAGON.

Here are all three Hannibal actors doing the same scene. Cox did it best imo.

R251 I prefer both Mikkelsen and Cox too Hopkins

Hopkins and Foster are both way overrated

People who say they prefer MANHUNTER are just snobs desperate to show how immune they are to popular taste. The monologue scenes in that film are fucking hilarious and so cheesy it's untrue. And all of Michael Mann's films are unfortunately rooted in the fashions of their day, meaning they age fast. It's a great film, but SOTL is the masterpiece. I haven't seen the recent idiot box version of Lecter...

I loved the book, Red Dragon.

I just never cared about the film Silence of The Lambs but I know many people did.

That year I thought My Own Private Idaho should have been nominated.