Ìý User Rating 
"The Silence of the Lambs" gave us the definitive portrayal of Hannibal Lecter, one of the most powerful screen creations ever. So consuming of our attention was Lecter, thanks to a performance of unnerving, motionless power by Anthony Hopkins, that the star is - in our minds - still welded to that role above all. It is indeed Hopkins' talent, his reflection of the film's unsettling mix of sheer scares and black fun, that is both "Hannibal" 's strength and weakness. Without Hopkins' steely, devouring stare the film would be weak indeed, yet he also serves to highlight the thinly-drawn characters elsewhere. Most disappointing of all is Julianne Moore who, through no fault of her own, is saddled with playing Clarice Starling (the obsessive FBI agent - Jody Foster in the first film) with a mix of nothing but thoughtfulness and zeal, while poor Ray Liotta (whatever happened to his ascending star?), is reduced to breathing life into her racist, sexist sidekick. Gary Oldman, whose name has vanished from the main credits, is Lecter's disfigured victim who wants revenge, specifically to feed the evil doctor to his singular of wild boars. Oldman, convincingly calculating and mean, certainly sports makeup that scares.
The interludes which exclude Hopkins (the strands involving the victim and the FBI are badly woven into the first hour) are nowhere near as vibrant as when he is on screen, which he is especially in the second half when he returns to America to haunt his favourite agent. (Their mutual dependence supplies quite a few dramatic sparks.) Ridley Scott even integrates the flatter moments with his permanently creeping camera and claustrophobic close-ups. The result is well-sustained tension throughout.
Visit the official "" website.
Read about the first film featuring Hannibal Lecter.
Read an interview with "Hannibal" producer, Dino De Laurentiis.
Read an interview with Hans Zimmer, composer for "Hannibal".
A ridiculously contrived plot
