Watching these two versions back-to-back, I was struck with the feeling that the Manhunter scene is far more effective than the Red Dragon version despite the scenes having mostly the same essential dialogue (I've not read the book, but the similarities in both suggest to me that these scenes are relatively faithful to Harris' depiction).
Manhunter plays out relatively flatly. At this point in the film as well as in the culture at large, Hannibal Lektor (Lecter) was a complete unknown. We know from what that film tells us is that he was a former psychiatrist and maniac killer, but it's all academic. So when we see him in his cell, it is very easy to underestimate his intelligence and, more importantly, the depths of his evil. It's only when he really starts fucking with Will that we start to understand that this isn't a human being. It's a monster wearing human skin.
Red Dragon, on the other hand, has the luxury as well as the burden of Anthony Hopkins' truly terrifying previous performance as Hannibal in Silence of the Lambs. That is where most people in the audience were first introduced to the character and also got to see how dangerous he really is. That's a luxury because A. in Red Dragon the audience already knows who this Hannibal is and therefore doesn't need an explanation to "get it" but also because B. the audience wants to see Hopkins go nuts as the character. But it's a burden because having seen what the character does in SOTL (as well as "Hannibal"), Red Dragon now has to somehow top that without letting the good doctor out of his cell. It's hard line to walk.
Unfortunately, all Ratner and Hopkins came up with to do that (maybe it's all that anybody could do) is to re-hash the dungeon scenes from Demme's film. The result is really not that effective in my view. In Manhunter, Lektor knows he's effectively neutralized and so he just takes pleasure in fucking with Graham because that's all he has left. Graham is always in control of the meetings and Lektor always has to capitulate. But in Red Dragon, Ratner still tries to use Hannibal to scare both Graham and the audience and it just comes off as . . . well silly, when you get right down to it. Graham has already caught Lecter. He's locked up. His efforts at intimidation amount to little more than posturing and anyone in Graham's position would see right through them.
Anyway, that's what I think.
Here are the two scenes. I know some folks will find the sterility and near banality of the Manhunter scene tonally uncreepy and therefore less effective, which is fair. I just find the Grand Guignol treatment in Red Dragon to be artificial and therefor not particularly frightening.
by Jackieirish
4 Comments
Manhunter is mostly just better. Brian Cox is really good as Lecter, and Tom Noonan’s Dolarhyde is creepy and menacing af.
Red Dragon was coasting on both Manhunter and Silence of the Lambs, imo.
# William Petersen is intense. I think he did this and ,To Live and Die in L.A , around the same time.
“In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida” playing as he slow mo`s through the window is badass.
I often think about these movies, and what I arrived at today is that William Petersen lends an importance to the role that parallels how character’s importance in the story. It’s really captivating. Edward Norton however feels like he’s doing a table read in the actual movie and like nobody is interested in being there.
I do wish we could get a cut with William Petersen, Farina, Brian Cox, and Ralph Fiennes, because I liked his portrayal much more, and I could understand what his motivations were better than the Tom Noonan version.
God, I love Manhunter so much.