Oct 27, 2002 08:09 PM
2398 Views
(Updated Oct 27, 2002 08:11 PM)
Whereas Hannibal was pointless fun, and The Silence of The Lambs was pure psychological terror at its best, Red Dragon is unfortunately just too much been there done that. Right off the bat that I was thoroughly disappointed in screenwriter Ted Tally's adaptation, which left its central characters mostly undeveloped and their groundings unbelievable - all because of a single scene! In the end, Red Dragon just left me pondering a lot of pointless ruminations and what-ifs.
Technically, Red Dragon can be classified as a remake of Michael Mann's flawed but interesting 1986 Manhunter. In Manhunter, actor William Petersen gave a powerful performance in the role of FBI Agent-Profiler Will Graham, adding both depth and texture to an already powerful character in an interesting screenplay (if only they had axed the horribly cheesy 80's soundtrack).
But in Red Dragon, the role of Will Graham was botched right from scene one, at no fault of actor Edward Norton. Here, Red Dragon gives us an almost incompetent and even bumbling Will Graham, who happens upon the crimes of his greatest enemy by mere happenstance. It's a joke really, and a slap in the face to audiences.
It actually made me angry, because if Red Dragon had never shown the capture of Hannibal Lecter, we could've had an awesome movie. The capture of Hannibal the Cannibal is something that is hinted at in both Manhunter, Silence of the Lambs and Hannibal, but it's something that I don't really wanna see. This character is larger than life, and it seems almost impossible that any man could take him down. So, when we do see it in Red Dragon, it just makes the characters all the more cloudy, unrealistic and uncaptivating for me: especially Will Graham.
The lack of a capture scene in Manhunter also made Will Graham all the more mysterious and interesting: because here is a man that defeated Hannibal the Cannibal, but we don't really know how! And by not showing the capture, it made the famous ''you think you're smarter than me?'' scene of all the more potent and psychologically ingrain for the viewer in Manhunter, and certainly would have in Red Dragon as well.
Unfortunately, from that point on, Edward Norton's character in Red Dragon held no believability for me. And that's what is so annoying --- this could have been such a wonderful film --- but the first scene just botched it! In-spite of some stunningly powerful performances by Ralph Fiennes as the evil and all too real Blake-fanatic tooth-ferry! In-spite of the amazing performance by Emily Watson as the outwardly-fragile but innerly-powerful Reba McClane! In-spite of Hopkins himself, hamming it up on screen once again as Hannibal the Cannibal, stuck in his dark prison cell for what will probably be an eternity!
No, the basic faults of the setup of Red Dragon just lie too deep to be forgivable. If only they had axed that one scene in the beginning; and opted to just start the movie by diving right into the present day investigation of Ralph Fiennes's Tooth-Fairy, we could have easily had a near-perfect film.
Because, in the end, there really was nothing wrong with the cinematography and editing, and even the music. Unlike the all-too clean and nice looking Manhunter, the true darkness of these characters came through in their very surroundings and settings. Everyone was where they rightfully should be in this film.
And my final gripe with Red Dragon would lie in the recasting of Agent Jack Crawford. Although I am a fan of both Dennis Farina who played the role in Manhunter and Harvey Kietel who had it in Red Dragon (and one could easily argue that both actors can ham it up equally well); for me Scott Glenn in Silence of the Lambs always held the torch in this role, giving the most textured performance of the three actors. It was great to see the return of Barney and Dr. Chilton with the original actors from Silence of the Lambs, so why couldn't they get Scott Glen? He isn't dead according to the Internet Movie Database!
So in the end, I'm sad to say that Red Dragon is nothing more than an interesting experiment in a mediocrity that wants to be more. And like Hannibal before it, Red Dragon unfortunately offers little insight into the motivations of its characters on screen, and as such, little reason to be sitting in the theatre watching it.
My Grade for ''Red Dragon'': B-
(Movie originally reviewed on October 12, 2002)
