MPAA Rating: R/Genre: Psychological Thriller/Stars: Anthony Hopkins, Edward Norton, Ralph Fiennes, Harvey Keitel, Emily Watson, Mary-Louise Parker, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Anthony Heald, Bill Duke, Ken Leung, Stanley Anderson, Frank Whaley, Frankie Faison, Tyler Patrick Jones, Azura Skye/Runtime: 124 minutes
If there was ever a thing in the realm of cinema that I may not have understood as a much younger movie lover than I am right now it would have to be how in the world people can love the villain of a story. Of course, with the passage of time and the right amount of Starbucks coffee, I have come to understand that there are at the very least several reasons for why this phenomenon exists. The first is that a villain can make arguments for their motives/actions which, when given the proper thought process are actually quite logical. Indeed it is that reason why, despite being repulsed by his actions, we can understand where someone like Killmonger or Ra’s Al’Ghul is coming from. The second is that a villain can possess a backstory which, upon learning it, can result in the character actually becoming worthy of our sympathies as much as we may hate to admit it. For an example of that, I would urge each of you to look no further than Magneto whose traumatic past as a survivor of the Holocaust definitely makes it easy to understand why he often goes to the lengths that he chooses to in his pursuit of mutant rights. The third is that sometimes the people we are supposed to be rooting for in a film are usually individuals who engage in some of the dumbest behavior that you have ever seen. It is for this reason, at least I am hoping as much, that people will always cheer on slasher villains in their respective franchises. Finally, the last reason that comes to mind would have to be the fact that sometimes the hero is someone who, for all of their positives, can be a bit more on the one-note side than we might like them to be whereas the villain is someone who makes for a much more complex character. Intriguingly the example of a villain that fits into this particular category is someone who is very important to this review overall and that would be the villain known as Dr. Hannibal Lecter. I mean sure he’s the only person I know who would take the phrase “chew you out” literally, but he’s also someone who’s remarkably brilliant, genuinely (yet also perversely) amusing, and very often capable of, albeit in a cryptic manner, doing the right thing even while still being a cold-blooded killer. It is for these reasons incidentally that both 1986’s Manhunter and 1991’s Silence of the Lambs have managed to become iconic films (besides the fact that both are phenomenally made of course). When it comes to the rest of Hannibal’s cinematic exploits however, there is one that I feel is a bit more underrated than the others. That being the 2002 slice of cinema, and film I happen to be reviewing for you today, Red Dragon. To be sure, it might not be perfect, but even so with the aid of fairly solid work on both sides of the camera, this is one cinematic outing that is still capable of giving us a relatively engrossing mystery with a collection of spine-tingling moments thrown in for good measure.
The plot is as follows: An adaptation of the book of the same name by Thomas Harris, Red Dragon first winds the clock back to the year 1980 and takes us to the distinct locale of Baltimore, Maryland. A place that, although usually more known for the Ravens or the Orioles, is about to become known for something else entirely. This is because as our story is getting underway, an FBI agent of some skill and renown by the name of Will Graham is paying a late-night visit to a noted forensic psychologist named Dr. Hannibal Lecter for his opinions on some updates he has made on a psychological profile the two have been working on. It seems that there is a serial killer afoot who, unlike many of their respective peers, has not been keeping any trophies from their victims; rather, they have been choosing to chow down on them instead. Of course, if you know anything about good ol’ Dr. Lecter you know that he takes this revelation from Will in a manner that is (big surprise coming up here) not so well and, in the ensuing chaos, both men are seriously wounded with Lecter eventually being imprisoned and our intrepid hero Mr. Graham making the choice to retire and moving to Florida with his family to try and escape the demons of his past. Moving ahead a few years later however, and it seems that the demons aren’t quite ready to relinquish their hold on Will just yet. A belief that is soon solidified by the arrival of Will’s mentor Special Agent Jack Crawford. It seems that another serial killer, known only as the “Tooth Fairy”, has emerged from the shadows and already horrifically butchered two entire families and, due to the killer’s projected deadline until they feel compelled to kill again fast approaching, Crawford would love Will to come back into the fold one more time and aid him in catching this scumbag before he’s able to take any more innocent lives. Yet by choosing to do so however, we see that our hero is doing more than just simply wading back into some potentially very dark waters that he really hoped to leave as far behind in the rearview mirror as he possibly could. Rather, he is also going to find himself having to engage in a battle of wills with the imprisoned serial killer who nearly took his life in order to find this serial killer before they can cause anymore death and destruction than they already have. Thus can our hero go toe to toe with his worst nightmare and get him to reveal information that could stop this latest terror in their tracks or is he about to lose everything in this final hunt for pure evil including his life to say nothing of those he holds dearest in the world? That I will leave for you to discover for yourself…..
Now right off, it should be said that the work done by the various departments behind the camera might not be on the same exemplary level as either Manhunter “86” or Silence of the Lambs, but they are also most assuredly leaps and bounds better than what audiences would get with 2007’s Hannibal Rising respectively. Without question, this starts with the work done at the helm by the now-disgraced Brett Ratner and, while it is nowhere close to what Jonathan Demme or Michael Mann brought to the franchise, he still does a decent job all the same. Perhaps the key distinction that really brings Ratner’s work here down a notch or two is the fact that, unlike Demme especially, Ratner’s directorial style tends to be a lot more literal whilst not really permitting the distinct psychological intricacies that are essential here to really take root like they ought to. As a result, the overall story not only doesn’t possess as much in the way of intensity, but it also sticks a lot closer to the typical ingredients for a slice of cinema in this respective genre thereby ensuring that you can fairly easily predict just where this story is going to go at any given moment. Thankfully, the rest of the work done behind the camera seems to be aware of Ratner’s dilemma and, as a result, they all are able to do a fairly admirable job at righting the ship so to speak. Without question, I think one of the key elements that aids this film in operating as well as it does would have to be the fact that Ted Tally, who also wrote Silence of the Lambs back in 1991, came back to write this installment’s screenplay. I say this because Tally, much as he did with that film, does a marvelous job of right from the word go providing the film with a tone that is uneasy to say nothing of eerie and an atmosphere that feels fairly bleak to say nothing of tense and genuinely suspenseful. Equally worthy of note however would have to be the fantastic work done by the undeniably gifted Dante Spinotti (1995’s Heat, 1992’s The Last of the Mohicans, and 1986’s Manhunter among others) in the cinematography department. Yet, unlike his first time telling this story with the aforementioned Manhunter, we see that here Spinotti gives us work that is less stylish and more in the vein of something that we might be more likely to see in a film noir while also showcasing wonderful degrees of both discretion and detail respectively. Lastly, I most assuredly feel that this section would be woefully incomplete if I didn’t devote some time in it to praise the work done by iconic composer Danny Elfman (1989’s Batman, 1993’s The Nightmare Before Christmas, 1988’s Midnight Run, 1988’s Beetlejuice, and 1982’s highly underrated Forbidden Zone among many others) in terms of this film’s musical accompaniment. Indeed Elfman does a terrific job here at giving this film a score that, much like the rest of the work done behind the camera, not only sends a shiver or 5 down the spine, but which also effectively conjures up an atmosphere for the audience that seems to be an equal mix of tension and malicious gloom respectively. Suffice it to say that when you also factor in solid work in the editing department by Mark Helfrich (2000’s Scary Movie, 1991’s The Last Boy Scout, 1995’s Showgirls, and 2011’s Tower Heist among others), it’s clear that the work done behind the camera definitely is not flawless by any measure, but each department by and large still proves to be quite solid both on an individual level and within the framework of the overall film respectively.
Alongside the solid work done by the various departments behind the camera, this particular cinematic outing is also blessed to contain an equally as terrific collection of performances in front of the camera as well. To no surprise, this starts with screen legend Sir Anthony Hopkins reprising the role of Hannibal Lecter and again he is absolutely brilliant in the role. Unlike Silence of the Lambs and Hannibal from ’91 and ’01 respectively, we see that Hopkins makes the choice to play the character less as the charming yet diabolical antihero of sorts from those prior installments and more so as the ruthless, cold, and calculating monster that he’s been described as to us for all these years. More than that, we see that Hopkins also does a remarkable job at giving Lecter a genuine degree of both malice and, dare I say, hatred on the inside towards Will which he effectively keeps buried under his trademark calm and composed exterior whilst also giving us flashes here and there that prove to be quite chillingly effective. Suffice it to say that it’s one heck of a performance and a brilliant final bow for Hopkins’ nothing short of legendary take on the character. Besides Hopkins, the film also gifts audiences with a wonderful turn from Edward Norton (taking over for Gil Grissom ehh William L. Petersen) in the role of Will Graham. Indeed Norton does a terrific job here of giving the character an intriguing juxtaposition within his psyche consisting of the fact that, despite being consistently haunted and revolted by the various mindsets of the monsters he hunts, he is also very much stricken with a desire to empathize with them as well due to possessing what he terms “cognitive empathy”. Suffice it to say it’s a very intriguing turn and one that Norton plays admirably well. Alongside Hopkins and Norton however, this slice of cinema also features an absolutely spine-tingling good performance from Ralph Fiennes as Francis Dolarhyde. Indeed to say a lot about his character would be absolutely spoilery, but what I will say is that the manner in which Fiennes is able to, figuratively, take us by the hand and guide us, on both a physical and mental level, through the mind of the individual he is playing is nothing short of incredible to say nothing of the one most underrated antagonists in 2000s cinema. Lastly, I think that this section would certainly be lacking if I didn’t talk about the skilled co-starring performance provided by the late yet great Phillip Seymour Hoffman in the role of tabloid reporter Freddy Lounds. Yes I will always have a soft spot for Stephen Lang’s take on the character from 1986’s Manhunter, but there is also no denying that Hoffman does a fairly solid job in his own right at bringing this iconically sleazy, lecherous, and amoral character to life. That and, without going into spoilers, his exit from the film is pretty great too….in a twisted sort of way. Suffice it to say that when you also factor in efforts from such talents as Emily Watson who brings a wonderful touch of humanity to the proceedings, Harvey Keitel who isn’t too bad when it comes to replacing Scott Glenn in the role of Jack Crawford, Mary-Louise Parker, Anthony Heald reprising his role of the wonderfully smarmy Dr. Chilton, Ken Leung, Bill Duke, Frank Whaley, Stanley Anderson, and Frankie Faison reprising his role of Barney the Orderly among others it’s clear that this slice of cinema might have its issues, but the work done by this cast certainly does all that it can to help make this cinematic nightmare an engaging sit all the same.
All in all and at the end of the day is Red Dragon a perfect slice of cinema to watch whilst enjoying, just to pull a couple of completely random items out of the proverbial hat, a tin can full of fava beans alongside a nice bottle of chianti? Sadly that is not the case though not for lack of effort on the part of either this slice of cinema’s cast and crew. With that in mind, is this going to give you the worst case of cinematic indigestion since 2007’s Hannibal Rising? Thankfully, I can also assure you that is not the case either. To be sure, this film is far from flawless dear reader thanks in large part to the fact that not only is the work done by Brett Ratner at the helm not on the same level as his predecessors, but also because the story isn’t entirely one that’s all that surprising. A feat that is due in equal parts to the fact that not only have we as movie goers seen this particular story adapted before, but also because this cinematic adaptation seems to cling to the typical ingredients you might see in a slice of cinema like this much tighter than Peanuts’ Linus has ever tried to grab ahold of his beloved blanket. On the other hand, the rest of the work done behind the camera is quite solid and the work done in front of the camera by the truly game cast of players is absolutely fantastic with each and every one of them getting a chance to shine no matter how much or little their overall amount of screentime during the course of the film’s 125-minute, including credits, runtime. Suffice it to say that it might not be the most exquisite in terms of either psychological thrillers, movies featuring Hannibal Lecter, or both, but at the same time there is also no denying that this is nevertheless a most assuredly engaging, thrilling, and entertaining slice of cinema that also has the added bonus of giving us more quality time with one of cinema’s most iconic antagonists. Just make sure that when you see this you keep a very close eye on who’s watching it with you especially if they have a book in their hands entitled “To Serve Man”. Not trying to spook you or anything, but if you know your pop culture references and/or anything about one of the characters in this movie then that might be one person you might wish to keep at a Mister Fantastic-style arm length. Make of that what thou will dear reader. On a scale of 1-5 I give Red Dragon “02” a solid 3.5 out of 5.
