Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Red Dragon (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: Red Dragon
Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002


 - posted 10-04-2002 02:18 AM      Profile for Mike Schindler   Email Mike Schindler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Let me preface this by saying that I'm a pretty big fan of Michael Mann's MANHUNTER, and as much as I'd like to look at RED DRAGON on its own terms, I can't. Also, I've never read the novel upon which these films are based.

When I first heard about this project, I thought it was a stupid idea. Why remake a movie that holds up as well as MANHUNTER? If you want to do an origin story for Hannibal, then do just that. It would work fine. It would probably be cool. But no. They needed to do this instead. The more I thought about it, the more OK I was with the idea. I like Brett Ratner a lot, and the cast is amazing. Eventually, I was convinced that this movie could actually be better than the original. Well, it wasn't.

This movie sucks a lot. Everything that makes MANHUNTER cool is gone from this film. What we are left with is mediocrity. They've talked about how well they developed the character of the Tooth Fairy in this version. Now he has motive. Who cares? Did Hannibal have motive? Not really. Did we miss that? No. On top of this, the tooth fairy's development is gained at the expense of Graham's character. He is much more two dimensional in this film. That's stupid.

I can't think anymore. I'm not making sense. I'm too upset and too tired, but there are lots and lots of reasons why RED DRAGON is a terrible terrible movie. I could spend days talking about it, but not right now. There is a Hannibal trilogy with three very good movies. They are MANHUNTER, THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS, and HANNIBAL. They coexist wonderfully in the same twisted movie universe. RED DRAGON does not.

 |  IP: Logged

Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 10-04-2002 06:33 PM      Profile for Dave Williams   Author's Homepage   Email Dave Williams   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well I have to respectfully disagree with you on this. I haven't even seen the movie and by your review I am all hyped to see it now.

Reason? Simple. You stated right early on that you could not be impartial in your review because you are a big fan of the Manhunter Micheal Mann version of this story.

I think the reason that they wanted to do this is simply Money and the fact that Anthony Hopkins did not play Hannibal Lechter in Manhunter, and there was this feeling and need to have some true connectivity.

I do not doubt the level of coolness of any Michael Mann film, I am a fan of his. But I am probably more able to separate myself from my own fanhood to truly discern if the film sucked or not.

I love hopkins and norton both, and really hope to see some fine work between them. I doubt it takes us to the level of Lambs, but we will see.

As soon as I finish watching this film this weekend, I will get back to you and let you know from a very unbiased view if it truly sucked or not.

Dave

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002


 - posted 10-04-2002 06:54 PM      Profile for Mike Schindler   Email Mike Schindler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
But the thing is, I'm not a tremendously big Michael Mann fan. I've only seen 5 of his movies. I liked THIEF, MANHUNTER, THE INSIDER and ALI. I did not care for HEAT. I watched ROBBERY HOMICIDE DIVISION last week and found it interesting enough to watch again, but I'm not at liberty to say why. I've never seen an episode of MIAMI VICE.

Brett Ratner, on the other hand, I am very fond of. I was really anticipating RED DRAGON. I was really disappointed. I can say in a totally unbiased voice that MANHUNTER is waaaaaay better than RED DRAGON. What I'm not so sure about is whether or not it's good on its own. But my guess is no, and my feeling is it doesn't matter, because you might as well just watch MANHUNTER.

 |  IP: Logged

James R. Hammonds, Jr
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 931
From: Houston, TX, USA
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 10-04-2002 07:49 PM      Profile for James R. Hammonds, Jr   Email James R. Hammonds, Jr   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
You did not like HEAT?
Blasphemy!

------------------
Find me online
AOL: Dexter Caldwell
yahoo!: dexter_caldwell

"It is the opinion of the entire staff the Dexter is criminally insane."

 |  IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 10-04-2002 08:01 PM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
You did not like HEAT?
Now I know why I will never watch a movie you recommend.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002


 - posted 10-05-2002 12:26 AM      Profile for Mike Schindler   Email Mike Schindler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I don't know. All of my friends tell me I'm crazy for not liking HEAT. I've actually been tempted to go back and take another look at it. The only time I saw it was in the theater. But here's the thing: It came out when I was fifteen, and the theater in my town was really good at keeping kids out of R rated movies. So when I actually successfully snuck into one, I expected to be rewarded for my efforts with a film which was of the highest quality. I didn't find HEAT to be that.

 |  IP: Logged

James R. Hammonds, Jr
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 931
From: Houston, TX, USA
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 10-05-2002 12:53 AM      Profile for James R. Hammonds, Jr   Email James R. Hammonds, Jr   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well, HEAT was long and a little slow at some points, so I probably wouldnt have gotten into it when I was 15 either.
Do you think that had something to do with it?
Id recommend renting it and watching it again.

------------------
Find me online
AOL: Dexter Caldwell
yahoo!: dexter_caldwell

"It is the opinion of the entire staff the Dexter is criminally insane."

 |  IP: Logged

Darryl Spicer
Film God

Posts: 3250
From: Lexington, KY, USA
Registered: Dec 2000


 - posted 10-05-2002 02:06 AM      Profile for Darryl Spicer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Ok, I have Manhunter in my Laserdisc collection. I thought that movie was a well made film for it's time. (Mid 80's) Red Dragon takes into account a lot of things that were left out of the first film. Yes, they did put more into developing the character of the Tooth Fairy. But I did not feel that the Will Graham character was lacking. I felt more so that it was even keel with the hannible lecter character that was lacking in the original film. I believe that both Manhunter and Red Dragon can stand on both feet as a reflection of two films each representing there time periods of wich the films were made. ***1/2 out of four stars.

 |  IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002


 - posted 10-05-2002 04:39 AM      Profile for Mike Schindler   Email Mike Schindler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
"Well, HEAT was long and a little slow at some points, so I probably wouldnt have gotten into it when I was 15 either.
Do you think that had something to do with it?"

Hmm... That's an interesting point, but my guess would be no. It was right around that point in time that I was falling in love with a number of excessively long movies, most notably, THE ABYSS.

It's weird. My attention span has gotten shorter as I have gotten older. When I was fifteen, I loved the idea of a three-hour film. Things like LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, APOCALYPSE NOW, and CASINO really appealed to me. It was this sort of thinking, like, "Now THAT'S a movie!" But now, I see that something's under an hour and a half, and I think, "Oh, thank God!" There are exceptions, but most of them are made by PTA.

 |  IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 10-05-2002 05:40 AM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
This thread is wandering from Red Dragon. Please open up a new thread on Heat or take the discussion into the Yak forum.

 |  IP: Logged

Darren Crimmins
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 130
From: Dallas, TX, USA
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 10-05-2002 05:50 PM      Profile for Darren Crimmins   Email Darren Crimmins   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Schindler,

Now that I know that you were only 15 when 'Heat' came out explains many of your movie critiques. Did you get to see 'Silence of the Lambs' when it came out? I liked 'Red Dragon' alot because it gave a similar dark mood that 'Silence of the Lambs' had. Not as dark, but soo much better than 'Hannibal'

It is pretty tough to give quality movie critiques when you admit that your attention span has gotten shorter as you have gotten older. Many of the short modern day movies are mostly action and teenage comedies which don't amount to much. Try and find that desire to watch longer movies like you said you used to because many longer movies are long because there is more substance and plot that require that length to develop everything. (Except for Cosner epics)


 |  IP: Logged

Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002


 - posted 10-05-2002 06:19 PM      Profile for Mike Schindler   Email Mike Schindler   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Darren, I'm going to respond to that in the Long Movies thread in YAK so as not to feel the wrath of Brad.


 |  IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 10-06-2002 07:56 PM      Profile for David Stambaugh   Author's Homepage   Email David Stambaugh   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
10/06/2002, 12:10PM, Regal Cinema World 8, Eugene OR, #4, digital sound. Attendance about 30. Slightly soft focus; misframed (flashes at the bottom); and the print was a little too dirty for only being on its 3rd day. Reel 2 seemed to have a lab defect that caused occasional "blotches" in the image from start to end.

I haven't seen "Manhunter" since its original theatrical release. At that time, I liked it enough to pay to see it twice (besides being a good film, where else were you going to hear In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida played that big and loud? ). "Red Dragon" stands very well on its own as a remake of "Manhunter". I liked it a lot. I will say that I didn't get as strong a sense that Graham was risking his own mental well-being as he tried to get into Tooth Fairie's head. But it worked anyway -- just a little different take on things. The 3 Hannibal films with Anthony Hopkins make a good trilogy, and they will probably sell well on video as a package.

I do want to see "Manhunter" again now.



 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 10-08-2002 03:16 AM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
A reasonable film of a shit lit novel which makes for a perfectly entertaining couple of hours, but IMHO is nothing special. The acting, directing and production values were OK and I thought Emily Watson played a very convincing blind character. I guess the film must have been under budget towards the end of the production schedule, hence the spectacular fire just before the end. The William Blake references were quite clever (e.g. the scene with Emily Watson stroking the tiger) and the way in which the sleazy journalist met his end was far more satisfying than any of Anthony Hopkins' 'dissections'!

The psychoanalytic element in the script was pretty obvious, though. Here is a mad loner who tortures and then brutally murders deliberately conventional happy, nuclear families, even killing the dog. Do you think he could possibly have had an unhappy childhood and an abusive mother? No, really? Well bugger me with a soldering iron, I'd never have guessed that. This formula worked for Hitchcock so let's milk it dry.

I was worried at this film having a 15 certificate in the UK. I presume the reasoning for this is that you don't see acts of violence or murder in any significant detail - tomato sauce is about the limit of it. But the extent of what is very clearly implied (i.e. in my opinion would be clear to a 15 year-old) goes over the line, I'd say. In particular, the scene in which Ralph Fiennes seems to become sexually aroused by watching a video of someone he intends to kill while Watson is next to him thinking that she's the reason takes sadistic voyeurism way beyond the 15 level. Coming after the attempted rape scene in Spiderman having a PG-certificate, this is becoming a worrying trend.


 |  IP: Logged

Dave Williams
Wet nipple scene

Posts: 1836
From: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 10-08-2002 12:20 PM      Profile for Dave Williams   Author's Homepage   Email Dave Williams   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I guess the film must have been under budget towards the end of the production schedule, hence the spectacular fire just before the end.

I would tend to agree that they may have kept this films budget under estimates, and had money left over during the fx process.

For those that do not know, most films are filmed entirely out of sequence for very many good and varied reasons.

Key reasons include the obvious that if you have different scenes in the same place throughout the movie, you just shoot them all at once right there, whether they take place at the beginning, middle, or end (it always helps to have really good actors and a really really good continuity coordiator).

Another reason, albeit secondary, is to keep how the movie ends from leaking out to the public before opening.

And a real big reason, is to shoot the cheap stuff first, and then when you get into fx production, you can see just how much money you REALLY have. Movies with great actors and talented directors and cinematographers, tend to shoot less footage, and take less time overall to shoot, keeping overall budgets of drama based features down. So when they start to wrap things up, BAM, extra cash, and the producer says... "LETS BLOW SOME SHIT UP!!!!"

Dave

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.