Directed by Micheal Mann in 1986, Manhunter is what Red Dragon would be a remake of two decades later. The only difference is that this one had better style, acting and tension. The other one had Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter. But let's not be quick to judge, for who am I to criticize a film like...wait, I am a critic. Well in that case, It's a descent film, some flaws, but also some very good elements.
As for the plot: A killer, known as the Tooth-Fairy, is on a monthly killing spree, murdering a family every full moon. To catch a killer (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) they bring in retired FBI agent Will Graham, whom has a method whereby he assumes the psyche of a killer to get into their heads and predict their moves. All the while, two criminal minds are at work. The other is Dr Lecter, a patron of beautiful deaths as he attempts his own revenge plot against Graham.
I suppose we should address the elephant in the room, Manhunter vs Silence of the Lambs. Silence all the way of course. But there are some impressive differences in this compared to the other. For example the main man...Lecter. Yeah I know he's supposed to be a minor character, but he has become such a cult phenomenon, that despite two films dedicated entirely to his character being total bombs, he's still an intriguing character. Here, he is fast talking, arrogant, smug bastard who can get into your mind with minimum of ease. Just watch the video down below to see for yourself! In fact I kind of like this version slightly more than Hopkins. Yes, i know he won an Oscar, but I still think Mark Hamill is a better Joker than Award winning Heath Ledger. (Fun Fact: Brian Cox and Anthony Hopkins share the same agent, so when Cox was offered Lecter, Hopkins got King Lear. Then, when Hopkins got Lecter, Cox got Lear. Just thought would like to know).
Another impressive feat of this movie is the main actor William Peterson playing Will Graham. This guy is just insane, well almost anyway. Here William is really convincing as a tortured, nervous and tired cop who just wants a normal life with his family. The moments he shares with his family are actually not as cliched as you'd imagine, in fact they actually benefit the characters as a whole. OK, he's not as compelling as Clarice, but you still feel sympathy for his plight as another one of Lecters victims. He is so engrossed in his performance, it actually convinces the audience he might not be well in the head.
AS for the atmosphere and cinematography, both are very well in portraying the contrasting elements of darkness/insanity and being safe and hopeful. The POV shots are especially unnerving as we follow each step of the killer as he navigates the house and Graham as he tries to keep calm. Te same can be said for the score, with a strange synthesizer/orchestral tone. The choice of music provides an excellent contrast for an intense final battle.
But then there are some elements that I didn't like, such as the bland backgrounds, some of the mundane side characters who get very little development and the ending. Without giving too much away, it's kinda too serene and happy-go-lucky for a film focused on murder and dark psychology. When compared to other similar films, I feel as though what would have made it really stand out is a shocking ending, one that leaves the viewer so shocked at such an abrupt dark ending. Like as though
non of what Graham did factor in at all at the end of it.
Also I felt as though the CSI work was a bit too rushed and most of it went way over my head. For a Sherlock fan and an avid reader of Conan Doyle's novels, that's saying something! While I got the motivation and the plans being put into action, I find some of the techno-science babble a bit overwhelming. That being said it's still an interesting case and a good mystery.
So overall...I'd say give it a watch. Some parts might be slow and others a bit fast-paced, but if you enjoyed Silence of the Lambs, then you'll certainly get a ride out of this.
«««««
No comments:
Post a Comment