Is silence of the lambs a great film? | Page 4 | TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
HerbEaverstinks
LSU Fan
Member since Jan 2011
3814 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?




Back to top
  Replies (0)
MrFreakinMiyagi
Stetson Fan
Tampa Bay
Member since Feb 2007
13049 posts
 Online 

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


quote:

I'd argue Brian Cox is just as good, if not better, than Hopkins.







Back to top
  Replies (0)
Freauxzen
USA Fan
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
22297 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


quote:




quote:




Strong debate from you both. Should I assume you don't really have a point? Or have you even seen Manhunter?






Back to top
Tiger Ryno
USA Fan
Member since Feb 2007
55785 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


I saw MH when it first came out and in no way is it even close to sotl on any level...especially cox's performance....your opinions are funny to me.





Back to top
  Replies (0)
SJS Eagle 85
New Orleans Saints Fan
P-Town
Member since Apr 2009
5007 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


quote:

I'd argue Brian Cox is just as good, if not better, than Hopkins.
Then you'd be wrong. I've only watched Cox's performance twice and both were recently. Having Hopkins' version as my mental standard of the character may give him all the latitude which I'll grant you. But Hopkins' Lecter kicks the ever-loving-dog shite out of Cox's. Cox is flat and basically came off as a guy trying to remember his lines. No sick nuances or guestures. He doesn't even look as scary as Hopkins.






Back to top
iwyLSUiwy
Southern Fan
I'm your huckleberry
Member since Apr 2008
21335 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


My buffalo bill voice is pretty impressive.





Back to top
  Replies (0)
Ace Midnight
LSU Fan
Currently asymptomatic
Member since Dec 2006
33484 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


Damn, Fox, you are in a deconstructive mood lately.

Obviously, you picked out the most outstanding feature of the film - Hopkins' Lector - which, if it had come somewhat earlier in his career would have threatened typecasting him (ala, coincidentally, Anthony Perkins).

Having said that, the other 4 principal performances were likewise very good. Ted Levine was brilliant in his one part malevolent, one part stoner, one part misfit - but for Sir Anthony's adlib hiss, "It puts the lotion on its skin" would be the line for which the movie is remembered.

Glenn was great and Foster provided a hub around which the great characters could shine - the movie was about Clarise, but she is our guide and we're supposed to perceive the action through her - had she been too strong or too weak of a character, it wouldn't have worked because she's supposed to be us, the audience.

Glenn is the father figure or older brother, Lector represents the bogey-man or imaginary monsters of our youth and Buffalo Bill is the very real dangerous world in which we live. Clarise is us. Jonathan Demme (and for that matter, his late, great nephew Ted) is an artist.



This post was edited on 3/19 at 12:22 pm


Back to top
CocomoLSU
Penn State Fan
Inside your dome.
Member since Feb 2004
129272 posts
 Online 

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


quote:

An overall amazing, historically important and influential film? No, not at all.

quote:

The film is considered "culturally, historically or aesthetically" significant by the U.S. Library of Congress and was selected to be preserved in the National Film Registry in 2011.[



I think it's definitely a good movie. Great? I don't know as it's been so long since I've seen it. Hopkins is awesome in it though, but so is Buffalo Bill. Jodie Foster's accent is awful though.



This post was edited on 3/19 at 12:25 pm


Back to top
  Replies (0)
iwyLSUiwy
Southern Fan
I'm your huckleberry
Member since Apr 2008
21335 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


*turns on goodbye horses*

*tucks dick behind legs*

"would you f**k me? I'd f**k me"




I actually like that song. Was awesome for the movie.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Fox Mulder
Tulane Fan
Austin, TX
Member since Dec 2010
28160 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


Ted liked that blow. He literally died like 5 months after Blow was released





Back to top
Ace Midnight
LSU Fan
Currently asymptomatic
Member since Dec 2006
33484 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


quote:

Ted liked that blow. He literally died like 5 months after Blow was released


Yeah, but he left us The Ref before he went. Seriously, I should make a thread about how awesome that freakin' movie is.






Back to top
Fox Mulder
Tulane Fan
Austin, TX
Member since Dec 2010
28160 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


He had a promising career ahead of him. fricking moron though. You just spent all this time in a prison interviewing a guy who's face is destroyed from all the coke use and you still did it

Granted I had a small habit at the time but that's different






Back to top
  Replies (0)
dawgdayafternoon
Georgia Fan
Member since Jul 2011
10024 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


quote:

But Hopkins' Lecter kicks the ever-loving-dog shite out of Cox's. Cox is flat and basically came off as a guy trying to remember his lines. No sick nuances or guestures. He doesn't even look as scary as Hopkins.

Well, no kidding. Obviously Cox is going to look flat when compared to Hopkins (in SOTL)... you have to keep in mind that the film Manhunter came first and in the novel Lecter has a significantly smaller role. In the little screen time he was given, he made the most of it.

As great as Hopkins is in SOTL and Hannibal, he isn't even remotely creepy in Red Dragon. His role in the story was only increased because of the popularity of the two preceding films but the formula and character was recycled to death by that point. Hopkins gives a one-of-a-kind performance in SOTL, but for the Lecter character in a Red Dragon adaptation, I prefer Cox.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Freauxzen
USA Fan
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
22297 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


quote:

Then you'd be wrong. I've only watched Cox's performance twice and both were recently. Having Hopkins' version as my mental standard of the character may give him all the latitude which I'll grant you.


And this is my only point really. It's almost impossible to evaluate them on equal terms given the amount of popularity Hopkins' portrayal generated. And deservedly so, it was a great performance. That doesn't mean Cox's wasn't any less great. It was a different film, a different time, etc.

quote:

But Hopkins' Lecter kicks the ever-loving-dog shite out of Cox's. Cox is flat and basically came off as a guy trying to remember his lines. No sick nuances or guestures.


That's a bit extreme. It's a different approach to the character. There's just as much going on under the surface for Cox.

quote:

He doesn't even look as scary as Hopkins.


Which is more effective to me. In these films, scariness should have little to do with appearance, voice, mannerisms. I think those almost "cartoonified" the character (and since pop culture took the reigns, they have), and made it difficult to see the real horror. I think it better that Lecter is more normal rather than less. But that's me. Hopkins rode a thin line very very well, that's for certain.



quote:

Well, no kidding. Obviously Cox is going to look flat when compared to Hopkins (in SOTL)... you have to keep in mind that the film Manhunter came first and in the novel Lecter has a significantly smaller role. In the little screen time he was given, he made the most of it.

As great as Hopkins is in SOTL and Hannibal, he isn't even remotely creepy in Red Dragon. His role in the story was only increased because of the popularity of the two preceding films but the formula and character was recycled to death by that point. Hopkins gives a one-of-a-kind performance in SOTL, but for the Lecter character in a Red Dragon adaptation, I prefer Cox.


Well said.






Back to top
MrFreakinMiyagi
Stetson Fan
Tampa Bay
Member since Feb 2007
13049 posts
 Online 

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


quote:

Strong debate from you both. Should I assume you don't really have a point? Or have you even seen Manhunter?

Yes, seen Manhunter multiple times, and really enjoy it.

Both had light screen time. Cox was rather forgettable. Hopkins was the complete opposite, and with his short amount of time on screen delivered a performance that has made Hannibal Lecter one of the most recognizable Villains of all time.

There is nothing to debate.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
MrFreakinMiyagi
Stetson Fan
Tampa Bay
Member since Feb 2007
13049 posts
 Online 

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


quote:

but for the Lecter character in a Red Dragon adaptation, I prefer Cox.

What isn't better about the Manhunter adaptation? Other than not quite being as true to the source material (story-wise)?







Back to top
RollTide1987
Alabama Fan
Aurora, CO
Member since Nov 2009
26016 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


Siskel & Ebert review from February 1991.

LINK

Eugene Siskel was always a dick to Ebert. Of course Ebert had the last laugh because Hopkins and Foster both went on to win Oscars for performances which Siskel referred to as "decent" and "overplayed."






This post was edited on 3/19 at 2:05 pm


Back to top
  Replies (0)
dawgdayafternoon
Georgia Fan
Member since Jul 2011
10024 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


I was just making the point that Hopkins is basically essential to the development of SOTL's plot and assisting Clarice whereas Cox plays more into the back story of Will Graham and his mental scars.

Because they serve completely different roles to each film, I think it's rather pointless to compare the two. It made more sense to me to compare Cox in Manhunter to Hopkins in Red Dragon because of the source material.



This post was edited on 3/19 at 2:18 pm


Back to top
Freauxzen
USA Fan
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
22297 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


quote:

Because they serve completely different roles to each film, I think it's rather pointless to compare the two. It made more sense to me to compare Cox in Manhunter to Hopkins in Red Dragon because of the source material.



And that was me, see here:

quote:

quote:

Demme pretty much nailed the casting of Foster and Hopkins as main characters. Can you imagine anybody else playing Starling or Lecter?



I'd argue Brian Cox is just as good, if not better, than Hopkins. And I do like Hopkins' take on Lecter, Cox is a bit different though, and far more menacing .

The "cultural" effect of Lecter's portrayal, (which mostly came from the odd sensibilities he gave Lecter, and voice) allowed it to overshadow great work from Cox and a really wonderful take on the same character.


I was more commenting on the very idea of "Can you imagine anyone else as Lecter?!?" as if that makes Hopkins essential to the character. He isn't and Cox was very good in his role as well.






Back to top
Ace Midnight
LSU Fan
Currently asymptomatic
Member since Dec 2006
33484 posts

re: Is silence of the lambs a great film?


quote:

I was more commenting on the very idea of "Can you imagine anyone else as Lecter?!?" as if that makes Hopkins essential to the character. He isn't and Cox was very good in his role as well.


The point is well taken that the character had different roles in the different films and are definitely different incarnations of the character, and even from the source material.

Having said that, "Can you imagine anyone else as Lector?" is quite different from "Can you imagine anyone else as Lector in SOTL?", isn't it?

There are certain roles that are just tough to detach the actor's performance from the character itself - Deniro as Biddle, Samuel L. Jackson as Jules Winfield, Brando as Corleone - Hopkins as Lector (in SOTL) is just one of those performances.



This post was edited on 3/19 at 2:46 pm


Back to top
  Replies (0)


Back to top