Red Dragon
Red Dragon (2002)
Writer: Thomas Harris (novel), Ted Tally (screenplay)
Cast: Edward Norton, Anthony Hopkins, Ralph Fiennes, Harvey Keitel, Emily Watson, Mary-Louise Parker, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Anthony Heald, Ken Leung, Frankie Faison, Tyler Patrick Jones
Synopsis:
A remake of the 1986 film Manhunter. Will Graham (Norton) is a retired FBI profiler living in Florida with his wife Molly (Parker) and son Kevin (Jones). He was once one of the Bureau's top profilers but he was forced to retire after being wounded and traumatized following his capture of the notorious Dr. Hannibal Lecter (Hopkins). Graham is visited by his former boss and friend Jack Crawford (Keitel) who asks him to get back into the game by helping him catch a serial killer known as the Tooth Fairy (Fiennes), who kills on the full moon. Will reluctantly agrees but the Tooth Fairy proves to be elusive and Graham comes up empty at every turn. Desperate and with time running short until the next full moon, Will decides to ask Lecter for advice in capturing the killer. Can Will cope with the trauma of dealing with Lecter again and can he navigate the good doctor's mind games in time before the Tooth Fairy strikes again?
First Impressions:
I caught this one in theaters back in 2002. I had yet to see the original and, in fact, I wasn't aware Manhunter even existed before I saw this film. It wasn't until some months later (it might have been mentioned on the DVD extras) that I became aware of the original film. That was probably for the best, as I was able to judge this film, which I initially enjoyed, on its own merits. Now, of course, I've seen Michael Mann's original vision (and reviewed it) and I have the opportunity to compare both films in a first for this blog, as I don't think I've watched and reviewed a movie and its remake on back to back occasions. As I mentioned, I enjoyed my initial viewing of Red Dragon and I've seen it a few times over the subsequent years and, while I still find it a perfectly watchable film, a few cracks in it's veneer have begun to show. Anyway, let's dive in and see how this remake compares not only to the original but also my first opinions of it.
** Please note: Since this is a remake of a film I just recently reviewed, I will be referencing the original film often. If you haven't read my earlier review please check out the link above for a bit more context. **
"Our scars have the power to remind us that the past was real."
So, let's get one thing out of the way right off of the bat, I think Brett Ratner is pretty much a shit director. With the exception of Red Dragon, I think I've loathed every movie of his that I've seen. Now that I've said that, I have to say that as far as this film goes, he didn't do such a bad job. Now one of the main reasons why that is would be because many of the scenes in this film are almost cut completely out of Manhunter. It's not an exact shot-for-shot remake, but there are a LOT of similarities between the two films. That being said, Ratner added a few more scenes to give a bit more depth in the relationship between Will and Hannibal. The most obvious of those is the film's opening scene, which sees Will visit Lecter at home to pick his brain about a case he's working. The conversation leads to Will discovering it's Lecter that's actually the killer he seeks and shooting the killer and being wounded in the process. I really enjoyed that scene because it gives the latter scenes between the two more gravity and you can understand Will's discomfort in talking with Lecter again. Another bit that I liked was the opening credit roll, which uses newspaper clippings in a scrapbook to follow-up what happened to both Lecter and Graham after the fateful encounter. I always appreciate these type of credit rolls because it gets a lot of necessary exposition out of the way without overtaking the story.
The film also expanded on the relationship between the Tooth Fairy and his girlfriend Reba (Watson). Manhunter did spend a bit of time on this relationship but breezed over it a little too quickly for my tastes. While the audience is never supposed to connect to the serial killer, the scenes with Reba help show what a tortured soul he really is. It delves a bit more into the psychology (perhaps just on the surface) of why these people do what they do, which I think is more of a focus in the novels. So, was there anything about the film that I didn't like? Well, not really. At least as far as the story goes. I probably would also say the same from a directorial standpoint as well. The only thing I really noticed was that Ratner played it pretty safe overall. He didn't take many chances and because he had a much bigger budget than Mann did, he didn't really have to think outside the box too much.
The next question is, how does Red Dragon compare to Manhunter? I can't believe I'm saying this because Michael Mann is one of my favorite directors, but I'm going to have to give this one to the remake. Even though it's a fairly by-the-book thriller, there's a lot more polish to Red Dragon compared to it's predecessor. Which makes sense considering Manhunter was one of Mann's first films and he'd really yet to develop his style. I still like both films but I'm giving Red Dragon the slight edge because it provided a bit more background to many of the main characters.
Acting/Characters:
I'm going to do a fair bit of comparison in this section as well since many of the principal actors took differing approaches to their characters. Let's start with Edward Norton's performance as Will Graham. In the original film, Petersen played Will Graham as more visibly tortured and you could see a great deal of pain behind his eyes (understandable considering what he's been through). Meanwhile Norton's version was much more wooden and that's not a criticism as he plays the role as someone who's learned to deal with his trauma by emotionally detaching themselves from their pain. In my mind both portrayals are accurate for someone who's experiencing PTSD and I appreciate the differing viewpoints.
Now let's move on the Anthony Hopkin's turn as Hannibal Lecter. For Hopkins, this was a reprisal of the character he made famous during his Academy Award-winning portrayal in Silence of the Lambs. Hopkins took what he did in Lambs and ramped it up to 11. In fact, one might goes as far to say that he was a bit hammy at times and he was perhaps trying a bit too hard to be ghoulish. It's a stark contrast to Brian Cox's portrayal which was, in my opinion, much more subtle and sinister. I love Hopkins as an actor and I think his original portrayal in Lambs is one of the best villain performances in cinema history but in this film, the character seems almost like a caricature of himself rather than the terrifying killer that he's supposed to be.
As for the film's antagonist, I'd have to say I quite enjoyed ralph Fiennes' portrayal of the Tooth Fairy. This is mostly because we're just given more time with the character than in the original film. We get some of his background and we get to experience some of his internal struggle (as mentioned above). In short, there's more depth given to the character than in Manhunter. That's not to say I didn't enjoy Tom Noonan's performance in the original, it's just that he's given less to do.
Visuals/Action:
Much like the original film, there's not a ton of action in Red Dragon, though there is a bit more than Manhunter. That doesn't bug me all that much because too much action would ruin the feel of a thriller like this. So, I'm going to focus more on the visual style of the film, which is quite different than its predecessor.
Since this film was really developed as a prequel to Silence of the Lambs, rather than a remake of Manhunter, Ratner opted to keep close to the visual style of the former. This is most apparent in the appearance of the mental hospital where Lecter is interned. In Manhunter, Lecter is locked in a bright white unremarkable room with bars which is almost uncomfortable to look at. Meanwhile, Red Dragon keeps with the style established in Silence and puts Lecter in a dank, dark dungeon with exposed brick behind a plexiglass wall with breathing holes drilled into it. Again, I appreciate the different style but I think I prefer Michael Mann's version because the bright white setting is in such contrast to the blackness of the character's soul.
Score/Soundtrack:
I almost fell off of my couch when I saw that Danny Elfman composed the score for this film. I've enjoyed many of Elfman's previous score (particularly the one from Batman), however, this is not one of his more memorable outings. You can definitely hear Elfman's distinctive style throughout much of the music but there's nothing here that reaches the height of what he did in Burton's Batman films or in Sam Raimi's Spider-Man, or even what Howard Shore did in Silence of the Lambs. It's not horrible, just not terribly impressive either.
Final Verdict:
From a story standpoint, I enjoy this film just a bit more than Manhunter and that's due mainly to the added depth it gives many of the characters. Though, from a visual standpoint, I prefer the original just because Michael Mann has just a great eye in setting up shots. I highly recommend checking out both if you can find them on streaming (or better yet on DVD/Blu-Ray).
Comments
Post a Comment