This was the first time that I’ve seen this whole movie, start to finish. I’m a little unimpressed with the whole movie. I’m not saying that I don’t like it. Not at all. I don’t feel as wowed as I guess I think I should. That may have something to do with how I watch this movie. From the first time when I saw only parts of the movie until now, I spend my time looking for the skin suits as if I’m playing a demented version of Where’s Waldo? My grandmother was a seamstress in Pittsburgh when the movie was being made; she was good and she also worked a lot with leather and she (along with several others) created the skin suits used in the movie. I end up focusing on the skin suits more than anything else.
There are several things about this movie that I like. One of them being the portrayal of Hannibal Lecter. There’s no argument that he is one of the two psychos of the film. But, I have mixed feelings about him. Casting Anthony Hopkins in this role further complicates this issue because he does such a great job with the role. For a character who is a brutal killer, I kind of like him. He comes across as smart, sophisticated, and dangerous. The brutality of his attacks is enough that it should make the viewer immediately dislike him. But there’s another side of him that is almost likeable (he’s intelligent, values politeness, likes art, etc.).
Part of this may stem from the idea that I don’t know who to cheer on. For example, Dr. Chilton comes across as arrogant and ineffective. He ends up breaking one of his own rules and accidentally leaves a pen in Lecter’s cell. Lecter takes advantage of this and I felt like the doctor was going to get what he deserved. When he kills the two guards and escapes, I was impressed with the plan and relieved that he got away. That kind of reaction would make sense if he were wrongly imprisoned. But, no. Logically, he needs to be locked up. There are so many layers to this character that it complicates the viewers’ reaction to him. It is both interesting and challenging to create a character that is simultaneously vicious and sympathetic.
On the other hand, we have Buffalo Bill. Another violent killer, but I don’t feel one bit of sympathy for him. Even though he has a troubled past and is working out his own personal issues, I just want him to be caught. And if that meant he had to get killed in the process, I was fine with that too. It’s interesting to have two characters who are both brutal murderers be portrayed in such a way that one is likable and the other not. If nothing else, the book and the movie are valuable tools for studying character development.
Lecter, as a character, has a lot of personal charisma. You could have a deep conversation with him and learn a lot from speaking with him -- that is the impression he gives, when he wants to. Mr. Hyde is a disgusting psycho and never gives any other impression; he is pitiful perhaps in the depth of his madness and alienation, but you don't like him or feel sympathy for him. That to me is the difference. Funny how personal charm covers a multitude of sins!
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, as you and Miles state, charm does make up for a lot of things. You can cut someone to the quick, but if you do so with politeness and a little honey, you just may get away with it.
ReplyDeleteLecter does indeed have many layers, and while you really can't root for him to break free and remain so, I almost want to. Especially so he can get Chilton.