Skip to main content

This is my design.


Hannibal

An Overview of the First Eight Episodes (SPOILERS)

1.1 Aperitif

An excellent opener, diligently establishing Will Graham’s state of mind. We don’t even see Lecter until 20 minutes in, after Will realises that the killer being hunted is eating his victims.

As strong as Hugh Dancy is throughout the run, Graham hasn’t been served quite so well in subsequent installments; writer/creator Bryan Fuller and director David Slade really get to grips with his fragile headspace here. That said, I’m not sure they didn’t make a meal of setting out his behavioural quirks (he’s studiously avoids eye contact, is “closer to aspergers and autistics” on the spectrum but  “I can empathise with anybody. It’s less to do with a personality disorder than active imagination”. Well that cleared that up, then.

The problem with the killer-of-the-week format is that it encourages the characters to tread water or behave repetitively; the area I’m most not buying with Will later on is that he’s popping in to see Lecter every five minutes. Less is more.

It’s an interesting decision not to have Graham married with a child; maybe Fuller was conscious of how Millennium (Season One) copied Red Dragon’s protagonist so closely and he wanted to avoid a similar set up. So stray dogs and Lecter fill the gap. And making Dr. Bloom a woman gives him a potential love interest (nice to see Fuller casting his Wonderfalls lead).  

I like the “This is my design” he intones whenever he’s in the mind of the killer but, while Slade does sterling work in setting out the visual tone of the series (his feature debut Hard Candyis still his most impressive work), the device for Graham assuming the antagonist’s role through reverse slow-motion becomes old quite quickly.

The visuals in Hannibal are as sumptuous as those in Fuller’s Pushing Daisies, and the food preparation is mouth-watering (even if such aesthetics are intended to be undercut by the knowledge of human matter in there).

A suitably exciting climax, all the better for having Lecter initiate it. And a plus point that Will spends the rest of the season haunted by the shooting.

Having the “canonical” Garret Jacob Hobbs in the first episode is a neat and interesting way to kick things off, suggesting as much fidelity to the source material as possible, but a recurring is that so many plot beats are pre-empting Red Dragon, it makes it surprising they didn’t solve that case in five minutes. I do like the dialogue drop-ins that occur occasionally, though. And the ultra cynical quips of the forensics team make are a nice contrast to the misery of Graham. Larry Fishburne is strong as Jack Crawford; I’m not sure who my favourite Crawford is. Probably still Dennis Farina.


1.2 Amuse-Bouche

The sick creativity of the mushroom victims is something to behold, and the one who wakes up is straight out of Seven.  Bonus point to the bad taste “Find any shitakes?” from one of the forensic team.

Reinventing Freddie Lounds as a hot redhead instantly makes a lot of sense for unscrupulous reporter purposes, particularly when it comes to appealing to Eddie Izzard’s vanity in a later episode. The scene where she visits Lecter is particularly strong, and there writers do a good job instilling a sense of hesitancy about what we think he’ll do in any given situation; sometimes he will stand by, sometimes save a life (or both at the climax of the opener), sometimes make a deal, or even give someone up.

I’m not too sure about having Jack over to Lecter’s as a regular dinner guest, and Lecter rehearsing his “God’s terrific” speech (which we’ve seen in both Red Dragon and Manhunter films now) is overkill. Mainly, though, the problem with this one is that it all falls into place too quickly and that the killer’s motives are feebly sub X-Files (the cod-psychology of his kinship to fungi).


1.3 Potage

I had half hoped Jack was right about Abigail Hobbs being an accomplice to her father, as it might have created interesting plot possibilities. As it is, the first 30 minutes where she is returned home keeps you guessing about her motives and is extremely well-sustained; the best moment is when she suggests reenacting the scene of Lecter’s phone call to her father and looks at him as she says, “… and you be the man on the phone”.

And Will’s leaps are similarly effective; having deduced that one of the victims was a copycat, he is now convinced that the perpetrator was the one who called Hobbs. This sort of ongoing plotting is much more effective and involving than attempts to come up with a new psycho with a distinctive manner of eviscerating his victims.

This episode’s Red Dragon snippet; “It’s the ugliest thing in the world”.

I’m not all together sure about Lecter’s loud suits. Mikkelsen carries them off but surely Lecter would think they’re vulgar?

This episode is five star territory until the last ten minutes or so, when the events in the house, with the police still outside, become ludicrous. Abigail gutting the victim’s brother, Lecter knocking out Bloom then somehow clearing up all the mess and removing the body. And before that we have Lecter going for copycat-happy murdering. But it’s an intriguing place to end, with his becoming a mentor-type to Abigail.


1.4 Ceuf

This was the unbroadcast episode in the US, and it’s fairly so-so. The motivations are rather unlikely (boys killing their real families in order to bond with their “new’ one) and the conclusion is rushed again; just get it all sorted in 40 minutes. All it needs is one quick deductive leap from Will and presto. Also, the “Will has issues” character theme is becoming repetitive rather than more engaging. Still, it’s interesting to see Molly Shannon in a non-comedy part. A bit like Robin Williams, she’s a natural at playing psycho.


1.5 Coquilles

Another episode that feels run-of-the-mill, just with added grotesquerie in the imagery. This is the one so far that reminds me most of a Millenniumepisode (the religious overtones of the mutilations), with a touch of X-Files in having a killer with a brain tumour subject to visions (seeing potential victims with burning heads).

In theory, Jack’s wife (Gina Torres from Firefly) receiving therapy from Lecter is a neat idea, but nothing very interesting is done with it. Nor with the frictions between Jack and Bella (she’s dying, he doesn’t know what to do etc).

This week’s Red Dragon snippet; “That smells like something with a ship on the bottle”.

And “I can give you the majesty of your becoming” sounds very Tooth Fairy. Again, the killer’s not very interesting, and you’re conscious how much more effective this would be if it could embrace a slightly looser cable TV approach.


1.6 Entrée

Eddie Izzard has a similar shaped face to Anthony Hopkins, but I expect he was cast as this proto-Lecter (in terms of incarcerated, intelligent serial killers) because Fuller felt guilty about the non pick-up of Mockingbird Lane.

Izzard’s actually quite good (but then, I tend to enjoy David Bowie performances, so what do I know?) If Izzard’s a proto-Lecter, then all-grown-up Anna Chlumsky is a proto-Graham. This episode nears five star territory again, but falls down at the last hurdle by lazily going the whole hog of imitation and copying the means by which Graham will eventually learn Lecter’s identity. Here, it was Chlumsky realising that Lecter is the Chesapeake Ripper. I wonder what the thinking is; it doesn’t matter because they aren’t going to go as far as adapting Red Dragon (or rather, how we’re told that Will recognised Lecter in Red Dragon)? Maybe it shouldn’t bother me, but either they want this to be a feasible prequel or they don’t.

The thread of Jack being menaced by phone calls from the long dead Chlumsky is especially effective, though, and is very nasty reminder of Lecter as the puppet master since he’s also having Jack round for dinner and tending to his wife etc.

Much as I like Anthony Heald’s Chilton in Silence/Red Dragon, Raul Esparza may be even better on the smug/cocky front. The “Nice to have an old friend for dinner” is a bit obvious, though.


1.7 Sorbet

I’m not so sure about the laissez-faire attitude with which Lecter takes another four victims, safe in the knowledge that they’ll be blamed on an organ harvester, but it’s in all the other elements that this one works so well.

Gillian Anderson is excellent as Lecter’s insightful shrink (“You’re wearing a very well tailored person suit”). Interesting to see Ellen Greene as one of his high society dinner party guests. And Dan Fogler all but steals the spotlight from Mikkelsen as over-familiar patient Franklin.

The dialogue ranges from the risibly explanatory for idiots (“They’re like USB cables” is something that should never be heard when describing the workings of the human body) to the inspired (“Who the hell gets a spleen transplant?”)


1.8 Fromage

The best episode since the opener, even if the penchant for each successive serial killer staging ever-more icky art instillations out of their victims is becoming silly. Tim Hunter (River’s Edge) directed this one; he seems to have resigned himself to TV gigs over the last two decades.  

Anderson continues to coolly control Lecter (“I’m your psychiatrist, you’re not mine”) as he tries to pull on any thread available to get a response. But this one is so good because it allows plotlines from previous episodes (Franklin, his now-discovered-to-be-a-psycho-friend Tobias) to come to a head. It’s a great Lecter episode (he plays the theremin?), as he’s put in harm’s way and doesn’t have an easy time of it before eventual winning out.

It’s also a much better Will one, with Bloom nixing his romantic overtures and his realisation that she did so, at least in part, because she knew animal noises coming from the chimney he dismantled were his hallucinations. Their recurrence contributes to Will’s failure to apprehend Tobias, and thus the attack on Lecter. I don’t know if I buy Lecter’s tentative steps towards friendship with Will (“I was worried you were dead”) but Franklin’s idiotic attempts to reason with Tobias, and Lecter putting an end to his patient, kicks off one of the best scenes in the series thus far.

I like how MIkkelsen isn’t doing anything that Hopkins does. He’s maybe a bit more like Cox except that he’s not so understated. Mikkelsen is all glacial calm, with no scenery chewing in sight.


Overall rating so far:


The main problem ahead will be keeping the show credible as it develops.  Graham is inevitably undermined if he remains so close (along with everyone else) to Lecter for so long and doesn’t get a whiff of the truth. Meanwhile serial killer after serial killer comes a-knocking – presumably this is still a universe of the characters that leads up to Red Dragon.

Even if the series isn’t cancelled, I don’t think I can hold back disbelief for more than a couple of runs. The show really needs a slow-burn approach to investigating each killer – maybe only having a couple of different cases per 13-episode run to make it plausible. They could have a season of Lecter incarcerated, then skip Red Dragon/Lambs/Hannibal to an older Will reencountering the Doctor; that might be fun.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

You guys sure like watermelon.

The Irishman aka I Heard You Paint Houses (2019)
(SPOILERS) Perhaps, if Martin Scorsese hadn’t been so opposed to the idea of Marvel movies constituting cinema, The Irishman would have been a better film. It’s a decent film, assuredly. A respectable film, definitely. But it’s very far from being classic. And a significant part of that is down to the usually assured director fumbling the execution. Or rather, the realisation. I don’t know what kind of crazy pills the ranks of revered critics have been taking so as to recite as one the mantra that you quickly get used to the de-aging effects so intrinsic to its telling – as Empire magazine put it, “you soon… fuggadaboutit” – but you don’t. There was no point during The Irishman that I was other than entirely, regrettably conscious that a 75-year-old man was playing the title character. Except when he was playing a 75-year-old man.

So you want me to be half-monk, half-hitman.

Casino Royale (2006)
(SPOILERS) Despite the doubts and trepidation from devotees (too blonde, uncouth etc.) that greeted Daniel Craig’s casting as Bond, and the highly cynical and low-inspiration route taken by Eon in looking to Jason Bourne's example to reboot a series that had reached a nadir with Die Another Day, Casino Royale ends up getting an enormous amount right. If anything, its failure is that it doesn’t push far enough, so successful is it in disarming itself of the overblown set pieces and perfunctory plotting that characterise the series (even at its best), elements that would resurge with unabated gusto in subsequent Craig excursions.

For the majority of its first two hours, Casino Royale is top-flight entertainment, with returning director Martin Campbell managing to exceed his excellent work reformatting Bond for the ‘90s. That the weakest sequence (still good, mind) prior to the finale is a traditional “big” (but not too big) action set piece involving an attempt to…

You can have it. Make the edits.

Little Women (2019)
(SPOILERS) It could be argued, given Little Women’s evergreen popularity, not least as a go-to text for Hollywood adaptations, that Greta Gerwig isn’t exactly stretching herself or giving us a better idea of the kind of directorial career she envisages. Hers is a likeable, intelligent, well-rendered sophomore picture. As such, the awards plaudits are probably no more or less deserving than for your average prestige period piece. Which is to say that Little Women is handsomely mounted and consummately performed (at least, by some of the cast), but it doesn’t absolutely feel like this umpteenth version of Louise May Alcott’s novel demanded to be told, even with the Gerwig’s innovations of experimentation with time frame and metatextual use of its author.

We need somebody to walk the clones.

Jojo Rabbit (2019)
(SPOILERS) Not so much the banality of evil as of taking pot-shots at easy targets, Taika Waititi’s typically insubstantial, broad-brush, sketch-comedy approach isn’t the best of fits for the formulation of this self-styled “anti-hate satire”. The issue isn’t so much that it’s inappropriate or insensitive to broach material of Nazi persecution of the Jews comedically as that the manner in which it has been done here is so obvious as to be redundant. Waititi said his inspiration for making the movie was partly the statistics on those Americans who had never heard of Auschwitz; Jojo Rabbit is as cack-handed a way of going about informing them as Life is Beautiful.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…

This popularity of yours. Is there a trick to it?

The Two Popes (2019)
(SPOILERS) Ricky Gervais’ Golden Globes joke, in which he dropped The Two Popes onto a list of the year’s films about paedophiles, rather preceded the picture’s Oscar prospects (three nominations), but also rather encapsulated the conversation currently synonymous with the forever tainted Roman Catholic church; it’s the first thing anyone thinks of. And let’s face it, Jonathan Pryce’s unamused response to the gag could have been similarly reserved for the fate of his respected but neglected film. More people will have heard Ricky’s joke than will surely ever see the movie. Which, aside from a couple of solid lead performances, probably isn’t such an omission.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

I'm reliable, I'm a very good listener, and I'm extremely funny.

Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I wrote my 23 to see in 2019, I speculated that James Cameron might be purposefully giving his hand-me-downs to lesser talents because he hubristically didn’t want anyone making a movie that was within a spit of the proficiency we’ve come to expect from him. Certainly, Robert Rodriguez and Tim Miller are leagues beneath Kathryn Bigelow, Jimbo’s former spouse and director of his Strange Days screenplay. Miller’s no slouch when it comes to action – which is what these movies are all about, let’s face it – but neither is he a craftsman, so all those reviews attesting that Terminator: Dark Fate is the best in the franchise since Terminator 2: Judgment Day may be right, but there’s a considerable gulf between the first sequel (which I’m not that big a fan of) and this retcon sequel to that sequel.