Red Dragon - Dueling Dragons, Part 2

This review is followed by a discussion comparing Red Dragon to it’s predecessor, Manhunter. For the complete review of Manhunter, go here



Following the phenomenal success of Silence of the Lambs, the public seemed to have an insatiable appetite for the character of Hannibal Lecter (no pun inte…….okay, pun fully intended). That singular creation of Anthony Hopkins captured the imagination and bloodlust of movie goers everywhere. And who can really blame them? Hopkins gave us this tremendously horrid man who was somehow able to gain the support of the viewer. We were glad when he escaped at the end of SOTL. He was gleeful in his merry chase and even though he was terrifying, on some level, you sort of rooted for the guy. When the public responds so strongly to a character and a movie, sequels are inevitable. This is not in and of itself a bad thing, for sequels can certainly be successful and worthy in their own right. In this case, we were first given Hannibal and then Red Dragon.

Red Dragon, based again on a novel by Thomas Harris, once again gives us Anthony Hopkins in the role of Hannibal Lecter. In this case, the story is a prequel to SOTL. We meet Lecter before he’s been apprehended. The movie opens at the symphony. Lecter is seated right there at the front, being a major supporter of the group, and is intent on the playing of a particular flutist. It seems this man is hitting frequent discordant notes. Lecter does not appreciate this.

Later on, the good doctor holds one of his nearly legendary dinners for the symphony board, at which they all cluck their tongues over the mysterious disappearance of a particular flutist. All are delighted by the exquisite meal they are served, though the good doctor will not reveal his secret recipe. Later on, Lecter is paid a visit by detective Will Graham (Edward Norton), with whom he has been working to profile a serial killer. As a psychiatrist, Lecter has been of great value to Will. Until Will figures out the truth and Lecter does his very best to kill him. Of course he fails, and this is the set up for Red Dragon.

Of course the case is sensationalized to the hilt. Particularly in the Tattler by one Freddy Lounds (Philip Seymour Hoffman), a particularly slimy example of the pond scum tabloid journalist. Will retires with his family and tries hard to heal the physical and psychological wounds inflicted by his encounter with Lecter. And he’s succeeding, until his old boss, Jack Crawford (Harvey Keitel), shows up looking for his help. Will refuses, but Crawford pushes, and Will eventually relents, having been made to feel guilty over letting his personal problems stand in the way of saving lives. His wife Molly (Mary Louise Parker) strenuously objects to his participation, but he promises that it will be brief.

Once on the case, Will is continually pushed by Crawford to get more and more involved, until he’s the primary investigator. This killer is attacking entire families, and Will needs to get into his head before he attacks again. The result? A series of meetings with Lecter to seek out help. Lecter once again plays with Will, tormenting him from his medieval dungeon of a cell (overseen by Anthony Heald as Dr. Chilton, the psychiatrist in charge). Their killer is someone Lecter can understand, and he’ll help, for a price. We meet our killer quite early on in the form of Ralph Fiennes, a man haunted by a terribly abusive past which has turned him into an unfathomable psychopath.

The investigation heats up, with Crawford pushing Will ever closer to his past, with more meetings with Lecter and with a blow by blow recounting of each step in the pursuit of the killer.

Director Brett Ratner borrows liberally from SOTL in every respect here, from the look of the cell to the at once cordial and menacing presence of Lecter. As current thrillers go, this one has all the elements in place, plus a stellar cast. This is a true ensemble, with Lecter, Will and the killer each having significant screen time, as well as fully fleshed out characters. The main mistake that Ratner and screenwriter Ted Tally make is in going for the Hannibal factor too heavily. They rely too much on the Lecter character, when he actually contributes very little and becomes quite boring as the film goes on. The casting is also flawed. Especially in the case of the killer. Ralph Fiennes is not nearly menacing or frightening enough for this type of role. His physical presence is not as overwhelming as it needs to be to give this guy the pure creepy factor that he needs to be more than just another cookie cutter villain.

The performances are all solid, if not extraordinary, with only one exception. Anthony Heald as Dr. Chilton is vain, sadistic and absolutely delicious in his sliminess. Each time his character is on screen is a treat. Mary-Louise Parker is also very good as Molly, and while her character has little screen time, she does make the most of it. Hopkins as Lecter is really nothing new. Norton as Will Graham, and it pains me to say this, because I like Norton very much, is bland and uninteresting, for the most part. He plays his character, but gives Will nothing particularly special. Keitel as Crawford is, well, Keitel. A hard-nosed cop not above taking the chance of destroying Will in pursuit of a killer. Again, adequate but no more. For the most part, a great cast giving fairly middle of the road performances.

The photography by Dante Spinotti is serviceable, as is the score by Danny Elfman. I would say that the music does veer toward the overly typical thriller music a bit too often.

Overall, Red Dragon is not a bad entry into the thriller genre. There are certainly better, but there are many, many more that are far, far worse. Despite the phoned in feel of the film, and its status as the third in a series of cash cows, this movie delivers a goodly number of thrill and chills. The characters are not deep enough to really get a good grasp on, but if you’re looking for a decent chiller, you could do much worse.






***************Spoilers Ahead*****************

Red Dragon vs. Manhunter. Which comes out on top, and why?


I saw Red Dragon immediately after viewing the original movie made from the Thomas Harris novel, the 1986 Manhunter. I want to compare the two, but not within the main body of either review, which is why there is scant mention of Manhunter in the above review. First I wanted to give each film as objective a look as possible, then compare. And the comparisons definitely do not come out in favor of Red Dragon. As I said above, this is a decent enough film, but Manhunter is far better. I’ll focus this comparison on a few major areas.

Manhunter is much more the story of Will Graham. His inner struggle with his past and his talents are front and center, Lecktor (spelled differently for some reason in the two movies) and the killer are present to a far lesser degree. In this case, less screen time equals greater mystery for the bad guys. We get to know Will far better in Manhunter, and the movie benefits from this focus.

The character of Jack Crawford gets an overhaul in Red Dragon. He goes from being a relatively compassionate man painted into a corner by a heinous case in Manhunter to being quite ruthless. As Dennis Farina plays Crawford, the character knows what he was asking of Graham, and honestly regrets having to do it. He repeatedly asks Graham to step back for his own good. It is Graham, and his own inner drive and demons, that push him to pursue the case with such vehemence. As Harvey Keitel plays Crawford in Red Dragon, the man pushes Graham every step of the way. Graham doesn’t do many of the things he does out of any inner need, he does them because he’s coerced into doing them by Crawford. This difference, while fairly subtle, changes the character of Graham, makes him weaker, less intense, less believable as a savant detective.

The screenplay for Red Dragon spells out every single thought and step in narrative form. While some might appreciate this extra exposition, I feel that it dumbs down the screenplay and leaves almost nothing to the imagination. And the ending plays far too much like a sad Fatal Attraction wanna be, just without the tub.

The actors in Red Dragon seem painfully aware that they are reprising roles. This is particularly true of Edward Norton. He never makes the role of Will his own, and you can almost see him struggling to recapture some of the inner turmoil and strength that made the original character (played by William Petersen) so compelling. Keitel turns Crawford from a sensitive friend with a hard job into a relentless needle in the side of Will, all in an effort to have Will seem haunted. In Manhunter Will needs no external impetus to seem haunted, the performance speaks volumes on its own. Even though it’s hard to imagine, at this point, anyone else in the role of Hannibal, for the purposes of this story, the more subtle performance of Brian Cox in Manhunter is much more effective than the more pointed and in your face performance of Anthony Hopkins. Hopkins is in no way bad, his character is simply given too much screen time, and his Hannibal too much attention. The same is true of the killer. In Manhunter, Tom Noonan is enigmatic and physically terrifying. Fiennes just is unable to pull that off. The back story of his abusive childhood takes away yet another layer of mystery, making the character far too weak.

The photography, so successful in creating atmosphere in Manhunter, is subjugated to imitation of SOTL in Red Dragon. The stark white of Lecktor’s cell is far more effective than the dungeon of Lecter. And even though I’m not thrilled with the score for Manhunter there are times when the blaring rock works extremely well. The score for Red Dragon is entirely forgettable.

The one area of comparison in which Red Dragon comes out the clear winner is the inclusion of Anthony Heald’s Dr. Chilton. Manhunter has no moments of comic relief, which is not a bad thing. But the inclusion of the weasely Dr. Chilton adds just a drop of mean spirited silliness that works extremely well. This character would stick out like a sore thumb in Manhunter, but in Red Dragon, it’s wonderful.

Overall, Manhunter is simply a far better movie. Red Dragon isn’t actively offensive, but Manhunter is smarter, more subtle, the acting is better, and it holds more genuine suspense than it’s successor. If you’re going to choose for suspense and overall quality, make it Manhunter. If you want something more current, Red Dragon is all right, but you’ll be cheating yourself out of a far better movie watching experience.

****************End Spoiler******************