|
Since the dawn of time, Man has sought to juxtapose pairs of films to see which would win in a fight. To finally bring release to that atavistic instinct, I give you this thread. Here, we'll compare Michael Mann's Manhunter to Brett Ratner's Red Dragon in order to find the objectively better movie, because one must win!!! Thomas Harris first brought the infamous Hannibal Lecter, a mass-murderer with a gustatory approach to the human body—to life with the novel Red Dragon in 1981. The book proved so popular that it got made into a movie twice: first as Manhunter in 1986, then as Red Dragon in 2002. The two films preserve most of the plot and characters of the book, but with decidedly different approaches. The novel deals with Will Graham, a preternaturally-talented FBI investigator who can empathize with and think like the killers he hunts… at the cost of his own mental stability. He reluctantly comes out of retirement to chase a mass-murderer whom the media have dubbed the Tooth Fairy. As the investigation goes on, Graham slowly realizes he can only catch the Tooth Fairy with advice and assistance vouchsafed from his quondam nemesis and the man who once almost killed him: hyper-intelligent and extremely dangerous psychiatrist-murderer Hannibal Lecter. Now we discuss the film adaptations. In the first corner, we have Manhunter…  In Manhunter, we see director Michael Mann at the top of his game. The book's plot necessitated a very introspective, "internal" style of writing. Since Mann couldn't exactly just flash the words on the screen, he instead evoked this style through mood. The lighting, the locations, and the use of color tell us what the characters think in a way that only film can. Unlike Red Dragon, Manhunter pares the plot down to little more than what it needs. As in Miami Vice, Mann appears to care about plot only insofar as what he requires to convey moods and emotions. He prioritizes how a scene feels over what the scene says.  This shot at the beginning of the film pits Molly—the symbol of Will's peaceful home life—against Crawford—the symbol of Will's onerous but potentially life-saving work. The borders between the window panes and the polarized composition show us the inimical positions in which Will's two closest friends find themselves.  I love this shot as well, with Will and Molly in the blue half-light. Mann slowly, elegantly pans and zooms in on the couple as they come to realize they both know what has to happen next.  Nobody knows city photography like Mann. This shot just oozes loneliness, from the hard-driving rain to the solitary reflection looking right back at Will.  I love this shot in particular of Will late in the movie. We can tell what he has on his mind simply by context, body language, the infinitude of pink water before him, and the muddy, drab shrubbery behind him. Manhunter Pros · The film boasts absolutely stunning cinematography, gorgeous and evocative throughout. Mann deftly uses color in a symbolic way that Ratner doesn't appear to even attempt. · Petersen plays Will Graham inimitably, conveying his introversion and heightened empathy through gestures and mannerisms in a way Norton doesn't. Petersen plays the character with the appropriate reluctance and recalcitrance. · Chris Elliott gets a "serious" role that contrasts hilariously with his subsequent career. · You just can't find a better pissed-off FBI agent than Dennis Farina or a better creep than Tom Noonan. · Mann gives the film a dark humor that fits with the novel. The scene where Graham wakes up on an airplane to find a child poring over his gory photos would fit right in the novel. · Frankie Faison. Manhunter Cons · Mann changed the ending, going for something "neater" but ultimately anticlimactic. · Mann took a lot out of the book (but what remains carries a far better through-line of pace and mood than in Red Dragon). · The synth-heavy score sounds powerful and often fitting, but some songs like "Strong As I Am" by The Prime Movers and "Heartbeat" by Red 7 just sound silly today. · The changes made to the plot rob the two most prominent female characters of their agency. · Character names have inconsistent spelling. In the other corner, Red Dragon…  After the massive success of Silence of the Lambs, Hollywood couldn't possibly let Hopkins' career-defining, Oscar-winning work as Hannibal Lecter go unmilked. The sequel, 2001's Hannibal, proved enormously successful in its own right. The following year, Brett Ratner directed this film, which feels like little more than an excuse to reenact the novel with Hopkins in the Lecter role. While Manhunter expands on the book's first act, Red Dragon stretches out the third act instead. Hopkins dominates the first and last scenes, and a number of parts of the novel get rewritten as an excuse to feature his character. He intimidates and hisses his way through each scene, although he ultimately plays only a supporting role in the actual cat-and-mouse game that comprises the actual plot. The other actors all seem more than cognizant that this film serves as Hopkins' show. Most of them betray a very strong sense of not actually wanting to do this film. Despite starring as the main character, Norton sleepwalks his way through, looking bored as a stone throughout.  Red Dragon Pros · Red Dragon features the third and final portrayal of Hannibal Lecter by Anthony Hopkins, who most would agree by this point embodies Lecter in the public consciousness. · This film's ending hews closer to the book than that of Manhunter, with a final contretemps that feels far more climactic. · Ratner's cinematography focuses less on the scenery and more on the characters' eyes (usually blue for some reason). · Minor nitpick… In the original novel and Manhunter, Graham says the symbol 中 means "red dragon," but in reality the symbol has many, many more meanings than that (i.e. middle, inside, center, average, China). This film words the revelation in a way that tiptoes around making that mistake. · Elfman's score sounds more conventional and less dated (but less dynamic and distinctive too). · The CGI work allows for blood and gore far more frank and harrowing than 1986 practical effects allowed. · Frankie Faison. Red Dragon Cons · None of the actors seem well-cast or committed. Philip Seymour Hoffman takes a role as an abrasive, importunate, unscrupulous journalist and mumbles his way through with an irritating somnolence. Emily Watson plays her character with no nuance or ability to think without narrating those thoughts. Norton plays Will Graham with an alacrity and gregariousness that feels incongruous with his character's pensiveness. Norton feels less like a mysterious virtuoso detective than the star of a CBS cop show. Keitel takes a sedulous fed and makes him look lazy and triumphalist. Fiennes has little of the physicality or "ugliness" the others ascribe to his character. · Compared to Mann's work with Manhunter, Ratner's workaday cinematography just seems lifeless and beige, frustratingly anodyne. · While Ratner sticks closer to the book in general, he seems to include scenes without really reconciling them with the rest of the screenplay. As a result, what feels like workable pacing in the book feels uneven and jarring in the film. Ratner seemed to take scenes from the novel and transplant them into his film without understanding why. · Hopkins has a surfeit of screen-time and top billing, even though Lecter serves as a largely incidental character to the actual plot. Indeed, the entire film feels like it only exists to make money off Hopkins playing Lecter. Interestingly, in the novel, Harris erroneously described one painting and ascribed it with the name of the other (to make a long story short, William Blake made wonderful paintings but sucked at naming them). Each film chooses one of the two paintings and sticks with it. Head-to-Head Crawford asks for Graham's help. Manhunter  Red Dragon  Graham sees the murder site. Manhunter  Red Dragon  Hannibal Lecter's "home." Manhunter  Red Dragon  Lecter's cell. Manhunter  Red Dragon  Dolarhyde's house. Manhunter  Red Dragon  You mess with a tiger; you get the horns! Manhunter  Red Dragon  Anyway, as you've undoubtedly figured out by now, I personally have a marked preference for Manhunter. In all of the above shots of scenes derived from the same parts of the book, I find that the ones from Manhunter all look more dynamic and interesting in their compositions. Lines advance; lines recede; figures don't sit or stand strictly parallel. More than that, I find that Manhunter has a heart and a unique identity that Red Dragon lacks. The latter feels like Brett Ratner's excuse to use Anthony Hopkins as his word-puppet, while the former feels like Michael Mann's excuse to tell a story with style and depth. But tell us what you think. And don't you dare go embarrassing me with PYF poo poo. Substantiate your choice. Tell us why you like the one you like. EDIT: No, I'm not putting in a comedy option or a tie option. gently caress you; nut/ovary up and just pick one!
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 10:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 05:55 |
|
|
CloseFriend posted:Graham sees the murder site. Wow. So much more visceral. edit: Now that I have time to look at it, the blood patterns look a lot more fake in Manhunter, but I guess it doesn't matter because its impact is undeniably stronger for the short few seconds it's on screen Steve Yun fucked around with this message at 11:36 on Dec 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 11:31
|
|
|
Manhunter. Close thread. Also everyone look how wrong this is: "...but some songs like "Strong As I Am" by The Prime Movers and "Heartbeat" by Red 7 just sound silly today."
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 12:36
|
|
|
Bonus fact: here's an argument for both Manhunter and "Strong As I Am" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foFw7djyELc (LEGAL DISCLAIMER: Posting this is a symbolic act, not an admission that there is room for argument. And it does not recognize this subject's right to exist. Furthermore, I am submitting a UN resolution to try this man for warcrimes. Nobody be this guy) EvilTobaccoExec fucked around with this message at 12:54 on Dec 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 12:48
|
|
|
CloseFriend posted:Red Dragon features the third and final portrayal of Hannibal Lecter by Anthony Hopkins, who most would agree by this point embodies Lecter in the public consciousness. The Public are morans, Hopkins Lecter is a panto Villain. Manhunter all the way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 13:20
|
|
|
For the shot of Hannibal's "home" in Red Dragon I'm pretty sure they just re-used the footage from Silence of the Lambs. I don't particularly like Manhunter but it's at least distinctive and has memorable things about it for me. Red Dragon is completely forgettable. And Edward Norton's fake hair color was really distracting in every scene.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 13:23
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:For the shot of Hannibal's "home" in Red Dragon I'm pretty sure they just re-used the footage from Silence of the Lambs. I don't really get why Norton goes occasionally blonde for rolls, he did it in 'Keeping the Faith' as well, it's oddly more distracting than it should be. But then I guess if he was better in the role I wouldn't be thinking about such things. Honestly I think he was more engaged in 'The Italian Job' than he was here. Calling him the lead in a CBS Detective show is right on the money since he's utterly bland. It doesn't help that since this is a post 'Silence of the Lambs' world everything seems in service to Hopkins and Lector. The really try to wring as much screentime as they can out of him. There are some flaws in the Mann version, but my favourite contrast is the scene where he questions Hannibal. The "You're insane" line is delivered a lot differently in both versions. Petersen is unsure, and looks away from Lector when he says it. Norton just gives it to him directly. It's a weird, minor, contrast. Norton is too in control as Graham. Petersen is legitimately damaged. He's jittery, he's not all there. It's the aspect of the character that 'Hannibal' (TV) nails as well. He's too good at his job to be doing his job because mentally it can ruin him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 13:51
|
|
|
CloseFriend posted:Dolarhyde's house. I absolutely love the use of colors in Manhunter, even though sometimes it does make the movie look so '80s it hurts. I saw it for the first time earlier this year, and it was great.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 14:24
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:There are some flaws in the Mann version, but my favourite contrast is the scene where he questions Hannibal. The "You're insane" line is delivered a lot differently in both versions. Petersen is unsure, and looks away from Lector when he says it. Norton just gives it to him directly. It's a weird, minor, contrast. Norton is too in control as Graham. Petersen is legitimately damaged. He's jittery, he's not all there. It's the aspect of the character that 'Hannibal' (TV) nails as well. He's too good at his job to be doing his job because mentally it can ruin him. I have Manhunter on VHS, the special edition Anchor Bay DVD with a "director's cut" on it, as well as the Divimax line DVD. All three cuts have some subtle but important differences regarding how off Graham is. Apparently there are nine different cuts of the movie out there for whatever reason. Anyways the director's cut on that Anchor Bay DVD is my favorite except that the transfer is awful. There's a scene where Graham is speaking to a doctor a bit about Lector/Lekter/whatever before going to see him personally, in this longer iteration Graham talks about how he's able to successfully profile people so well and he and the doctor go back and forth to the point where the doctor is asking if Graham ever gets in character too much with these guys or if he ever feels like recreating their exploits himself. Graham loses his patience, stands up and calmly says "I'd like to see Dr. Lektor now." It's not particularly angry sounding, and he stands up very blandly, without excitement. However, it's great because the camera doesn't move, it's a low shot of the doctor's desk with them sitting around it chatting. So when Graham stands up we don't see his face or upper body, we just see the doctor's reaction to him which is a second of borderline terror. I found this really interesting because Mann constantly plays up eye contact, "he wanted to see me," etc. almost as much as Blade Runner, and even in an instance like this where we don't see it, we know Graham's face and eyes give him away as still being unstable. I liked this aspect of Manhunter a lot, on first viewing especially of this particular version of the movie Graham snapping in some way seems extremely possible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 14:43
|
|
|
Manhunter without question. I just saw the movie for the first time a year ago or so and I INSTANTLY fell in love with it. It's got everything I love about Mann.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 15:00
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:Wow. So much more visceral. Yea I guess the Red Dragon murder scene looks more realistic, but everything about the way its handled in Manhunter makes it so much more effective. The way the film starts with Dollarhyde's POV, and then later on Graham walks the same path that he did, except this time when he gets to the bedroom and turns on the lights you see the aftermath. To me that was the scariest scene in the movie and Dollarhyde isn't even involved, its just Graham alone in the house so there's no real danger to anyone. But his narration of what happened and the blood stains really get your imagination going. I can't remember, does Red Dragon also have the "turning on the lights" bit where Graham walks into the bedroom and its dark so you can't see anything at first? That was huge in Manhunter because at first you can tell its a bedroom and you see all the familiar shapes you'd expect, and then when the lights go on you see all the horror at once.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 15:37
|
|
|
See I thought the acting in Red Dragon was generally excellent- I didn't notice anyone "sleepwalking" through their role, even if Hopkins was on the hammy side.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:See I thought the acting in Red Dragon was generally excellent- I didn't notice anyone "sleepwalking" through their role, even if Hopkins was on the hammy side. Me too but its a criticism I've heard over and over again from other people so maybe its just that my standards are low from watching tons of lovely horror movies. Especially Fiennes, the OP said he doesn't project physicality or menace but I found him terrifying in Red Dragon. Noonan is off-putting and has an alien quality to him that few others have, but I think Fiennes did a great job. The exception for me though is Keitel as Crawford, Dennis Farina is just a way more believable FBI agent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
I like Fiennes' version a little better. His speech about Lounds trembling before him needs to be grandiose and over the top. In manhunter he just kind of reads through it quickly in monotone.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:See I thought the acting in Red Dragon was generally excellent- I didn't notice anyone "sleepwalking" through their role, even if Hopkins was on the hammy side. It's not bad acting by any means. Ratner at least put together a great cast, but it is somewhat bland. I never feel like the movie Red Dragon is all that interested in Graham, or the toll of his job. It's not that Norton is bad, it's that he has nothing to play. I do like Feinnes a lot though, one of the things Red Dragon does do well is give him a little more back story - even if it is somewhat cliche.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 23:43
|
|
|
Red Dragon is one of the biggest wastes of a great cast I've ever seen. Manhunter's not one of Mann's best films, but I'll definitely take it over Brett Ratner at his worst.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 23:46
|
|
|
Only three more years until Bryan Fuller and Mads Mikkelsen take their shot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 02:34
|
|
|
I kind of want to do this for the Renny Harlin and Paul Schrader Exorcist sequels.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 02:56
|
|
|
You should.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 04:08
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I kind of want to do this for the Renny Harlin and Paul Schrader Exorcist sequels. Yea that would be pretty awesome, I've watched both recently and its such a bizarre experience. It was kind of fun waiting to see which characters would show up in both and what parts of the story would be changed. Its a really cool example of how much a film is the vision of the director because you end up with two films that couldn't be more different from each other.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 15:17
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Yea that would be pretty awesome, I've watched both recently and its such a bizarre experience. It was kind of fun waiting to see which characters would show up in both and what parts of the story would be changed. Its a really cool example of how much a film is the vision of the director because you end up with two films that couldn't be more different from each other. I just wish the later released Dominion had Vittorio Storaro's cinematography. The way Isabella Scorupco's character in the Harlin version suddenly bleeds to death out of the back of her head out of nowhere towards the end is hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 15:28
|
|
|
There are literally no cons for Manhunter. We could do a whole fuckin' thread on the cinematography of the film. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 16:01
|
|
|
Con: That soundtrack *sucked* and is pretty much the most hilariously inappropriate thing ever for the movie they were going for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:21
|
|
|
DeathChicken posted:Con: That soundtrack *sucked* and is pretty much the most hilariously inappropriate thing ever for the movie they were going for. What the gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:21
|
|
|
It's seriously terrible and I see no way any rational human being could go "Yeah, this moody serial killer movie needs more *80s butt-synth*. Can we get Pet Shop Boys on board?"
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:28
|
|
|
DeathChicken posted:It's seriously terrible and I see no way any rational human being could go "Yeah, this moody serial killer movie needs more *80s butt-synth*. Can we get Pet Shop Boys on board?" See, I agree with you that the Manhunter score sucks but making GBS threads on Pet Shop Boys does make your opinion extremely suspect. '80s synth scores are often good but Manhunter is not a good example of the form.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
There's a time and a place for Pet Shop Boys, but Halloween would not have been improved upon by Loomis picking through the remains of the dog to West End Girls. I can only assume people who like Manhunter's choice of score have blinkers on to the movie as a whole.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
DeathChicken posted:I had a great privilege. I have seen, with wonder and awe, the strength of the Manhunter soundtrack. All I wrote about it, lies. Poor taste made me write them to pull others into a trap on the forums of something awful. Those with poor taste will learn from my own words on what you have to dread because I was forced to lie. It will be more merciful to me than to you. You will lie awake and hear what the Manhunter soundtrack can do. I will be a testament to the truth of this. You did very well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
DeathChicken posted:There's a time and a place for Pet Shop Boys, but Halloween would not have been improved upon by Loomis picking through the remains of the dog to West End Girls. I can only assume people who like Manhunter's choice of score have blinkers on to the movie as a whole. kinda owns: http://www.youtubedoubler.com/?vide...me=terror+girls
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
Visually Mann's version is superior, but that's about where I end my feelings of it being the better version. I really think Hopkins is a spectacular Lector (the character just screams to have an actor like him command the role) and I thought Feinnes was far more impressive. Everything about the Mann version just seems painfully locked in what was cool if you lived in 1986. My one gripe about both is how neither of them kept the book's ending (Manhunter deviated pretty far from it and I was really disappointed).
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 18:24
|
|
|
I think as a kid/teenager a lot of the movies that scared me the most were from the 80's and a lot of them had synth heavy scores. So somewhere along the line my brain just started to connect that style with fear and the connection is still there to this day. Manhunter is one example but in most of Carpenter's work he used synth a lot as well(not just Halloween). I think its hard for me to go to that place where I'm a child at heart and still have all my childhood fears unless I hear some synth.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
Robot_Rumpus posted:Visually Mann's version is superior, but that's about where I end my feelings of it being the better version. I really think Hopkins is a spectacular Lector (the character just screams to have an actor like him command the role) and I thought Feinnes was far more impressive. Everything about the Mann version just seems painfully locked in what was cool if you lived in 1986. Problem is that Hopkins is the ultimate ham. He's not really a subtle actor - as much as I like him. Cox's Lector is curious because he's a fast talker, he has rapid back and forth with Graham. Hopkins seems to savour every line and talk very slowly. He wants every word to have impact but it kind of gets infuriating. I think it's an 'easier' performance to do. So far, for me at least - Mads Mikkelson really owns that role, but then he's had a lot more to work with. He's a genuinely fascinating character, which I never thought would happen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
What I kind of want to see is a sequel for Graham. I never finished Hannibal nor either of these movies, but reading Red Dragon and Silence of the Lambs you know Graham is explicitly hosed up by the end of the book. I wanted to see him either get back together.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
Lotish posted:What I kind of want to see is a sequel for Graham. I never finished Hannibal nor either of these movies, but reading Red Dragon and Silence of the Lambs you know Graham is explicitly hosed up by the end of the book. I wanted to see him either get back together. Support the (excellent) television show, then. Circa S3 should get to Red Dragon territory, which allows room for after.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:Problem is that Hopkins is the ultimate ham. He's not really a subtle actor - as much as I like him. Cox's Lector is curious because he's a fast talker, he has rapid back and forth with Graham. Hopkins seems to savour every line and talk very slowly. He wants every word to have impact but it kind of gets infuriating. I think it's an 'easier' performance to do. So far, for me at least - Mads Mikkelson really owns that role, but then he's had a lot more to work with. He's a genuinely fascinating character, which I never thought would happen. To me, that character IS the exact kind of person who would want every line to have an impact. I would disagree that it's 'easier' to give that performance because hardly any actor can grab your attention like that. But it's cool we get two interpretations of the same character to compare/contrast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 20:39
|
|
|
Darko posted:Support the (excellent) television show, then. Circa S3 should get to Red Dragon territory, which allows room for after. Don't have cable, but I'll look into it some other way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 22:15
|
|
|
Lotish posted:Don't have cable, but I'll look into it some other way. It's an NBC show. Robot_Rumpus posted:To me, that character IS the exact kind of person who would want every line to have an impact. I would disagree that it's 'easier' to give that performance because hardly any actor can grab your attention like that. But it's cool we get two interpretations of the same character to compare/contrast. Three. Wait...four in popular history. I love all but the Hannibal Rising takes for different reasons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 23:09
|
|
|
Red Dragon is one of my favorite movies. Maybe I'm biased because I saw it first, but when I watched Manhunter after I watched Red Dragon, I was really bored. Some scenes stand out, and I agree that the cinematography was evocative, but I really liked Ralph Fienne's portrayal of Dolarhyde. He really made the film stand out for me. I think without Fiennes, Red Dragon really would have been flat, but with him it's great.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2013 23:42
|
|
|
Where can you find the Directors cut of Manhunter? Someone mentioned in the thread they'd seen it but I've never seen it. I love Manhunter, it's just so 80s and perfect in cinematography and just ugh everything everything about that movie, even the music is perfect.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2013 07:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 05:55 |
|
|
It's cool how Manhunter has a lot of similarities to Heat. Criminal and cop both have their romantic lives strained by their chosen professions, world suffused by a neon glow, the houses with big windows by the sea, even the conversation with Lecter is sort of analogous to the meeting in Heat. Of course these are the most prominent elements of Mann's style but I think these two films, made ten years apart, are particularly close. They're both amazing.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2013 10:34
|
|