Countries - USA.
Creators - Thomas Harris.
Anthony Hopkins.
Release Year - 1991.
.
Duration - 118 M
➡✶ ★✻★✻★✻★✻★✻★✻★✻★✻★✻
➡✶ 
➡✶ STREAM
➡✶ ⊛⌘⊛⌘⊛⌘⊛⌘⊛⌘⊛⌘⊛⌘⊛⌘⊛⌘
For character development of Hannibal Lecter, please view Red Dragon, first.
It is the prequel to this movie, and bestows the viewer with much needed information not gleaned from this production.
The end of "Red Dragon" tells us that Hannibal has an upcoming visit from another FBI agent to look forward to; a female agent. He asks for her name but due to the nature of prequels, we already have that information: Clarice Starling. This is one of those Oscars-dominating movies whose name was on the tip of everyone's tongue for a while. From time to time, a movie comes along which is so annoyingly popular as to make me wish to never see it.
Mainstream popularity is not wholly attractive to me, and I tend to avoid it at all costs. However, I was forced to view this film as a class requirement in college. So I rented it, determined to hate it.
First of all, the whole movie, although released in the early 90's, appears to be obsessed with the 1980's. The clothing, the hair styles, the clichés, the soundtrack, and the atmosphere seems to be wrapped in a time warp. Starling's (Jodie Foster) character in particular, seems to be a walking cliché. She is a hapless hick; an unfortunate who is, as Lecter put it. one generation away from poor white trash."
Secondly. I was born in the south, and I can tell you that her accent, though sometimes a decent reminiscing of poor West Virginia, is horrible. It comes and goes seemingly at whim.
Third. The training and knowledge Starling exhibits, combined with the fact that she grew up poor, in a home where sewing was almost a certain necessity, the fact that she missed the obvious sewing patterns of skin removed from the victims just does not work for me. I grew up upper middle class, and I knew in the first 30 minutes what Buffalo Bill was up to. Her character should have been written to be more intelligent. She was able to puzzle out Lecter's riddles, but not see what was staring her right in the face?
And lastly. While the film quality is horrible; grainy and low quality, the cinematography itself is startlingly good.
All that having been said, the psychological aspects of this film are above reproach. Dr. Lecter's character, portrayed brilliantly by Anthony Hopkins, is the perfect portrayal of a psychopathic sycophant with a "taste" for high society.
As a slave to his own superiority, he is a thousand times more dangerous than those psychopaths who believe they are on a holy mission, or at the head of some spiritual metamorphosis into a higher state of being.
Lecter is under no such delusion. He is the brilliant sociopath who can blend into society without casting even the briefest hesitation in our acceptance of his social graces and high society politeness. He does as he does, merely as a means to humor himself, and for no other reason. There are no outward clues or appearances of anything gone wrong within and therefore, is all the more deadly for it. He
His manipulation of Starling is on a high intellectual level. He is a sage of such devious management of others' minds. His knowledge of Buffalo Bill, the newest personification of sickness, brings Starling to his cell. As a brilliant psychiatrist turned "Chesapeake Slasher, Lecter has had the opportunity to touch many lives; to shape, mold, and guide others less fortunate than he. Indeed, his influence may very well have assisted Buffalo Bill in his crossing the stream between being a confused and needy individual, to that of a homicidal psychopath.
Many researchers have agreed that offender profiling can be a useful tool in solving serial homicides (Egger, 1998; Stevens, 1997; Holmes, 1998; Canter, 1994; Douglas and Olshaker, 1995. However, the question remains as to whether the lack of ability the modern police department has in dealing with serial homicide has created a real need for this type of investigative practice.
A lack of psychological training, limited resources, and an apparent rise in serial homicide rates may be creating the appearance that police need new investigative techniques, when in reality what may be more appropriate is a higher standard of psychological training among police investigators.
The number of serial killers presently active in the United States has been estimated to be between 30 and 500, depending on the source (O'Reilly-Fleming, 1996. Just think. With the possibility of 500 serial killers who are "active" in the US, how many of them are as educated and intelligent as the character of Hannibal Lecter? The statistics are chilling at an estimation of 80% O'Reilly-Fleming, 1996.
Many serial killers are professionals; doctors, lawyers, even law enforcement personnel or city employees. People who have passed the civil service tests, psychological evaluations, and thorough screenings. Sociopaths are such due to their ability to "blend in" with our society without any obvious dysfunctions.
How many people do you know who are a little "quirky, eccentric, or just plain freaky? Chances are, they are not the homicidal maniacs in your lives. Chances are, they are the very polite, nice, friendly and helpful person at the drug store where you go; the empathetic lab tech who is drawing your blood; the family physician with the terminal about this, and these movies, next time you encounter an overly-polite stranger.
Just a thought.
This movie rates a 9.8/10 from. br>
the Fiend.
0コメント