Jump to content

  • Home
  • Help
  • Contact
  •  

Photo

Hannibal


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#1 Funke

Funke

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 01 June 2013 - 02:57 AM

51vx8fVmW1L._SX500_.jpg

 

So am I the one who only watches this show? If you haven't already started watching this - I'd highly recommend this show. One of the best series currently running on TV. Intelligent, sophisticated and dark horror series - that's incredibly hard to come by these days. Full credits to Brian Fuller (creator of Pushing Daisies, Wonderfalls, and Dead like me) whom I really rate. And exceptional performance by Mads Mikkelson. 

 

And good news for fans, it's been renewed for the second series by NBC :)


Edited by Funke, 01 June 2013 - 02:58 AM.

  • 0

#2 Funke

Funke

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 15 June 2013 - 02:28 AM

I never bothered to give this show a chance. Sorry, but I view it as a bastardization of a movie franchise that itself, was already bastardized for going too long to begin with. Not to mention no Hopkins as Lecter? You can't just do that!

First watch it out, then I'd agree to differ if you still hate it. It has a phenomenal cast, the writer is not some clueless slouch as the rest, etc. Mikkelsen is spectacular, him vs Hopkins it's like Jack Nicholson vs Heath Ledger as Joker - both unique but classy. I'll bet you that even if you don't like the series, you'll never question Mikkelsen being casted as Hannibal - he's that good.

 

Don't be judgmental - it's not just a spin off - it's unique in its own ways compared to SOTL.


  • 0

#3 Funke

Funke

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:21 AM

I am not being as judgmental persay as I am anti-re-hash. Hollywood needs to invent new characters and new ideas, and scenarios. They remake and sequelize enough movies. Now they're gonna spin them off to t.v.? Sheesh.

It's not a rehash - you're just presuming that it is. It is more of a reinterpretation if anything. The characterization is entirely different, so is the presentation. It's anything but a spin off of the SOTL. I don't see anything wrong with it. As long as it's not crap, what's wrong with it at all? And SOTL itself is based on Red Dragon obviously, they didn't make it from scratch or anything. Didn't turn out horrible, did it? 


  • 0

#4 Funke

Funke

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 25 June 2013 - 11:51 AM

*SPOILERS AHEAD!*

 

Spoiler
:)


Edited by Arya Stark, 17 August 2013 - 12:58 PM.
added spoiler tags

  • 0

#5 Funke

Funke

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 04 August 2013 - 12:57 PM

 

I am not being as judgmental persay as I am anti-re-hash. Hollywood needs to invent new characters and new ideas, and scenarios. They remake and sequelize enough movies. Now they're gonna spin them off to t.v.? Sheesh.

 

It's not a rehash - you're just presuming that it is. It is more of a reinterpretation if anything. The characterization is entirely different, so is the presentation. It's anything but a spin off of the SOTL. I don't see anything wrong with it. As long as it's not crap, what's wrong with it at all? And SOTL itself is based on Red Dragon obviously, they didn't make it from scratch or anything. Didn't turn out horrible, did it? 

 

 

You can make up all kinds of fancy names for it. But when it's something I've seen before and am already familiar with, it's a rehash, remake, or something close to that. These people make a lot of money. I don't think it's too much to ask to come up with a new concept from time to time.

 

That honestly doesn't make any sense. So according to your rationale, Sherlock must be one of the crappiest TV shows around since they've already made plenty of TV and movies on it right? Just because it''s something that's been done before, doesn't mean one can't present it with a refreshing perspective. You don't like the show? Fine, that's alright. Post your criticisms and we'll discuss. And oh, people don't make movies to do some sort of charity - Silence of the lambs, Hannibal (film) etc where made to make money too. So what? We just need quality movies and TV. That's my POV.



I have not given this show a chance. Is it anything like the movie Hannibal? I really enjoyed those movies, with Anthony Hopkins. 

 

It's entirely different from Hannibal actually. That's what I'm trying to say. It's not just a rip off - it's very refreshing and character dynamics between Will and Hannibal is top notch. Hannibal is much more colder, and pure evil - you'll know when you watch it. It's very well written. Some of the scenes are downright chilling. Worth watching for Mikkelsen's performance alone.


  • 0

#6 Funke

Funke

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 04 August 2013 - 10:37 PM

"Sherlock" is different. Mostly because it's based on a character from a long time ago. Characters like Sherlock Holmes or The Wolfman can be reinvented from time to time.

So this works arbitrarily then? If it is a fairly old character then it's ok, but recent character isn't? What exactly is your rationale here mate? Remember the TV series came JUST AFTER the movie (in year gap or so I think). Lets say Sherlock has been done to death for a moment, would it take anything away from how brilliant the show is? 


  • 0

#7 Funke

Funke

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 10:02 PM

Not to me. But horror is my favorite genre, so I always want something fresh and new. I am biased like that. I am also biased in that I'd like to see some ugly people in slasher movies for once. Instead of perfect, good looking kids.

 

Alright, so it's just your personal preference - you don't like it personally. But to call it bastardization of the franchise is ridiculous. As I said, this is "fresh" - as in not merely a spin off. Just like Sherlock. The stories they're based on is age old, but they've given it a 360 degree spin with excellent writing, that it's so worth watching. You have to judge each case on it's own merit IMO.

 

Anyways.


  • 0

#8 Funke

Funke

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 10 August 2013 - 10:37 PM

Well the Silence Of The Lambs franchise is held in higher regard than most of the tripe that passes for horror these days. Hence my  commentary.

 

Silence of the Lambs was unique in it's own ways and path breaking. But that aside for a moment, it's pointless comparison. Of course it's a classic and there's no quality horror films made these days, but that's a different topic isn't it? I agree with that, but this is far from 'tripe" and regardless of whether you like it or not, it's DEFINITELY not bastardization of the franchise. And I didn't even love any Hannibal films except SOTL, which I am a big fan of obviously.



This is definitely one of my favorite new primetime series. Not only are the actors doing a top notch job, but the visuals of the show are insane as well. The show had me on edge all the way to last episode of the season. The only thing that sucks is that the show won't be back till 2014 and that is a pretty long wait. Still, I know it will be well worth it.

 

Yes! It relies on none of the cheap shot gimmicks and yet is brilliantly cold and chilling. It did take it's sweet time to warm up to the characters, but since then it's all been edge of the seat stuff. And I also love the bits of dark humor that's in there. 

“This is very educational,” :D Brilliant.


  • 0

#9 Funke

Funke

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 12 August 2013 - 12:34 AM

MIkkelsen gives his own interpretation of the character and it is a chilling yet very classy performance. I will not compare him to Anthony Hopkins as they both have very different styles but all the same, I think the show has a lot of potential. 

 

The writing is top-notch and the performances from Mikkelsen, Hugh Dancy and Caroline Dhavernas are excellent. I love the macabre imagery and often gruesome murder and death scenes but the writers seem to use these to portray the workings of twisted but often brilliant minds. 

 

I totally missed this post, sorry BWR :)

Yes, that's the strong suit. It's not just aping Hopkins. He's still cold and sophisticated. You can never read him. At one moment you'd think he'd do anything to help out Will, the next moment you'll see him weave the web and attempt to trap Will in it. Or say *spoiler alert* Abigail, to whom he stood as a father figure, and she's been killed by him in the end. That's what makes me love the show - unlike Dexter, which although explains that his father is the one who forced him to follow the code, is much more "good" and predictable, than Hannibal. Quality stuff.


  • 0

#10 NickJ

NickJ

    Friendly

  • Members
  • 522 posts

Posted 14 June 2013 - 11:44 AM

I never bothered to give this show a chance. Sorry, but I view it as a bastardization of a movie franchise that itself, was already bastardized for going too long to begin with. Not to mention no Hopkins as Lecter? You can't just do that!


  • 0

#11 NickJ

NickJ

    Friendly

  • Members
  • 522 posts

Posted 16 June 2013 - 12:04 PM

I am not being as judgmental persay as I am anti-re-hash. Hollywood needs to invent new characters and new ideas, and scenarios. They remake and sequelize enough movies. Now they're gonna spin them off to t.v.? Sheesh.


  • 0

#12 NickJ

NickJ

    Friendly

  • Members
  • 522 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 07:53 AM

I am not being as judgmental persay as I am anti-re-hash. Hollywood needs to invent new characters and new ideas, and scenarios. They remake and sequelize enough movies. Now they're gonna spin them off to t.v.? Sheesh.

It's not a rehash - you're just presuming that it is. It is more of a reinterpretation if anything. The characterization is entirely different, so is the presentation. It's anything but a spin off of the SOTL. I don't see anything wrong with it. As long as it's not crap, what's wrong with it at all? And SOTL itself is based on Red Dragon obviously, they didn't make it from scratch or anything. Didn't turn out horrible, did it? 

 

 

You can make up all kinds of fancy names for it. But when it's something I've seen before and am already familiar with, it's a rehash, remake, or something close to that. These people make a lot of money. I don't think it's too much to ask to come up with a new concept from time to time.


  • 0

#13 mkcookin

mkcookin

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 57 posts

Posted 09 July 2013 - 02:00 AM

I have not given this show a chance. Is it anything like the movie Hannibal? I really enjoyed those movies, with Anthony Hopkins. 


  • 0

#14 dethdealer24

dethdealer24

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 55 posts

Posted 14 July 2013 - 04:36 PM

I lied the movies, but this show doesn't seem to follow the books or the movies. I saw the first episode and I do remember that Will Graham did consult Hannibal once, actually when it was Hannibal he was after, but i don't ever think they said that Hannibal was on retainer with the FBI or that Graham saw him professionally.


  • 0

#15 NickJ

NickJ

    Friendly

  • Members
  • 522 posts

Posted 04 August 2013 - 06:10 PM

"Sherlock" is different. Mostly because it's based on a character from a long time ago. Characters like Sherlock Holmes or The Wolfman can be reinvented from time to time.


  • 0

#16 NickJ

NickJ

    Friendly

  • Members
  • 522 posts

Posted 05 August 2013 - 05:45 PM

Not to me. But horror is my favorite genre, so I always want something fresh and new. I am biased like that. I am also biased in that I'd like to see some ugly people in slasher movies for once. Instead of perfect, good looking kids.


  • 0

#17 NickJ

NickJ

    Friendly

  • Members
  • 522 posts

Posted 06 August 2013 - 11:44 AM

Well the Silence Of The Lambs franchise is held in higher regard than most of the tripe that passes for horror these days. Hence my  commentary.


  • 0

#18 Wayne Clark

Wayne Clark

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 30 posts

Posted 06 August 2013 - 04:40 PM

This is definitely one of my favorite new primetime series. Not only are the actors doing a top notch job, but the visuals of the show are insane as well. The show had me on edge all the way to last episode of the season. The only thing that sucks is that the show won't be back till 2014 and that is a pretty long wait. Still, I know it will be well worth it.


  • 0

#19 BWR

BWR

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 09 August 2013 - 03:48 AM

MIkkelsen gives his own interpretation of the character and it is a chilling yet very classy performance. I will not compare him to Anthony Hopkins as they both have very different styles but all the same, I think the show has a lot of potential. 

 

The writing is top-notch and the performances from Mikkelsen, Hugh Dancy and Caroline Dhavernas are excellent. I love the macabre imagery and often gruesome murder and death scenes but the writers seem to use these to portray the workings of twisted but often brilliant minds. 


  • 0

#20 BWR

BWR

    Cordial

  • Members
  • 53 posts

Posted 13 August 2013 - 12:26 AM

Absolutely, totally unpredictable and there is an undercurrent of tension as well as an eerie edginess, all through season .I love the (as cruel as it may sound) tortured portrayal by Dancy and the fact that our unreadable Dr Hannibal can turn from father-figure one moment to emotionless serial killer / cannibal the next (he's a psychopath, after all) just makes you impatient to see the next episode! I definitely give this one a thumbs up!


  • 0