Dr Hannibal Lecter - best portrayal

laurence1870laurence1870 Posts: 213
Forum Member
Made a similar post for the Joker yesterday, but this time here's a poll to vote on.

Who played the best Hannibal Lecter? 47 votes

Brian Cox
29% 14 votes
Sir Anthony Hopkins
51% 24 votes
Gaspard Ulliel
0% 0 votes
Mads Mikkelsen
19% 9 votes

Comments

  • Matt DMatt D Posts: 13,153
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Mikkelsen.

    I love Hopkins' portrayal, and was not expecting Mikkelsen to be anywhere near as good when I first heard of the TV series, but he turned out to be bloody brilliant.
  • ParthenonParthenon Posts: 7,499
    Forum Member
    Big fan of the TV show but it's Sir Anthony for me.
  • JasonJason Posts: 76,557
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I'd have to watch Manhunter again just to give a properly definitive answer but for me, Mads Mikkelsen is Lecter. He's far better than Hopkins' pantomime version and far more believable.
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 23,678
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    A lot of revisionism about Brian Cox in Manhunter, he's only a supporting character in it and the film only received attention after the success of silence of the lambs, but it's a lot better than Red Dragon.
  • degsyhufcdegsyhufc Posts: 59,251
    Forum Member
    Matt D wrote: »
    Mikkelsen.

    I love Hopkins' portrayal, and was not expecting Mikkelsen to be anywhere near as good when I first heard of the TV series, but he turned out to be bloody brilliant.
    I'd have to watch Manhunter again just to give a properly definitive answer but for me, Mads Mikkelsen is Lecter. He's far better than Hopkins' pantomime version and far more believable.
    Isn't it similar arguments to the Joker poll.

    Nicholson and Ledger were very different portrayals of the same character so hard to judge in a head to head comparison without taking the themes of the films into account.

    Mikkleson has had two series to develop the character - plus from a different point of view to the films.
  • Irma BuntIrma Bunt Posts: 1,847
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Brian Cox. No question for me.
  • EmolgaEmolga Posts: 46,944
    Forum Member
    Anthony Hopkins. The guy from the TV show, Mads Mikkelsen, is good too, but Anthony Hopkins is my favourite.
  • TakaeTakae Posts: 13,555
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I chose Cox because I felt Hopkins's take was too hammy for my taste and I haven't seen the other two.
  • Johnny ClayJohnny Clay Posts: 5,315
    Forum Member
    Cox for me as well (shall I rephrase that?).

    Never liked Hopkins in 'Lambs, but admittedly he had some fun with the role in Hannibal, a bizarre and trashy oddity. Bet he got a fair wage for it an' all.
  • Trsvis_BickleTrsvis_Bickle Posts: 9,202
    Forum Member
    dodrade wrote: »
    A lot of revisionism about Brian Cox in Manhunter, he's only a supporting character in it and the film only received attention after the success of silence of the lambs, but it's a lot better than Red Dragon.

    I think there's a fair bit of that in relation to Hopkins. These days, the cool kids are all saying that he was a pantomime villain. I don't recall anyone saying anything of the kind at the time the film was released and the Academy clearly didn't think so either.
  • GortGort Posts: 7,460
    Forum Member
    I think there's a fair bit of that in relation to Hopkins. These days, the cool kids are all saying that he was a pantomime villain. I don't recall anyone saying anything of the kind at the time the film was released and the Academy clearly didn't think so either.

    I remember saying when the film came out that Hopkins was cartoonish in the role. To me, the understated Brian Cox performance was more fitting to the character.
  • be more pacificbe more pacific Posts: 19,061
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Anthony Hopkins' portrayal has suffered from becoming a cultural icon. It is almost impossible to view The Silence of the Lambs in isolation from all the cultural baggage of endless homages and parodies.

    The same goes for Anthony Perkins as Norman Bates and Jack Nicholson as Jack Torrance.
  • TakaeTakae Posts: 13,555
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    dodrade wrote: »
    A lot of revisionism about Brian Cox in Manhunter, he's only a supporting character in it and the film only received attention after the success of silence of the lambs, but it's a lot better than Red Dragon.

    Manhunter received attention because of Heat. It didn't get much if any attention during the release of Silence of the Lambs, mostly because Manhunter still wasn't available on VHS. I think it was finally available on VHS when Heat was released at cinema.

    Some British film geeks, on the other hand, was aware of it before SOTL because of Alex Cox. The nearest we could get to see the film was when it appeared in Cox's Moviedrome on BBC 2.
    I think there's a fair bit of that in relation to Hopkins. These days, the cool kids are all saying that he was a pantomime villain. I don't recall anyone saying anything of the kind at the time the film was released and the Academy clearly didn't think so either.

    The majority loved Gravity, but as we've seen from here, there were some who didn't. So it stands to reason that SOTL would have its share of dissent voices during its theatrical release as well.

    Either way, there's no denying that Hopkins's portrayal left an impact on British pop culture. French and Saunders's parody, anyone? :D
  • NoseyLouieNoseyLouie Posts: 5,651
    Forum Member
    I loved Anthony Hopkins as Lecter, it was an exaggerated turn but worked for me and Brian Cox was quite chilling. Haven't seen the tv adaptation. When I read the books Dr Hannibal Lecter did come across as quite a charismatic persona or is it just me? So a bit of 'pantomime' was fine :D
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 23,678
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think there's a fair bit of that in relation to Hopkins. These days, the cool kids are all saying that he was a pantomime villain. I don't recall anyone saying anything of the kind at the time the film was released and the Academy clearly didn't think so either.

    I think that's partly true but he still had real menace (despite relatively little screen time), whereas by Hannibal and Red Dragon his performance had become pure ham.
  • ironjadeironjade Posts: 10,001
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    dodrade wrote: »
    A lot of revisionism about Brian Cox in Manhunter, he's only a supporting character in it and the film only received attention after the success of silence of the lambs, but it's a lot better than Red Dragon.

    He only has a few scenes but with HL less is definitely more. What you imagine about Lecter is far worse than you ever see (until the TV series anyway) and seeing him actually killing people just seems crass.
  • Eddie BadgerEddie Badger Posts: 6,005
    Forum Member
    Brian Cox for me. He gave a subtle and restrained performance which made him all the more sinister. Hopkins was borderline Vincent Price a lot of the time.
  • pearlsandplumspearlsandplums Posts: 29,389
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    mads definitely. he is just fantastic in the role, and bizarrely theres something very sexy about his portrayal
  • necromancer20necromancer20 Posts: 2,548
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Poor Gaspard Ulliel :p

    Anthony Hopkins for me (though I've only seen him and Cox as Hannibal).
  • revolver44revolver44 Posts: 22,766
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Mikkelsen, Cox, Hopkins and then that other dufus who was appalling.

    Mikkelsen is just perfect, the right amount of charm & threat.
    Cox was completely intimidating and more a physical threat than a psychological one.
    Hopkins was great but a little too theatrical.
  • Heston VestonHeston Veston Posts: 6,478
    Forum Member
    Brian Cox just edges it over Hopkins for me. The "smell yourself" line delivered to a fast-de[parting Will Graham, and his slack-jawed menacing gaze - here's a man who you believe would do you serious damage. Whereas Hopkins' face-chewing antics come across a bit unconvincing. Better to have left a bit more to the imagination. The scenes where we see the aftermath of Lecter's work - as in the victims' bedroom in 'Manhunter' - or Jodie Foster's horrified reaction to the photos of Lecter's handiwork, are more effective.
  • tombigbeetombigbee Posts: 4,639
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I find Mads' Lecter more nightmarishly intelligent, threatening, complex and interesting. Obviously having the most screen time out of any of them can't hurt.
  • The MartianThe Martian Posts: 1,610
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    tombigbee wrote: »
    I find Mads' Lecter more nightmarishly intelligent, threatening, complex and interesting. Obviously having the most screen time out of any of them can't hurt.

    Agreed. He also has a sinister look about him. He looked like a badass psycho in the movie, Valhalla Rising.
  • ironjadeironjade Posts: 10,001
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Brian Cox just edges it over Hopkins for me. The "smell yourself" line delivered to a fast-de[parting Will Graham, and his slack-jawed menacing gaze - here's a man who you believe would do you serious damage. Whereas Hopkins' face-chewing antics come across a bit unconvincing. Better to have left a bit more to the imagination. The scenes where we see the aftermath of Lecter's work - as in the victims' bedroom in 'Manhunter' - or Jodie Foster's horrified reaction to the photos of Lecter's handiwork, are more effective.

    "Dream much, Will?":o
Sign In or Register to comment.