list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Hannibal on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Hannibal/180811/default.aspx Title: Hannibal
Year: 2001
Director: Ridley Scott
Plot: Based on the controversial sequel novel of the same name, Hannibal is the much-anticipated follow-up to the Oscar-winning The Silence of the Lambs (1991). Anthony Hopkins returns as Dr. Hannibal Lecter, one of the world's most cunning and feared serial killers, who resurfaces after a decade in hiding to toy with FBI agent Clarice Starling (Julianne Moore). As Starling's career flounders thanks to a drug bust gone wrong, Lecter attempts to elude a greedy Italian police detective (Giancarlo Giannini) who's willing to alert the authorities to his presence in Florence for a price. In the meantime, a maimed but wealthy former victim of Lecter's named Mason Verger (Gary Oldman) plots to get his revenge on the doctor in a most unusual and grisly fashion. The novel by Thomas Harris was adapted for director Ridley Scott by David Mamet and Steven Zaillian. ~ Karl Williams, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 36
Number of Lists: 52
Number of blog posts: 3
Number of discussion threads: 7
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 08:00:02 GMTHannibal2001Ridley ScottBased on the controversial sequel novel of the same name, Hannibal is the much-anticipated follow-up to the Oscar-winning <a href=/films/31277/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>The Silence of the Lambs</a> (1991). <a href="/players/P____94812/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Anthony Hopkins</a> returns as Dr. Hannibal Lecter, one of the world's most cunning and feared serial killers, who resurfaces after a decade in hiding to toy with FBI agent Clarice Starling (<a href="/players/P____50325/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Julianne Moore</a>). As Starling's career flounders thanks to a drug bust gone wrong, Lecter attempts to elude a greedy Italian police detective (<a href="/players/P____91430/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Giancarlo Giannini</a>) who's willing to alert the authorities to his presence in Florence for a price. In the meantime, a maimed but wealthy former victim of Lecter's named Mason Verger (<a href="/players/P____53946/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Gary Oldman</a>) plots to get his revenge on the doctor in a most unusual and grisly fashion. The novel by Thomas Harris was adapted for director <a href="/players/P___110579/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Ridley Scott</a> by <a href="/players/P___100953/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>David Mamet</a> and <a href="/players/P___117789/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Steven Zaillian</a>. ~ Karl Williams, All Movie Guide36Tag Target (>10)52373http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/u34977jdmsg.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Hannibal/180811/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_August_31_Makeup_Metamorphosi/625/43784/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: leeroy711
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 9/3/2009 3:03:12 PM
Body: This topic made me immediately think of Gary Oldman. He was in a pretty thick layer of makeup for Bram Stoker's Dracula. And in Hannibal, I had no idea that was him in the wheelchair. I'd also add Mrs. Doubtfire to this discussion.
]]>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 19:03:12 GMTleeroy711Weekly Theme9/3/2009 3:03:12 PMThis topic made me immediately think of Gary Oldman. He was in a pretty thick layer of makeup for Bram Stoker's Dracula. And in Hannibal, I had no idea that was him in the wheelchair. I'd also add Mrs. Doubtfire to this discussion. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/10/15/36353.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 10/15/2008 10:01:17 AM
Body: Forget about Don Cheadle replacing Terence Howard as James Rhodes / War Machine in Iron Man II, which smells a lot like the “we’ll threaten to replace Tobey Maguire with Jake Gyllenhaal” tactic that Sony used for Spider-Man II –– Hollywood has been doing this for years. It was bad enough back in the days of television with Dick Sargent replacing Dick York in Bewitched, but now it’s becoming pretty commonplace for producers to replace actors in iconic roles. Although now it’s more common due to monetary concerns, which seems to be what has taken Howard out of the War Machine suit, it’s also common to see an actor ankle a role because they don’t like the source material, or the direction the character is taking. We’ve put together several different re-castings, which all happened for a variety of reasons: money, dissatisfaction with the script, test audience reactions, and actors just growing tired of playing the same character. Check them out after the break. Alec Baldwin –> Harrison Ford –> Ben Affleck –> Ryan Gosling (?) In Tom Clancy’s series of “Ryanverse” books, action politician and former teacher Jack Ryan has dne everything from rescue a rogue Russian submarine to become the President of the United States. Alec Baldwin first played the role in 1990’s The Hunt for Red October, but he was unavailable for the sequel Patriot Games (which in the books is a prequel), due to a stint on Broadway. The producers then approached Harrison Ford, who took over the role for two movies, with Clear and Present Danger being the highest grossing Ryan film to date. Ford decided not to play the role a third time, and for 2002’s The Sum of All Fears they decided to try and jumpstart the franchise with a young Jack Ryan, casting Ben Affleck in the role. At the time, Ford reportedly told Affleck, “Knock yourself out. I don’t want to do these movies anymore.” Which contrasts with what he just told AOL’s Moviefone: “I thought that we hadn’t quite exhausted the potential of the Jack Ryan character. Those films were, I think, very good movies. I wouldn’t mind doing another of those.” Nevertheless, there’s a rumor that Ryan Gosling will become the new Jack Ryan in Without Remorse, which is currently in development. Personally? I thought Baldwin made the best Jack Ryan, but he’s a better Jack Donaghy. Jodie Foster –> Julianne Moore When Foster declined to reprise the Clarice Starling role from Silence of the Lambs in Hannibal, the producers considered a list of actors that ranged from Winona Ryder to Gillian Anderson, who lost the role because her contract at Fox said she couldn’t play another FBI agent. Even though Foster had initially said she’d do it and had specific notes on the script, eventually Julianne Moore won the part, but in the end it wasn’t much of a prize –– it’s hard to remember that Ridley Scott directed this movie, because it just didn’t have a the spark or charisma of the original. Similarly, if you rent the excellent Manhunter, you’ll see William Petersen in a non-CSI role playing FBI agent Will Graham, who actually captured Hannibal Lecter (oddly spelled Lecktor in this movie), played by Brian Cox. Later Hollywood remade this movie as Red Dragon (the name of the book) with Anthony Hopkins reprising his Lecter role, and Ed Norton playing Will Graham. Although if we include remakes on this list, it’ll stretch on far too long. Katie Holmes  –> Maggie Gyllenhaal Katie Holmes turned down a big payday when she decided not to return for the sequel to Batman Begins, and missed out on being in the biggest movie of this year. It’s still unclear if her decision shows Tom Cruise’s influence at work, or if she just didn’t want to do it now that she’s a mommy, but it was one of those head-scratching moments that just makes you wonder what happened. Maybe she bristled at the paltry two million dollars she was being offered for the role, especially since the part was beefed up for The Dark Knight. Claudia Wells –> Elisabeth Shue and Crispin Glover –> Jeffrey Weisman Back to the Future Part II saw two major roles get recast, and in some cases rewritten completely. Claudia Wells, who played Marty’s girlfriend Jennifer in the first film, decided to leave acting since her mother was diagnosed with cancer, and she later took more time off to have children. Her part was recast with Elisabeth Shue stepping in, and they had to re-shoot the ending sequence of the original movie since that’s how Back to the Future II opens. Additionally, Crispin Glover found out that the producers were using his image without his approval for the sequel, and he sued the directors and producers, including Steven Spielberg. The case was settled out of court, and the Screen Actors Guild later implemented rules to prevent this from happening again. As a result, Glover’s part was recast with Jeffrey Weisman playing George McFly, and most of his scenes show the back of his head, or him floating upside down (he’s supposed to be in traction, having hurt his back) and wearing heavy prosthetics. Burt Reynolds –> Jackie Gleason –> Jerry Reed This story is so strange that it makes me want to go back and watch this movie again, even though I remember how terrible it was when I saw it as a kid. This movie was originally titled Smokey and the Bandit III: Smokey IS The Bandit, with Jackie Gleason playing both Buford T. Justice, and the role of the Bandit. We sure would have like to see him as the Bandit, but apparently audiences didn’t and were too confused by the dual roles. So the studio dumped Gleason as the Bandit, and rewrote the film to have Jerry Reed as the Bandit. If you remember from the first two movies (and it’s forgiveable is you don’t have the lore of Smokey and the Bandit memorized at this point), Reed was the Bandit’s best buddy, Cledus Snow, who drove the big truck. However in this third installment, the Enoses (I swear I’m getting dumber by remembering all of this stuff) decided that the Bandit was too egotistical, and hire Snow to do their bidding. In the climactic scene, when Smokey finally catches the Bandit, he seems him as Burt Reynolds, who reprised the role just for that one moment. Now I need to go get a stiff drink. If someone out there can find the footage of Gleason as the Bandit, you’ll make my day. Thank god he made Nothing In Common with Tom Hanks before he died, because this would have a been a terrible film to end a career with. I was going to include Michael Gambon replacing Richard Harris in the role of Dumbledore, which opens up a whole realm of actors who had to be replaced because they died. Then I realized there’s actually quite a lot of those, so look for that in a future post. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:01:17 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com10/15/2008 10:01:17 AM Forget about Don Cheadle replacing Terence Howard as James Rhodes / War Machine in Iron Man II, which smells a lot like the “we’ll threaten to replace Tobey Maguire with Jake Gyllenhaal” tactic that Sony used for Spider-Man II –– Hollywood has been doing this for years. It was bad enough back in the days of television with Dick Sargent replacing Dick York in Bewitched, but now it’s becoming pretty commonplace for producers to replace actors in iconic roles. Although now it’s more common due to monetary concerns, which seems to be what has taken Howard out of the War Machine suit, it’s also common to see an actor ankle a role because they don’t like the source material, or the direction the character is taking. We’ve put together several different re-castings, which all happened for a variety of reasons: money, dissatisfaction with the script, test audience reactions, and actors just growing tired of playing the same character. Check them out after the break. Alec Baldwin –> Harrison Ford –> Ben Affleck –> Ryan Gosling (?) In Tom Clancy’s series of “Ryanverse” books, action politician and former teacher Jack Ryan has dne everything from rescue a rogue Russian submarine to become the President of the United States. Alec Baldwin first played the role in 1990’s The Hunt for Red October, but he was unavailable for the sequel Patriot Games (which in the books is a prequel), due to a stint on Broadway. The producers then approached Harrison Ford, who took over the role for two movies, with Clear and Present Danger being the highest grossing Ryan film to date. Ford decided not to play the role a third time, and for 2002’s The Sum of All Fears they decided to try and jumpstart the franchise with a young Jack Ryan, casting Ben Affleck in the role. At the time, Ford reportedly told Affleck, “Knock yourself out. I don’t want to do these movies anymore.” Which contrasts with what he just told AOL’s Moviefone: “I thought that we hadn’t quite exhausted the potential of the Jack Ryan character. Those films were, I think, very good movies. I wouldn’t mind doing another of those.” Nevertheless, there’s a rumor that Ryan Gosling will become the new Jack Ryan in Without Remorse, which is currently in development. Personally? I thought Baldwin made the best Jack Ryan, but he’s a better Jack Donaghy. Jodie Foster –> Julianne Moore When Foster declined to reprise the Clarice Starling role from Silence of the Lambs in Hannibal, the producers considered a list of actors that ranged from Winona Ryder to Gillian Anderson, who lost the role because her contract at Fox said she couldn’t play another FBI agent. Even though Foster had initially said she’d do it and had specific notes on the script, eventually Julianne Moore won the part, but in the end it wasn’t much of a prize –– it’s hard to remember that Ridley Scott directed this movie, because it just didn’t have a the spark or charisma of the original. Similarly, if you rent the excellent Manhunter, you’ll see William Petersen in a non-CSI role playing FBI agent Will Graham, who actually captured Hannibal Lecter (oddly spelled Lecktor in this movie), played by Brian Cox. Later Hollywood remade this movie as Red Dragon (the name of the book) with Anthony Hopkins reprising his Lecter role, and Ed Norton playing Will Graham. Although if we include remakes on this list, it’ll stretch on far too long. Katie Holmes  –> Maggie Gyllenhaal Katie Holmes turned down a big payday when she decided not to return for the sequel to Batman Begins, and missed out on being in the biggest movie of this year. It’s still unclear if her decision shows Tom Cruise’s influence at work, or if she just didn’t want to do it now that she’s a mommy, but it was one of those head-scratching moments that just makes you wonder what happened. Maybe she bristled at the paltry two million dollars she was being offered for the role, especially since the part was beefed up for The Dark Knight. Claudia Wells –> Elisabeth Shue and Crispin Glover –> Jeffrey Weisman Back to the Future Part II saw two major roles get recast, and in some cases rewritten completely. Claudia Wells, who played Marty’s girlfriend Jennifer in the first film, decided to leave acting since her mother was diagnosed with cancer, and she later took more time off to have children. Her part was recast with Elisabeth Shue stepping in, and they had to re-shoot the ending sequence of the original movie since that’s how Back to the Future II opens. Additionally, Crispin Glover found out that the producers were using his image without his approval for the sequel, and he sued the directors and producers, including Steven Spielberg. The case was settled out of court, and the Screen Actors Guild later implemented rules to prevent this from happening again. As a result, Glover’s part was recast with Jeffrey Weisman playing George McFly, and most of his scenes show the back of his head, or him floating upside down (he’s supposed to be in traction, having hurt his back) and wearing heavy prosthetics. Burt Reynolds –> Jackie Gleason –> Jerry Reed This story is so strange that it makes me want to go back and watch this movie again, even though I remember how terrible it was when I saw it as a kid. This movie was originally titled Smokey and the Bandit III: Smokey IS The Bandit, with Jackie Gleason playing both Buford T. Justice, and the role of the Bandit. We sure would have like to see him as the Bandit, but apparently audiences didn’t and were too confused by the dual roles. So the studio dumped Gleason as the Bandit, and rewrote the film to have Jerry Reed as the Bandit. If you remember from the first two movies (and it’s forgiveable is you don’t have the lore of Smokey and the Bandit memorized at this point), Reed was the Bandit’s best buddy, Cledus Snow, who drove the big truck. However in this third installment, the Enoses (I swear I’m getting dumber by remembering all of this stuff) decided that the Bandit was too egotistical, and hire Snow to do their bidding. In the climactic scene, when Smokey finally catches the Bandit, he seems him as Burt Reynolds, who reprised the role just for that one moment. Now I need to go get a stiff drink. If someone out there can find the footage of Gleason as the Bandit, you’ll make my day. Thank god he made Nothing In Common with Tom Hanks before he died, because this would have a been a terrible film to end a career with. I was going to include Michael Gambon replacing Richard Harris in the role of Dumbledore, which opens up a whole realm of actors who had to be replaced because they died. Then I realized there’s actually quite a lot of those, so look for that in a future post. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_August_25_Monster_Madness/625/34503/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 8/28/2008 2:27:00 PM
Body: [quote user="unclefestering"] I don't know if you've seen it yet, but you may want to check out The Real World Fears Behind 8 Movie Monsters on Cracked. I was watching Psychoon TCM last night and Norman Bates is the creepiest monster of them all. Just the scene where he ia sitting in the office across from Marian Crane says it all. She is surrounded by the doves and sparrows in the well lighted side of the room, while he is perched on his chair in the shadows surrounded by the owls, hawks and other predatory birds. I think he is even more frightening than Hannibal Lecter. Especially since the later movies like Hannibal drained all the suspense from the character. [/quote] Not sure if you ever came upon this busy discussion thread before: Hannibal Lecter vs Norman Bates
]]>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:27:00 GMTRisseladaWeekly Theme8/28/2008 2:27:00 PM[quote user="unclefestering"] I don't know if you've seen it yet, but you may want to check out The Real World Fears Behind 8 Movie Monsters on Cracked. I was watching Psychoon TCM last night and Norman Bates is the creepiest monster of them all. Just the scene where he ia sitting in the office across from Marian Crane says it all. She is surrounded by the doves and sparrows in the well lighted side of the room, while he is perched on his chair in the shadows surrounded by the owls, hawks and other predatory birds. I think he is even more frightening than Hannibal Lecter. Especially since the later movies like Hannibal drained all the suspense from the character. [/quote] Not sure if you ever came upon this busy discussion thread before: Hannibal Lecter vs Norman Bates http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_August_25_Monster_Madness/625/34451/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: unclefestering
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 8/27/2008 2:36:15 PM
Body: I don't know if you've seen it yet, but you may want to check out The Real World Fears Behind 8 Movie Monsters on Cracked. I was watching Psychoon TCM last night and Norman Bates is the creepiest monster of them all. Just the scene where he ia sitting in the office across from Marian Crane says it all. She is surrounded by the doves and sparrows in the well lighted side of the room, while he is perched on his chair in the shadows surrounded by the owls, hawks and other predatory birds. I think he is even more frightening than Hannibal Lecter. Especially since the later movies like Hannibal drained all the suspense from the character.
]]>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:36:15 GMTunclefesteringWeekly Theme8/27/2008 2:36:15 PMI don't know if you've seen it yet, but you may want to check out The Real World Fears Behind 8 Movie Monsters on Cracked. I was watching Psychoon TCM last night and Norman Bates is the creepiest monster of them all. Just the scene where he ia sitting in the office across from Marian Crane says it all. She is surrounded by the doves and sparrows in the well lighted side of the room, while he is perched on his chair in the shadows surrounded by the owls, hawks and other predatory birds. I think he is even more frightening than Hannibal Lecter. Especially since the later movies like Hannibal drained all the suspense from the character. http://www.spout.com/groups/Serialicious/Re_Hannibal_the_Cannibal/587/28171/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: leeroy711
Post To: Serialicious
Post Date: 5/4/2008 11:17:06 PM
Body: [quote user="mercurial"] Undoubtedly the most widespread and critically acclaimed serial killer movie is The Silence of the Lambs. The acting, direction, dialogue, cinematography, and nature of the characters all coalesce into a fantastically terrifying portrayal of madness (both beautiful - Hannibal, and perverse - Bill). Unfortunately I think the films that followed were rather haphazard and spoil a great character. Manhunter, which was the first filmic adaptation of Harris' Hannibal, wasn't the most profound movie but nonetheless established the character as one of the nastiest antagonists out there. The Silence of the Lambs followed and allowed for the predictable sequels. Hannibal had its moments of gory goofiness but ultimately wasn't anything special. Red Dragon moved the franchise into a different direction and was interesting, but something seemed to be missing. Lastly Hannibal Rising, a prequel following the birth of the man, is intriguing in its execution and beautifully filmed yet lacks that certain something that made The Silence of the Lambs so incredible. Am I wrong? Which of the Hannibal films do you find to be the best? [/quote] You're dead right. I thought Ralph Fiennes acting in Red Dragon was pretty good and but ultimately the only one worth watching more than once for me has always been Silence of the Lambs. Hopkins personified the character so deviantly well that you can still hear some of his dialogue just thinking about the film. Well put.
]]>Mon, 05 May 2008 03:17:06 GMTleeroy711Serialicious5/4/2008 11:17:06 PM[quote user="mercurial"] Undoubtedly the most widespread and critically acclaimed serial killer movie is The Silence of the Lambs. The acting, direction, dialogue, cinematography, and nature of the characters all coalesce into a fantastically terrifying portrayal of madness (both beautiful - Hannibal, and perverse - Bill). Unfortunately I think the films that followed were rather haphazard and spoil a great character. Manhunter, which was the first filmic adaptation of Harris' Hannibal, wasn't the most profound movie but nonetheless established the character as one of the nastiest antagonists out there. The Silence of the Lambs followed and allowed for the predictable sequels. Hannibal had its moments of gory goofiness but ultimately wasn't anything special. Red Dragon moved the franchise into a different direction and was interesting, but something seemed to be missing. Lastly Hannibal Rising, a prequel following the birth of the man, is intriguing in its execution and beautifully filmed yet lacks that certain something that made The Silence of the Lambs so incredible. Am I wrong? Which of the Hannibal films do you find to be the best? [/quote] You're dead right. I thought Ralph Fiennes acting in Red Dragon was pretty good and but ultimately the only one worth watching more than once for me has always been Silence of the Lambs. Hopkins personified the character so deviantly well that you can still hear some of his dialogue just thinking about the film. Well put. http://www.spout.com/groups/Serialicious/Hannibal_the_Cannibal/587/27615/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mercurial
Post To: Serialicious
Post Date: 4/22/2008 12:44:41 AM
Body: Undoubtedly the most widespread and critically acclaimed serial killer movie is The Silence of the Lambs. The acting, direction, dialogue, cinematography, and nature of the characters all coalesce into a fantastically terrifying portrayal of madness (both beautiful - Hannibal, and perverse - Bill). Unfortunately I think the films that followed were rather haphazard and spoil a great character. Manhunter, which was the first filmic adaptation of Harris' Hannibal, wasn't the most profound movie but nonetheless established the character as one of the nastiest antagonists out there. The Silence of the Lambs followed and allowed for the predictable sequels. Hannibal had its moments of gory goofiness but ultimately wasn't anything special. Red Dragon moved the franchise into a different direction and was interesting, but something seemed to be missing. Lastly Hannibal Rising, a prequel following the birth of the man, is intriguing in its execution and beautifully filmed yet lacks that certain something that made The Silence of the Lambs so incredible. Am I wrong? Which of the Hannibal films do you find to be the best?
]]>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 04:44:41 GMTmercurialSerialicious4/22/2008 12:44:41 AM Undoubtedly the most widespread and critically acclaimed serial killer movie is The Silence of the Lambs. The acting, direction, dialogue, cinematography, and nature of the characters all coalesce into a fantastically terrifying portrayal of madness (both beautiful - Hannibal, and perverse - Bill). Unfortunately I think the films that followed were rather haphazard and spoil a great character. Manhunter, which was the first filmic adaptation of Harris' Hannibal, wasn't the most profound movie but nonetheless established the character as one of the nastiest antagonists out there. The Silence of the Lambs followed and allowed for the predictable sequels. Hannibal had its moments of gory goofiness but ultimately wasn't anything special. Red Dragon moved the franchise into a different direction and was interesting, but something seemed to be missing. Lastly Hannibal Rising, a prequel following the birth of the man, is intriguing in its execution and beautifully filmed yet lacks that certain something that made The Silence of the Lambs so incredible. Am I wrong? Which of the Hannibal films do you find to be the best? http://www.spout.com/groups/The_Film_Library/They_changed_the_ending/512/22821/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: The Film Library
Post Date: 12/14/2007 12:14:40 PM
Body: In movie adaptations they so often change the ending? Is this always a crime? It seems like nine times out of ten people hate the ending when it's different from the source material. So why do they do it??One of my favorite books since I was young has been Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None. I remember reading the book in an entire sitting when I was a young adolesecent. It's short and simple, and although I won't deny that parts of the plot are a bit shakey or uncertain if you truely examine it, it's probably the best flat out mystery book I've ever read (although I haven't read many so I'm not saying there couldn't be better ones).Anyways, with any novel the whole thing must be great for it to be a great novel overall, but especially with a mystery novel the ending is of course essential because you will look back on everything in a new light.Well I just saw the original movie adaptation of this book released in 1945 and directed by René Clair. The ending is rather different, and there are a few other weird changes. But what I found out is that it's actually based on the play version which was written or approved by Christie as well. The new ending is more of the "happy" ending which I guess she thought was more appropriate in a time where WWII had just ended.Well it's just reeeeally hard to judge a movie in this situation. How would I have liked it if I hadn't been already anticipating a certain ending? Hard to say. But upon reflection I did mostly enjoy it. Walter Huston is always fantastic. I can't give too many more complaints without revealing essential portions of the plot, but I'm disappointed to find out that even subsequent film and TV adaptations have kept the happier ending from what I read.So what do you think? Was there ever a movie adaptation of a source where the ending was changed for the better?
]]>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:14:40 GMTRisseladaThe Film Library12/14/2007 12:14:40 PMIn movie adaptations they so often change the ending? Is this always a crime? It seems like nine times out of ten people hate the ending when it&#39;s different from the source material. So why do they do it??One of my favorite books since I was young has been Agatha Christie&#39;s And Then There Were None. I remember reading the book in an entire sitting when I was a young adolesecent. It&#39;s short and simple, and although I won&#39;t deny that parts of the plot are a bit shakey or uncertain if you truely examine it, it&#39;s probably the best flat out mystery book I&#39;ve ever read (although I haven&#39;t read many so I&#39;m not saying there couldn&#39;t be better ones).Anyways, with any novel the whole thing must be great for it to be a great novel overall, but especially with a mystery novel the ending is of course essential because you will look back on everything in a new light.Well I just saw the original movie adaptation of this book released in 1945 and directed by Ren&eacute; Clair. The ending is rather different, and there are a few other weird changes. But what I found out is that it&#39;s actually based on the play version which was written or approved by Christie as well. The new ending is more of the &quot;happy&quot; ending which I guess she thought was more appropriate in a time where WWII had just ended.Well it&#39;s just reeeeally hard to judge a movie in this situation. How would I have liked it if I hadn&#39;t been already anticipating a certain ending? Hard to say. But upon reflection I did mostly enjoy it. Walter Huston is always fantastic. I can&#39;t give too many more complaints without revealing essential portions of the plot, but I&#39;m disappointed to find out that even subsequent film and TV adaptations have kept the happier ending from what I read.So what do you think? Was there ever a movie adaptation of a source where the ending was changed for the better? http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_Scary_Movie_Quotes/222/18328/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: FroggyBaBe15876
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 8/17/2007 10:35:46 PM
Body: Ah, my dear. That would be Hannibal, I believe...yes? I thought so. Here's mine. Short and sweet:"Back off. Way off."
]]>Sat, 18 Aug 2007 02:35:46 GMTFroggyBaBe15876HORROR MOVIES 1018/17/2007 10:35:46 PMAh, my dear. That would be Hannibal, I believe...yes? I thought so. Here&#39;s mine. Short and sweet:"Back off. Way off." http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_Hannibal_Lecter_vs_Norman_Bates/222/6910/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Puhnner
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 4/11/2007 12:14:51 PM
Body: Off the subject a bit and call me a heretic, but I always enjoyed Brian Cox as 'Hannibal Lecter' (in Michael Mann's Manhunter ; in fact, I enjoyed this film much more so than Red Dragon), much more than Sir Anthony Hopkins, whose performance seemed to peak for me in the Silence of the Lambs and descend further and further into Sir Anthony playing Hopkins playing Hannibal playing Sir Anthony as the series progressed ( maybe, blame it on the Director instead of Hopkins ). I also found Manhunter much more effective than Red Dragon; and Hannibal only so much fetid bilgewater under the bridge ( hell, even the book stunk ). Brian Cox seemed more real person than the 'super hero' that Lecter became ( I have not seen Hannibal Rising ), similar to Mitchum' Max Cady in Cape Fear compared to De Niro's Cady in Cape Fear.There, I have said it, but it remains only my opinion and subject to the same lack of insight with which all my opinions are formed and proffered..
]]>Wed, 11 Apr 2007 16:14:51 GMTPuhnnerHORROR MOVIES 1014/11/2007 12:14:51 PMOff the subject a bit and call me a heretic, but I always enjoyed Brian Cox as &#39;Hannibal Lecter&#39; (in Michael Mann&#39;s Manhunter ; in fact, I enjoyed this film much more so than Red Dragon), much more than Sir Anthony Hopkins, whose performance seemed to peak for me in the Silence of the Lambs and descend further and further into Sir Anthony playing Hopkins playing Hannibal playing Sir Anthony as the series progressed ( maybe, blame it on the Director instead of Hopkins ). I also found Manhunter much more effective than Red Dragon; and Hannibal only so much fetid bilgewater under the bridge ( hell, even the book stunk ). Brian Cox seemed more real person than the &#39;super hero&#39; that Lecter became ( I have not seen Hannibal Rising ), similar to Mitchum&#39; Max Cady in Cape Fear compared to De Niro&#39;s Cady in Cape Fear.There, I have said it, but it remains only my opinion and subject to the same lack of insight with which all my opinions are formed and proffered.. http://www.spout.com/blogs/phantasma-gore-ia/archive/2007/2/1/5209.aspx Post By: Phantasma-gore-ia
Post To: Phantasma-gore-ia Blog
Post Date: 2/1/2007 8:37:51 PM
Body: Make no mistake, this is nowhere near just a gory violence flick. It's everything you've heard about it and as qualified a thriller as Michael Mann's version Manhunter. Even still, check it and other horror favorites on http://www.bloodgutsandgore.com.
]]>Fri, 02 Feb 2007 01:37:51 GMTPhantasma-gore-iaPhantasma-gore-ia Blog2/1/2007 8:37:51 PMMake no mistake, this is nowhere near just a gory violence flick. It&#39;s everything you&#39;ve heard about it and as qualified a thriller as Michael Mann&#39;s version Manhunter. Even still, check it and other horror favorites on http://www.bloodgutsandgore.com. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/murder/MemberTagFilms.aspxmurder
Number of films tagged: 8748

Number of people who tagged: 157

Number of times used: 830

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 02:57:25 GMT8748157830Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/friendship/MemberTagFilms.aspxfriendship
Number of films tagged: 6791

Number of people who tagged: 154

Number of times used: 979

]]>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:08:37 GMT6791154979Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/revenge/MemberTagFilms.aspxrevenge
Number of films tagged: 5189

Number of people who tagged: 145

Number of times used: 489

]]>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:13:41 GMT5189145489Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/disturbing/MemberTagFilms.aspxdisturbing
Number of films tagged: 283

Number of people who tagged: 119

Number of times used: 394

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:55:54 GMT283119394Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/escape/MemberTagFilms.aspxescape
Number of films tagged: 2868

Number of people who tagged: 76

Number of times used: 279

]]>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:51:44 GMT286876279Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sacrifice/MemberTagFilms.aspxsacrifice
Number of films tagged: 391

Number of people who tagged: 35

Number of times used: 63

]]>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:22:01 GMT3913563Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/serialkiller/MemberTagFilms.aspxserialkiller
Number of films tagged: 996

Number of people who tagged: 32

Number of times used: 64

]]>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:03:15 GMT9963264Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/killing/MemberTagFilms.aspxkilling
Number of films tagged: 7191

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 96

]]>Fri, 07 Aug 2009 13:01:54 GMT71913196Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/cannibal/MemberTagFilms.aspxcannibal
Number of films tagged: 273

Number of people who tagged: 28

Number of times used: 38

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:20:45 GMT2732838Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/serial-killer/MemberTagFilms.aspxserial-killer
Number of films tagged: 64

Number of people who tagged: 23

Number of times used: 76

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:25:45 GMT642376Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/cannibalism/MemberTagFilms.aspxcannibalism
Number of films tagged: 18

Number of people who tagged: 20

Number of times used: 24

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:20:36 GMT182024Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/fbi/MemberTagFilms.aspxfbi
Number of films tagged: 49

Number of people who tagged: 20

Number of times used: 54

]]>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 04:51:04 GMT492054Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/pig/MemberTagFilms.aspxpig
Number of films tagged: 83

Number of people who tagged: 15

Number of times used: 19

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:11:49 GMT831519Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/respect/MemberTagFilms.aspxrespect
Number of films tagged: 218

Number of people who tagged: 13

Number of times used: 19

]]>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 13:01:56 GMT2181319Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/knife/MemberTagFilms.aspxknife
Number of films tagged: 78

Number of people who tagged: 10

Number of times used: 23

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:27:14 GMT781023Tag