"L'ex agente dell'FBI Will Graham viene richiamato in servizio per catturare lo spietato serial killer noto come ""Lupo Mannaro"". Per fermare il brutale massacro, Graham dovrà prima di tutt... Leggi tutto"L'ex agente dell'FBI Will Graham viene richiamato in servizio per catturare lo spietato serial killer noto come ""Lupo Mannaro"". Per fermare il brutale massacro, Graham dovrà prima di tutto riuscire a scrutare la mente di Lecter.""L'ex agente dell'FBI Will Graham viene richiamato in servizio per catturare lo spietato serial killer noto come ""Lupo Mannaro"". Per fermare il brutale massacro, Graham dovrà prima di tutto riuscire a scrutare la mente di Lecter."
- Premi
- 4 vittorie e 10 candidature totali
Recensioni in evidenza
This movie is basically a reworking of the film Manhunter, except with Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal, so it connects better with the others. This movie sticks closer to the book than Manhunter did, which will please fans, except that it ads way more Hannibal Lecter interview scenes than were in the book, most likely to bank on Anthony Hopkins' name. The movie has the same suspenseful style as Silence of the Lambs, making up for the fact that Hannibal hardly had any suspense at all. The dialogue and overall fast paced style of the movie made it really worth watching, and if this movie had been released a year before Silence rather than a year after Hannibal, they would be great together. The characters are great and engaging. They seem more realistic than they were in Manhunter. I'm glad this movie managed to be far more successful than Manhunter, because I don't think I could deal with two bad Red Dragon adaptations.
The acting is superb. I was kind of annoyed with Anthony Hopkins in Hannibal, because he played the role way too differently than the way he played it in Silence. Now, in this movie, he gets back to basics. Edward Norton is great as Will Graham. The role of the Red Dragon/Francis Dolarhyde was made for Ralph Fiennes. He takes the role and makes it his own. Whenever I think Ralph Fiennes now, I think Red Dragon.
Overall, this is an awesome psychological thriller, and any fan of Silence of the Lambs should definitely see this movie.
7/10
Red Dragon is a prequel to the hugely successful Silence of the Lambs. The story had already been filmed as Manhunter in 1986 directed by Michael Mann. The signs weren't particularly good for Red Dragon. The previous year had seen Ridley Scott tackle Silence Of The Lambs follow up, Hannibal, with tepid results. While at the helm here was the director of such fodder as Rush Hour 1&2, and of course Mann's take on the story is viewed as a grainy and skin itching cult classic. Nice to report then that even tho it's hardly in the same class as "Lambs," it's a willing entertainer that genuinely manages to unease.
Firstly one has to get past the Hannibal Lecter factor to fully enjoy (and dampen expectations) the movie on its own terms. Lecter (Hopkins enjoying himself but going thru the motions) is a secondary character. Important? Yes! But still secondary to Norton's troubled but gifted FBI agent Will Graham and Fiennes bonkers serial killer Francis Dolarhyde (AKA:The Tooth Fairy). Red Dragon is first and foremost a ripping good old detective story, with Ratner and Tally wisely using the bits that made Harris' novel such a page turning success. They have added their own bits of course {the pre-credit sequence involving Lecter & Graham sets things up perfectly}, but ultimately it's a loyal enough telling of a gripping and goose flesh inducing story.
The makers have wisely filled the film out with quality performers. Norton underplays Graham nicely, a character unable to stay away from the job that threatens his family, he becomes an easy guy to root for as things start to get troubling. Fiennes too doesn't go over the top, in great physical shape and with piercing blue eyes, he exudes menace without resorting to being a cackling caricature. Hoffman was a shoe in for a weasel reporter since he does it so well, while Keitel, tho not having to stretch himself, offers up a stoic turn as Jack Crawford. But the main performance, and sadly unheralded, comes from Emily Watson as the blind Reba. With Reba acting as both a romantic and redemptive foil to Dolarhyde's split-personality, Watson gets the tough gig, and comes up trumps with an affecting turn featuring the right amounts of spunk, sadness and needy tenderness.
It's a bit too polished to be a nerve shredder, with Ratner unable to give the film an atmospheric feel befitting the darkness at its core. But it does deliver on the promise of not only that opening segment, but also on Harris' fine procedural narrative. 7/10
"Red Dragon" is almost a copy of "The Silence of the Lambs", as both films feature FBI requiring Hannibal Lecter's help to solve serial murder cases. Both have intelligent exchanges of words, and both are thrilling. "Red Dragon", has a stellar cast, and all of them give memorable performances. I particularly like the performance of Ralph Fiennes; he is very convincing as a socially inept person.
Though "Red Dragon" is not as suspenseful and thrilling as "The Silence of the Lambs", it is certainly much better than the meaningless meanderings of "Hannibal".
Prequels are the fashion of the moment aren't they?
This was actually very good, and most enjoyable. Fiennes and Norton added much to the story, and were both absolutely excellent.
Hopkins gave the performance you'd have expected from him in his role, and this was also notable for a fine performance as Fiennes' blind girlfriend of the bird that appeared in the ever-so-nauseating and vomit enducing Angela's Ashes [which gave a whole new meaning to stereotypical grim films].
Don't be put off by Hannibal, definitely see this one.
1) The critics said (and rightly so) that it is not as good as the Silence of the Lambs. However, I find it difficult to compare the films, largely because Will Graham (Norton) is completely different to Clarice Starling (Foster). The different dimension they bring to the investigation is enough, by itself, to distinguish them beyond comparison.
2) This was the third film in the series. The problem with the Hollywood pumping out an absurd number of sequels and prequels (even when the original film was terrible to begin with) is that it alters the public's attitude towards them. People are usually happy to see the "part 2" but beyond that, you're usually down to loyalists. In fact, this situation has been made worse due to the fact that many of the sequels made are shockingly bad (eg, the American Pie sequels, the Highlander sequels). Some are so terrible that they can actually tarnish the memory of the original (eg... Matrix Revolutions). So a third Hannibal film was always going to be an uphill battle.
3) This followed an awful sequel: Hannibal. People who thought Hannibal was terrible (and there's no shortage of them) are likely to turn their nose up at any further sequels or prequels. That's what Hollywood always overlooks - once you pump out one bad sequel (eg, Ocean's Twelve 2004), fewer people will even consider seeing the next sequel, unless it receives almost unanimous critical acclaim.
I did not like Hannibal either and I think that many stars in Hollywood would have turned it down after reading the script. Jodie Foster, with the offer of reprising her academy awarding winning role, and Jon Demme (director of Silence of the lambs) walked away from the Hannibal after disagreements with author (Harris) over the character directions. Hopkins nearly left when Foster and Demme walked, but was persuaded to stay (probably with a nice salary increase!). In any case, key elements were gone and in my view, they ultimately failed to attract a strong supporting cast.
By contrast, I think many actors would have been falling over themselves to land one of the roles in Red Dragon after reading the script. Accordingly, we ended up with Hopkins (reprising his academy award winning role to absolute perfection), Norton (who is the rightful winner of the academy award for American History X in my view, even though the academy went to someone else that year), Harvey Keitel, Ralph Finnes and the brilliant, but under-rated, Phillip Seymore Hoffman. They combine to breath tremendous life into this investigative/thriller. And the opening 5 minutes is magnificent.
However, I have two criticisms that cost it a star. First, it wasn't quite dark enough. Perhaps that masterpiece, the Silence of the Lambs, used up all the visceral attributes that were so pathetically contrived in Hannibal and present, but not powerfully present, in Red Dragon. There certainly was a dark edge, but it just didn't get under my skin the way Silence of the Lambs did (if you'll forgive the pun).
Second, I felt that there were a few off-shoots to the main plot that could have been worked around or seemed to play no real role in the film whatsoever. For example, the tense relationship between Norton and the reporter (Hoffman), Finnes taking the blind girl to listen to the sedated tiger (or lion or whatever it was), Norton teaching his wife to shoot ... and many others. Most of the time, I felt that they should have been left on the cutting room floor as they were of little interest, had little (if any) role in the context of the story and accordingly, unnecessarily bulked out the running time of the film.
Otherwise, terrific viewing. Don't be dissuaded by Hannibal - this sequel achieves where that one so dismally failed.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizSir Anthony Hopkins stated that one of his goals in playing Dr. Hannibal Lecter for a final time was to re-establish that he is an evil serial killer, as Hopkins believed Hannibal had come to be seen too much as a likable anti-hero by audiences.
- Blooper(at around 37 mins) The movie is set in the 1980s, as a prequel to Il silenzio degli innocenti (1991), but VHS tapes of films such as Mrs. Doubtfire - Mammo per sempre (1993) (1993), Ritorno al futuro (1985) (1985), and E.T. - L'extra-terrestre (1982) (1982) are seen in a drawer as part of the Leeds family VHS collection. Dating the film from the 1980 opening and "a few years later" after that prologue, and the reference to Saturday, February 25 as two months ago puts it in April 1984 or 1989, the latter more likely as the end of the movie leads directly into Il silenzio degli innocenti (1991); the 80s tapes may be OK for 1989 but one from 1993 is certainly not.
- Citazioni
Hannibal Lecter: And be grateful. Our scars have the power to remind us that the past was real.
- Curiosità sui creditiThanks to the men and women of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
- Colonne sonoreOriental Blues
Written by Jack Newlon (as Richard Newlon)
Performed by Tony DeSimone
Courtesy of MCA Records
Under license from Universal Music Enterprises
I più visti
- How long is Red Dragon?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Lingue
- Celebre anche come
- Dragón rojo
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 78.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 93.149.898 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 36.540.945 USD
- 6 ott 2002
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 209.196.298 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 2h 4min(124 min)
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 2.39 : 1