Connect with us

Published

on

Some characters are better when presented mysteriously, and such is definitely the case with Dr. Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins) in Jonathan Demme’s The Silence of the Lambs. Then again, he isn’t the only character harboring mysteries and secrets. In addition to the film’s other main serial killer, Jame “Buffalo Bill” Gumb (Ted Levine), you have FBI agent-in-training Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster). From the film’s beginning, we get a sense of her somewhat cold, distant, detached personality, and a lingering sense that she may have some mental ailment, something holding her back yet forcing her to prove herself.

Obviously, as The Silence of the Lambs progresses in its cat-and-mouse games, Dr. Lecter explores certain elements of her psyche, and there are no strong hints she is putting up a false front. Also, curiously, Hannibal seems to respect her for doing this, rather than sadistically toy with it as much as he could. This is, of course, in stark contrast with how he treats certain other characters, such as U.S. Senator Ruth Martin (Diane Baker), who is particularly victimized by his snide humor. So the question becomes: What is with Dr. Lecter’s decisions in this film? That’s as interesting as it is mysterious.

Dr. Lecter’s Perception as Shown in ‘The Silence of the Lambs’

Before he worked in Florence, Italy under the stolen identity of Dr. Fell in the film Hannibal, most of us knew Hannibal Lecter as an exceptionally unique inmate at the Baltimore State Hospital for the Criminally Insane (obviously, this title might now be deemed politically incorrect, but it flew back in 1991). We quite instantly recognize Lecter as a complex, intriguing, menacing character, who creepily never seems to blink and always has insight into the psychology of anyone in the room. Yes, he makes it clear to Clarice that he’s dangerous, but (in his own ways) tries to reassure her that he’s somehow a civilized murderous cannibal.

It’s a strange and volatile cocktail of character elements, and the average viewer surely wonders how many he has killed and fed from versus how many he has spared, and for what reasons. Also, because Clarice is difficult to read, we don’t quite know how vulnerable she really is to Dr. Lecter. We do know that, if he is unconvinced she is being genuine, he’s unlikely to assist her in any way. This already provides some insight into how his mind works. Like practically anyone else, Dr. Hannibal Lecter has some respect for honesty, integrity, and a willingness to engage one seriously and with fairness. At the same time, Lecter is aware of the dual nature of his engagements with Clarice, so he knows there must always be some level of deceit between the two of them, making The Silence of the Lambs a psychological game of cat-and-mouse.

Advertisement

Lecter’s More Refined Side vs. the Articulate, Brooding Brute Behind Glass

Because of the groundwork laid by The Silence of the Lambs, audiences came to know and respect who (and what) Dr. Lecter is. The events of this film helped us believe that, yes, Lecter can speak near-perfect Italian and is widely knowledgable about things like the history of Florence, Italy. We also recognize that, to a considerable degree, this veil of high culture and encyclopedic knowledge base allowed him to conceal his brutal side. In fact, we are given the impression that, if Clarice isn’t careful, she might think the stories she has heard about him are lies.

In a way, Clarice ends up lowering Dr. Lecter’s own defenses in the cat-and-mouse game, too. It seems he cannot approach her from any single angle, due to her often unassuming manner, yet she’s fully capable of challenging him if he is deceitful, showing a lack of fear and enough charisma to impress him. For example, Lecter blunders noticeably in his attempt to prevent her image from being sexless, as he improvises stories about her sexual encounters. She notes he is being crass, and he noticeably retreats from this psychological line of attack, or maybe even clumsy flirtation. It’s still interesting how this interpersonal mystery between the characters ties into solving the Buffalo Bill murders.

Would Dr. Lecter Kill Clarice?

I only vaguely remember the first time watching The Silence of the Lambs. However, I’m pretty sure I never assumed he planned to kill Starling by the movie’s end. Yes, he plans to make Dr. Frederick Chilton (Anthony Heald) into a special project, but there’s every reason to assume Dr. Lecter’s honest about not making her life a living hell. Quite simply, he likes her too much. It’s hard to say exactly why, but it doesn’t seem to be merely because he’s attracted to her, but he seems to respect her dedication.

Let’s face it, he also has the ability to pick and choose victims based on his own calculations, be they plain or esoteric to our own understandings. Although he is cold and calculating, he also seems capable of grasping things like empathy, at least intellectually. Thomas Harris-based films often play with this idea about killers being complex and evolving. As another example, Red Dragon‘s “Tooth Fairy” killer decides to torch his house to fake his own death (and ostensibly eliminate some evidence of his crimes).

In the end, all movies can be interpreted in any way we choose, with some ways being more plausible than others. In the universe firmly established in The Silence of the Lambs, it seems Clarice would have the luxury of safety from dying at his hands (or teeth). FBI Agent Jack Crawford (Scott Glenn) and Dr. Chilton are not wrong to call Lecter deadly, and that’s part of why his story has branched out well past 1991, and he has become one of the more complex horror icons out there.

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movies n TV

Dexter Original Sin Gets Darker with Kid In A Candy Store

Published

on

Episode two of Dexter, Original Sin, was just as wonderful as the first. As a long-time Dexter fan, I find it added so much to the background of the story. And if you’re a new fan, I promise you won’t feel left behind.

The story

At the start of our episode, Dexter is learning the ropes of his new internship at Miami Metro. He’s getting a little hazing but is learning how to fit in.

Sarah Michelle Gellar and Patrick Gibson in Dexter Original Sin.

Especially when he starts digging into the old files and finding new playmates for his Dark Passenger.

Meanwhile, Deb is struggling. She feels underappreciated and ignored at home. So, she decides to steal some jewelry from around the house for some quick spending money. Having little in the house in the way of jewelry, she happens upon a pair of earrings in Dexter’s room.

Advertisement

Nurse Mary’s earrings, to be specific.

And finally, in what will probably be the storyline for the series, a little boy is kidnapped. While he looks like a victim from the first episode of Dexter, or at least dressed in the same school uniforms, we soon find out that he’s the son of a judge. And his kidnapping might have something to do with the death of Dexter’s biological mother.

What worked

I’ve often complained about slow episodes in a TV season or mini-series. The episodes that just don’t have anything going for them. The episodes that are needed to set up the story, but otherwise are kind of dull.

This is an example of that sort of episode done well. It is true that there were no murders in this episode. There was only one dead body, and it was already dead when we got there.

But that didn’t mean the episode was uninteresting. There was character development. There was comedy. And most importantly, it had a storyline that had a satisfying conclusion. Specifically, Deb stealing Dexter’s trophy earrings and trying to sell them.

Advertisement
Patrick Gibson, Molly Brown and Christian Slater in Dexter Original Sin.

This little storyline worked on so many levels. One, it heightens tension because we know those earrings can lead the police to Dexter for the murder of Nurse Mary. Two, it shows how frustrated Deb is with her life and how far she will go to have a little fun. Three, it shows how far she won’t go when she refuses to sell her mother’s pearls. And four, it gives us a satisfying beginning, middle, and end of a story while we’re doing the necessary work of laying a foundation for the rest of the series. This was a masterclass in subplots.

I also want to point out that, so far, this series works by itself as much as it works as a prequel. I would watch Dexter Original Sin if I’d never heard the name Dexter Morgan before. And while it certainly benefits from its predecessors, it isn’t only relying on that.

What didn’t work

All that being said, I’m afraid there is still one glaring issue with this series. I hate Gellar’s character.

Yes, I am biased. But hear me out.

Tanya is supposed to be Dexter’s mentor. She got him the job as a paid intern. It would stand to reason that she did that because she wanted to take him under her wing. And yes, I am aware that a certain kind of teacher likes to knock their students down a peg or two. But she seems more interested in proving what a Strong Female she is to this college student than actually teaching him.

Advertisement

And frankly, this is some of the most sexist stuff I’ve ever seen on Dexter. This show has a long history of being pretty good about gender relations. It passes the Bechdel test. All of the female characters have flaws, strengths, and personalities. It’s almost like they’re, gasp, real people. None of them have been the girl hero with no personality other than being the Strong Female until Tanya was introduced. And given how similar she is to Buffy, and how unlike the rest of the cast this character is, I sense some meddling from Gellar herself.

Do better.

I am so pumped for the rest of this mini series. It is clear that everyone working on this series, except Gellar, are huge fans of the original show. Everyone is going a great job, the story is great, and I cannot wait to see what happens next.

4 out of 5 stars (4 / 5)

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movies n TV

Heretic:

‘It’s a simple choice that should not be made simply: Belief or Disbelief?’

Published

on

A24‘s chilling religious horror film, Heretic, arrived in theatres this November, forcing viewers to confront the unsettling line between faith and doubt. Directed by Scott Beck and Bryan Woods, this edge-of-your-seat thriller will leave audiences deeply disturbed as Sister Barnes (Sophie Thatcher) and Sister Paxton (Chloe East) pass over the threshold of Mr. Reed’s (Hugh Grant) home where they undergo a terrifying experience that shatters their beliefs.

The Plot.

Sister Barnes and Sister Paxton are Mormon missionaries for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. As the opening scenes roll they are visiting houses in an unnamed, rural Colorado town. These houses are from a list of people who have shown interest in joining the church. After being rejected and ignored several times, they arrive at the door on Mr. Reed, a pleasant gentleman who invites them in the discuss the church, promising his wife is home in the kitchen to put the Sister’s minds at ease.

Welcoming the women to sit in his living room, Mr. Reed initiates what amounts to be an awkward conversation, questioning the faith of the missionaries. Sensing that something is amiss, with Mr. Reed’s wife still not coming to meet them and a storm brewing outside, the women decide it is time to leave. Sneaking to the front door when Mr. Reed leaves the room they find the front door locked, and the only way out is to go deeper into the strange house.

Highlights.

I have never really understood the appeal of Hugh Grant. I found him lackluster in Love Actually and just plain annoying in Bridget Jones’s Diary. After watching Heretic though I think the problem is that his career focus has been on the wrong genre. Hugh Grant is terrifying, but not in the conventional sense, in the creepy religious uncle that you only see on Boxing Day sense. It might be in the jerky way Mr. Reed walks, or the near-whispered dialogue throughout the movie. Also, whoever put Mr. Reed in those glasses is a genius, they give chilling Jeffrey Dahmer vibes.

Advertisement

I must also note the intense monologues that Hugh Grant delivers in Heretic. It is hard to take your eyes off him. The ideas and theories that are presented are not unknown and rather convincing. I was surprised to find myself nodding in agreement with an obviously deranged and hostile character.

Drawbacks.

It is hard to explain the main drawback of this movie without spoiling the ending, but let me try. The explanation and big reveal at the end of Heretic was a bit… on the nose. I just couldn’t hitch myself to that wagon. I understand what the writer was trying to say. That there are people who have such strong faith that they are willing to give up their lives to prove the belief true. It is the way this is presented in the plot however… I didn’t like it and wonder if there might have been another way to present this idea.

The Final Take.

Ahh, how I loved this movie. Never mind National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation, Krampus or Die Hard, Heretic is my new favorite Christmas film. There is nothing more to be said.

5 out of 5 stars (5 / 5)

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Movies n TV

Returning to the Soothing World of Evil with “The Demon of Death”

“The Demon of Death” is the season 3 premiere of the supernatural drama Evil, created by Michelle King and Robert King.

Published

on

“The Demon of Death” is the season 3 premiere of the supernatural drama Evil, created by Michelle King and Robert King. The central cast includes Katja Herbers, Mike Colter, Aasif Mandvi, Michael Emerson, Christine Lahti, and Andrea Martin. As of this review, it’s available through Netflix and Paramount+ and its add-ons.

The assessors investigate the weight of a soul. Father Frank Ignatius (Wallace Shawn) agrees to participate in this test despite his growing disillusionment. David (Mike Colter) and Kristen (Katja Herbers) deal with the ramifications of their confessions. Kristen’s girls go on the warpath with Leland (Michael Emerson). Andy (Patrick Brammall) signs his death warrant.

Evil written in bold, a snake reaches for an apple. Beneath reads Season 3
Evil Season 3 Cover

What I Like about “The Demon of Death”

As season 2 ended with a cliffhanger, “The Demon of Death” picks back up with an interesting addition. The episode provides a more obvious stopping point that Season 2 should have taken advantage of. It dumbfounds me because this addition makes for a more interesting and darker cliffhanger. The added context would have made the cliffhanger more palatable. However, it’s a nice twist for the episode.

Dr. Boggs (Kurt Fuller) and Sister Andrea (Andrea Martin) make an interesting pair that adds complexity to both. We even explore some of Sister Andrea’s character flaws, best displayed by her interaction with Kristen in the next scene. Few wise sage characters that display flaws, making this addition appreciated.

Father Ignatius’ introduction adds layers of interest for a character who will play a recurring role, tying into Monsignor Korecki directly. The yet-to-be-explored relationship between Father Ignatius and Monsignor Korecki (Boris McGiver) evokes an interest.

Advertisement

While “The Demon of Death” isn’t a haunting episode, but explores the mysteries and terror of death through science to provide an interesting environment for an episode. It introduces a new character that adds to the cast.

White background, rubber stamp with disclaimer pressed against the white background.
Disclaimer Kimberley Web Design

Tired Tropes and Triggers

There’s not much to report here that particularly crosses the line and what teeters on the line holds a dark comedic tone.

Perhaps Sister Andrea’s flaw might rub some the wrong way, as it deals with her overwhelming faith. However, it’s a minor point at the moment. Again, I lean on liking some complexity for the wise sage archetype.

A nun looks down at a therapist who lays on his back. The room suggests a therapists office with certifications lined up on the wall.
A Nun and a Therapist Discuss Certainty

What I Dislike about “The Demon of Death”

“The Demon of Death” still plays it safe with its supernatural elements, but that does seem to be Evil’s standard. At this point of the series, it seems a strange restraint. However, the new normal remains functionally paranormal.

While the premiere starts with an interesting procedural plot, it doesn’t direct the season like prior premieres. This episode doesn’t deliver a massive refocus as season 2’s premiere, but that’s because its conclusion doesn’t deliver as focused of a direction. Regardless, “The Demon of Death” is still an episode that slips away despite its premiere status.

Ben (Aasif Mandvi) seems needlessly hostile as they investigate a soul’s potential weight. The study delivers a thorough scientific process, which makes his resistance linger on the “angry atheist” archetype.

The demon shown on screen certainly isn’t the demon of death the title suggests. While the plot revolves around the mystery of death, there is a demon with a more carnal domain. As future episodes dive into their respective demons, it does seem to be an inaccurate title. However, the demon of the episode will get further focus in a different episode.

Advertisement

Final Thoughts

“The Demon of Death” doesn’t stand out as a premiere but provides an interesting procedural episode. As Father Ignatius will become another key character in the series, giving him an entire episode to introduce him is a nice strategy. While it’s not a haunting episode, it still provides a level of camp with interesting characters to pull it off.
3 out of 5 stars (3 / 5)

Continue Reading

Trending