Television Hannibal - The "how much milage can we get out of this character" TV Series

[Mockney]

What it says on the tin...

With this guy as usually this guy, but once this guy.

This guy as this guy...and also this guy.

and this guy as this guy and (apparently) this guy.

Aired in yankland last night. Anyone see it? Is it worth me legally acquiring?

 

[Saliph]

You're missing a few photos you amateur.

 

[Cina]

It's NBC so it will either be shit or get cancelled.

 

[kouroux]

Watched it, liked it.Wasn't "wowed" but it doesn't matter at this point, will definitely keep watching

 

[Mockney]

Mikkelsen strikes me as quite good casting. Apart from his literary description as "small and compact" of course. But TV/Movie land is well past caring what the character is supposed to be like. Or indeed what any literary character is supposed to be like.

You're missing a few photos you amateur.

Yeah but no one watched the prequel one.

 

[SteveJ]

I'm sorry but that looks as interesting as semolina. I'm a fanboy of Manhunter, though, so my views aren't unbiased. Also, I can't believe they've given Hannibal a movie-Nazi scar.

 

[Mockney]

That's a picture from Casino Royale Steve.

 

[SteveJ]

I knew that*, and was merely testing you all.





*Did I feck.

 

[Mockney]

What did you think of the books? I enjoyed Hannibal up until the frankly bonkers indulgent ending, which for once in the history of things the movie actually improved on (whilst making everything else a bit shitter, naturally)

 

[Member 39557]

What did you think of the books? I enjoyed Hannibal up until the frankly bonkers indulgent ending, which for once in the history of things the movie actually improved on (whilst making everything else a bit shitter, naturally)

I was thinking of making the same post. From memory, the movie also cut out a couple of superfluous characters which worked well.

 

[SteveJ]

What did you think of the books?

Red Dragon: brilliant. Many interesting aspects, aside from the main story.

The Silence of the Lambs: same.

Hannibal: Harris started to go all Rococo; it's self-indulgent black comedy gone to the extreme.

Rising: so-so, with a predictable theme of clichéd Japanese culture (the delicacy of their art contrasted with the cruelty of their martial culture, minus the philosophy).

He's a superb writer who, I sense, is bored of his most successful creation.

 

[Mockney]

Yeah I think Harris got too attached to his own breakout character's reputation. Though there was never really anything wrong with Hannibal in 'Hannibal' it's just everyone else started acting barmy towards him. Like writers tend to do with pet characters that they've run with too long.

I was thinking of making the same post. From memory, the movie also cut out a couple of superfluous characters which worked well.

Yeah, I think there was quite a bit about a lesbian bodybuilding carer that had no real relevance to anything.

 

[Member 39557]

Yeah I think Harris got too attached to his own break out character.




Yeah, I think there was quite a bit out a lesbian bodybuilding carer that had no real relevance to anything.

Yes, that's the one that immediately springs to mind.

 

[JustAFan]

Watched it, wasn't bad, actually like the casting of Mikkelsen to play Hannibal. Given they are making a TV series we almost really have to expect some diversion from the books and previous movies, and I am fine with that, mostly because I have not read the books.

Will watch a few more episdoes and see if it can get me hooked.

Spoiler

When Hannibal brings Will breakfast even though similar things h ad been done in the movies, it was still creepy.

 

[SteveJ]

I think it's difficult to cast such a multi-faceted killer. Hopkins rather kids the role; Cox was chilling & arguably more authentic but not as nuanced; and people would just be sickened by sheer monsters like the Gabriel Engel character in Antibodies. So, it's difficult, in fairness.

 

[Mockney]

Given they are making a TV series we almost really have to expect some diversion from the books and previous movies, and I am fine with that, mostly because I have not read the books.

Yeah it's going to inevitably spiral well out of cannon, if it hasn't already. What was a short but hostile relationship between the two leads in the book and films, will become a long, life defining bromance in a TV series by necessity. Which is partly why I've never been a fan of America's insistence on really long multi-episode series.

 

[Member 39557]

Yeah it's going to inevitably spiral well out of cannon, if it hasn't already. What was a short but hostile relationship between the two leads in the book and films, will become a long, life defining bromance in a TV series by necessity. Which is partly why I've never been a fan of America's insistence on really long multi-episode series.

Yes, something snappy like Sherlock with 3 or 4 long episodes would be better.

 

[SteveJ]

There's some really interesting stuff in the novels; minor things, yet really well done. Examples that come to mind: the sometimes-bizarre sketches prospective patients draw for the House-Tree-Person Test, and the humane-against-all-odds character Dr Bloom. That kind of thing, plus the insight into forensic tests, is almost as fascinating to me as the main story. It's stuff I'd normally be unaware of, and Harris is brilliant at providing the reader with these interesting 'asides.'

 

[Mockney]

If it's good, they'll incorporate stuff like that into this, which is the benefit of taking more time with a TV adaptation (providing it's a good source, obviously, and not lesbian bodybuilding carer sub plots) Though I've no idea how wedded this is to Harris's creation. I wouldn't hold my breath it's much.

I'm going to watch it now.

Yes, something snappy like Sherlock with 3 or 4 long episodes would be better.

The Wire works, obviously, because it's not episodic, but even things like The Sopranos or The West Wing could quite easily lose a few episodes, because you're actively encouraging filler the longer the thing goes on.

 

[Member 39557]

If it's good, they'll incorporate stuff like that into this, which is the benefit of taking more time with a TV adaptation (providing it's a good source, obviously, and not lesbian bodybuilding carer sub plots) Though I've no idea how wedded this is to Harris's creation. I wouldn't hold my breath it's much.

I'm going to watch it now.



The Wire works, obviously, because it's not episodic, but even things like The Sopranos or The West Wing could quite easily lose a few episodes, because you're actively encouraging filler the longer the thing goes on.

I'm only just watching Sopranos, about 3 eps into season 2. There was one episode about signing a rock band that was completely out of place and pointless which could have quite easily been scrapped.

This is probably the point where you tell me that it's really relevant to a plot point in season 3 or something!

 

[Mockney]

There's some really interesting stuff in the novels; minor things, yet really well done. Examples that come to mind:

... the humane-against-all-odds character Dr Bloom

Who is in this. And you'll be happy to know they've kept the character faithful in the way only American TV shows know how.

Spoiler

In no way at all.

 

[SteveJ]

Right, I'm off to the Feminism thread - these power-hungry women have gone too far!*


*Unless that's Dr Alan Bloom after an op.

 

[Saliph]

Yeah but no one watched the prequel one.

I meant Will Graham and Jack Crawford.

 

[kouroux]

I don't think they could have done a creepier (therefore perfect) actor to play Hannibal.In real life that guy would scare me

 

[Saliph]

Nobody will top Hopkins' performance in Silence anyway. Also it seems Lecter is more effective as a character when he's behind bars (or glass).

 

[Mockney]

I'm missing a Crawford, but I don't think a Graham...This is like Top Trumps.

Right, so I've watched it. I quite liked it. Mads is very good, once you get used to him as the character, and despite the rather silly cliche Hollywoodisation of Alan Bloom as a hot, love interest called Alana, Steve will be pleasantly surprised to know the first episode was surprisingly faithful to Red Dragon. It features the killer Graham is described as capturing in the backstory of the book (The Minnesota Shrike) and with quite a few nice nods to a lot of things directly mentioned in it..

What happens from here is what will be interesting, as we've got a whole series that'll be based around stuff they're gonna make up themselves, presumably leading up the capture of Lecter, which is going to be a hard one to work beyond, or indeed work towards for a series that presumably wants to go beyond one season.

The teaser below contains an amazing amont of things that look both really good, and utterly ludicrous...

Spoiler

Like a hammy Eddie Izzard doing an Anthony Hopkins impression on an homaged set, and the amalgamation of Bloom as a Clarice Starling love interest proxy heronie.

This is very spoilery.


I think I probably will keep watching.

 

[SteveJ]

Hannibal appears to have been designed by Kraftwerk.

 

[Mockney]

The portrayal of Graham is much closer to Manhunter than Red Dragon too. Which is good, cos I didn't really like Norton in Red Dragon.

Lawrence Fishburne is Lawrence Fishburne playing Lawrence Fishburne.

 

[JmRssll555]

Where can we watch this online? Or will it come to the UK at some point?

 

[SteveJ]

The portrayal of Graham is much closer to Manhunter than Red Dragon too. Which is good, cos I didn't really like Norton in Red Dragon.

I usually like Norton...but not in Red Dragon.

Lawrence Fishburne is Lawrence Fishburne playing Lawrence Fishburne.

Morpheus revisited (again). Whatever happened to the happy-go-lucky laughing psychopath from King of New York?

 

[kouroux]

I would never have chosen Fishburne for this role.They couldn't find anybody else

 

[Moonwalker]

I remember listening to the Red Dragon commentary and Ratner mentions that he quarreled with Norton over how the character should be played, very often.

I'm sure it's in no small part thanks to him, that Graham ends up looking the way he does. That and it was a pointless remake to begin with.

 

[Mockney]

He's supposed to be a tortured profiler that's haunted by being able to think like killers, and Norton plays him like a perfectly stable accountancy clerk who occasionally gets a bit sulky and has 90s boy band hair.

 

[Mockney]

Also this guy will be playing this guy.

 

[Elliott]

That was a bit pointless.

Spoiler

USE THE LADIES' ROOM!

 

[kouroux]

The way he shouted it was weird

 

[Will Absolute]

He's supposed to be a tortured profiler that's haunted by being able to think like killers, and Norton plays him like a perfectly stable accountancy clerk who occasionally gets a bit sulky and has 90s boy band hair.

I thought Norton was fine. There was enough weirdness in the movie.

 

[Mockney]

It wasn't a bad film, if anything it was a far more faithful adaptaion, but there was too much Hannibal in it, staring a noticeably much older and hammier Hopkins playing a supposedly much younger Lecter. Those kind of things annoy me. Plus Norton was bland and his hair was shit.

Fiennes and Watson were both great though I thought.

 

[Moonwalker]

I thought Fiennes was fatuous as Dolarhyde.

As far as movie adaptations go, both films were reasonably accurate in terms of detail, if not tone.

It's just that one(Red Dragon) was needless, though perhaps not pointless. The point of it was to cash in on the popularity of Hopkins' Lecter, before he was too old to be used in the franchise.

I suppose it all worked out for Dino.

 

[Moonwalker]

That first episode wasn't as terrible as I thought it would be, but it's not hard to imagine how it will spiral into foolishness before too long, with writers and politics taking their turn at bat, as they will.