31 | 07 | 2002 Fernando Lum writes ...

" I just finished reading Red Dragon and also saw Manhunter. I have to admit that Manhunter is a very good movie, but it is less suspenseful than SOTL, yet it's underrated. Well, when I first saw it years ago, I thought it was kinda like an extension of Miami Vice, well Michael Mann had that style of directing and moviemaking at the time. One thing that I didn't care much for about Manhunter is that the ending was totally different from the book (RD)

Speaking about the cast of Red Dragon and a comparison with the cast of Manhunter:

In my opinion, William Petersen IS Will Graham. He has that edginess and the look that a burn-out former agent have. While Edward Norton is a very good actor, I feel he looks too young for the part. I bet Edward Norton will do well, but I cannot picture anybody being Will Graham other than William Petersen.

Anthony Hopkins is definitely Hannibal. Nothing against Brian Cox (I thought he was good), but I just can't get over Hopkins' performance in SOTL

As for Jack Crawford, I think Scott Glenn is the best so far. While Dennis Farina was a cop in real-life, I can picture him as a cop, but not as a fed. I can say the same about Harvey Keitel although I haven't seen his performance. What I really don't know is why they didn't get Scott Glenn for the Jack Crawford role instead of Harvey Keitel?

As for Francis Dolarhyde, I feel Tom Noonan was great. We will see how Ralph Fiennes does the role, but I think he's too much of a pretty-boy and not big enough physically to portray Francis Dolarhyde.

As for Freddie Lounds, I think Phillip Seymour Hoffman is a great choice. I feel he's suited for that role better than Stephen Lang.

As for Reba (the blind girl), Joan Allen did a good job, I'm certain Emily Watson will also do well. So, I'm neutral in there.

Finally, as for Molly (Graham's wife), I'll have to see how Mary-Louise Parker does as the character didn't have a substantial role in Manhunter as in the book ..."

31 | 07 | 2002 Sofia, from Thessaloniki in Greece writes ...

" I am just another avid fan from the other side of the world (Greece). I know what you're thinking: 'Greece?!', but since the nignt that I saw Manhunter (about 9 years ago - a retrospective screening at a film festival in my hometown) I became obsessed with it. Of course I read all of the books (it was very hard to find a copy of Red Dragon few years back...) and saw all the films but, as anyone who saw it, I think Manhunter was a masterpiece.

I saw the Red Dragon trailer on the web and it was very dissapointing. First of all, Antony Hopkins is a like a cartoon. Brian Cox's version of Lecter is far superior because he is playing his role just with his eyes and his doesn't shout "I am the crazy-bad guy!". Ed Norton's voice, as I heard it on the trailer, when he talks with Lector about the new killer, is ... comic. He is also very young for the role of Will and although his is a great actor, I think this is not his best moment. And what about the real protagonist of the film, Francis D.? Ralph Fiennes is also a very good thespian but ... hello! Has the person who did the casting of the film read the book or not? Francis has to be big, very big and ugly. Ok Fiennes was ugly in "English-Hungarian Patient" but that's another story (not to mention another film, another book, another writer e.t.c ...)

I don't know anything about the director [Brett Ratner] but I am very sure that he is not as half as good as Mann. I do not want to sound very fanatic, but Michael Mann is one of the best visioneer / cinematographers on this planet. His work on Manhunter is so good and perfect that nobody can compete with. Perhaps David Lynch ... now that's a good thought: a remake of Manhunter by Mr. Absurdity himself. What do you think?"

30 | 07 | 2002 André Thomas from London, Ontario in Canada writes ...

" I myself, read all three books by Thomas Harris before seeing the movies Manhunter, SOTL, and Hannibal. I have a very profound vision on what the characters act like, move like, talk like, and think like. Sir Anthony Hopkins is an brilliant Hannibal LECTER **some of you can't even spell his name right** while Brian Cox reminds me of my old Grade 11 english teacher. To say the least, he is not very convincing. Don't get me wrong, Brian Cox is an good actor, but he did not adapt to the script very well to fit the character. From movements to speach patterns to lying down even, was sloppy.

William Petersen on the other hand was the movie. William Petersen very much reminded me of Will Graham. To his movements to speech he is a very good actor. I had (and maybe still do) doubts about Edward Norton as Graham, but from the trailer and from what I've seen, he will do a great job.

Ralph Fiennes was a huge shocker to me. Tom Noonan was such a perfect pick for the character, and had so much potential for a greater role. Ralph I believe will end up doing a great job, but Tom Noonan deserved an Oscar(R) for his role.

Now, I love Michael Mann's work from Miami Vice to Ali, but he did not take in the importance of The Red Dragon character. We finally see him when Lounds is kidnapped, but we see a man with panty hose on his face. What Ted Tally can do for the script and the overall production is take the Dragon to a newer height. That is what made SOTL such a great film. We met Buffalo Bill, and learned about him for the whole movie, thats what lacked in Manhunter.

Manhunter is my favourite of the three, because of the book. Its all I have to go by really. And for a certain poster calling Sir Tony an "wrinkly, old 60 year old, who although is as talented as ever, still seems way over the hill to be able to put his heart and soul into acting his part professionly and to the best of his ability" is a fool. It may be his opinion, but LECTER is dignified, and only a actor who is older, and looks older brings out that quality. And by the way, from the trailer I viewed, he looks younger than Brian Cox did in the 80's.

I for one am happy about this remake, and I can only hope it will make every bull-headed know-it-all realize you need freshness to keep a legacy alive. I do however hope there is a remake of Hannibal (although that seems it will never happen) where it gives us the true ending intended for the series."

28 | 07 | 2002 Jim Cox, from the USA writes ... " They can remake the picture all day long, and claim to be disappointed with "Manhunter" all day long, but the truth is that "Manhunter" is an excellent movie. To make "Red Dragon" better than "Manhunter" is most likely wishful thinking, especially since the series decreased in quality as the movies were made, with "Hannibal" being the worst. Michael Mann's movie will be difficult to impossible to surpass, simply because he was out to make a good movie. I have little doubt that "Red Dragon" will not focus on making a quality representation of the story, but will center around making the all-mighty dollar. I'll give "Red Dragon" the benefit of the doubt, though; let's see if it can replace "Manhunter" as my favorite movie of all time. I'm skeptical ..."

27 | 07 | 2002 avidfan77, from California in the USA writes ...

" Obviously this page is somewhat of a shrine to the film "Manhunter" rather than the book "Red Dragon", therefore my opinion may seem negative to fans of "Manhunter" but I assure you, I too enjoyed the film very much. The thing is though, the book is so amazing and complex that I don't think the movie did it justice. Francis Dolarhyde is such a twisted and dark character, you can almost base an entire movie on his life alone!!! How can you not travel into the depths of his childhood and tell the tale of his torture??

Hollwood just wants villains and monsters, so they leave out all the morbid details of how these monsters are spawn and where the rage comes from. If they go beyond that and get into Mr. D's head then people will see the "real movie-villains", such as his "muhner" (aka mother for those who haven't read the book). I pray that the remake stays true to the book and true to "The Tooth Fairy". If they want to call it a "psychological thriller" then they need to get into peoples' heads and scare the wits out of them!!!

To be honest with you, the gruesome details of the murders didn't bother me nearly as much as the chapters that described Francis Dolarhyde's childhood and upbringing - and that is something that "Manhunter" unfortunately left out. Anyway, I'll keep my fingers crossed and hope that the remake lives up to my expectations. We loyal fans deserve that !!! Hey, by the way - what's Thomas Harris up to these days??? Anything new in the works??? I hope so ..."

24 | 07 | 2002 anon, from Oklahoma City, Oklahoma writes ...

" The question I ask myself ... is it really necessary to remake "Manhunter"? If anyone has the limited edition of "Manhunter" on DVD, then you know the reason for the title change. Michael Mann specifically changed the name due to the release and failure of another movie, "Year of the Dragon". He claims that he did not want his movie to be confused with it. Understandably the name was changed and hence we have "Manhunter".

As far as it being "loosely" based on the book "Red Dragon", as quoted by the current director of "Red Dragon" Brett Ratner in Entertainment Weekly ... hogwash. "Red Dragon" the novel is roughly 400 pages. It took me about 8 hours to finish it cover to cover. Taking all this compelling story and writing a screenplay to fit a 2 hour movie would be difficult task, especially when every page of that book was detrimental to the story. Plot points have to be changed, notably Dollarhyde's past and the end, to make the movie flow in 2 hours. Mann did an excellent job. The film has a very "Miami Vice" feel to it, and can be easily dated due to the soundtrack, but on the whole it was just as good a film as "Silence of The Lambs", if not better. Speaking of "Silence of The Lambs" and to further illustrate my point, again plot differences to make the movie flow ... Crawford's wife, Klaus - the homosexual lover of Raspail, and Senator Martin's seeming hatred of Starling and the FBI ...

So, again the question, is really necessary for a remake, because that is what it would be. I would say, no. Am I glad they are making it, yes. Getting a fresh view from a different director and screenwriter will make it interesting, but I cannot help but compare the two from the trailer I just finished watching, plus, taking Ratner's quote above into account :

Where exactly in "Red Dragon" the novel is Hannibal Lector chained to a wall in front of Will Graham? Ralph Fiennes as Dollarhyde, no way ! He's too short, and too good looking and supposed to be competition level muscular.

I feel the only reason this movie is being made is for money. Anthony Hopkins to me is the pinnacle Lector, (not discounting Brian Cox's brilliant performance). He alone has brought the essence of Lector to the screen. Seeing him as Lector again completes the trilogy for Anthony Hopkins. But, if that is the reason for the remake beyond money wouldn't it be necessary to remake "Hannibal" with Jodie Foster, or "Silence of the Lambs" with Julianne Moore. Further, what about Jack Crawford? or Paul Krendler?

I could go on all day, I just wanted to throw something out there for the fans like me to chew on ..."

19 | 07 | 2002 "Avid Fan" Rogue Gallart from Florida, USA writes ...

" Why tamper with something that has been done? I am an avid fan (line from the tooth fairy in manhunter) of all of the movies, but why? Michael Mann's masterpiece should be left alone.

It's like Oliver Stone remaking "The GodFather ..."

18 | 07 | 2002 Andrew Collins from London, England writes ...

" I've reading Red Dragon [the book] again, and it appears that I perhaps was a little harsh with regards to the forthcoming film. Will [Graham] does indeed teach Molly to shoot in the book [as seen in a recent press still for Red Dragon]

However, since it was a peripheral chapter inserted to further illuminate Will's state of mind, it was rightfully dropped by [Michael] Mann. This new knowledge also got me thinking, if this scene is in the new film, then perhaps [Brett] Ratner is truly attempting to actually do closer a adaption of the Harris book than "The Mann"?

I still think however, that all the changes the Mann made for his adaption were justified. Such as making Graham by far and away the most important character, giving several important lines and scenes to him rather than the book 'owners'. In the novel Graham, although the main character, only occupies about 60-70% of the book. In the film the Mann gave him what, about 75-85% of screen time. But then the film is called MANHUNTER ... "

07 | 07 | 2002 Jason Howse, from the USA writes ...

" When I first heard that they were re-making "Red Dragon", I leapt for joy, under the mistaken belief that Anthony Hopkins would be replaced by a younger, fitter actor. But on viewing the trailer I saw a wrinkly, old 60 year old, who although is as talented as ever, still seems way over the hill to be able to put his heart and soul into acting his part professionly and to the best of his ability. I heard rumours that he was going to be made to look younger using computer technology, I take it that idea went straight out the window when the special effects team realised that it was just too much work !

I have had my whinge, but now I am going to talk about the strong points about the re-make.

Whoever cast Ralph Fiennes as Francis Dollarhyde, should be given an Oscar right here and now. As chilling as he is scary, he will live up to his critics expectations in what looks set to be his most memorable outing.

I have been a big fan of Edward Norton's since he starred in films such as "Fight Club" and "American History X" (don't even mention "Keeping the Faith"!), and I know for a fact that if anyone can pull off Will Graham, it is he. He has all the on-screen chemistry with Lector that Jodie Foster had with Lector in "The Silence of the Lambs". It looks like the script writer is also going to add his touch to the film, with lines like "What disadvantages, Will?". Genius !

[ webmaster: actually, that line was in Manhunter too ! ]

All I have left to say is that I hope that Red Dragon isn't just a quick cash-in sequel/prequel that's just rushed out to support the Producers' mistress'. With any luck we may get a sequel /prequel worth remembering. The Horse's head is almost overshadowed by Robert DeNiro's explosive entrance in "The Godfather Part 2".

I may only be 16, but I know my stuff when it comes to films. I happen to think that some movies are sacred and should not be altered or re-made. Should Michael Mann's masterpiece "Manhunter" really be tampered with? We'll find out in October ..."

17 | 02 | 2002 Martin Pike, from Earth writes ...

"I am thrilled that there will be a remake of Red Dragon. However, I think Ralph Fiennes as the Red Dragon is a casting nightmare! Fiennes is a fantastic actor but Dolarhyde is a large, muscular imposing man. Fiennes is not. I am disappointed with this choice. There is nothing imposing about Fiennes. I think Norton is definately the right choice for Graham. I was looking forward to seeing this strong, powerful unique villian but I am not sure how I feel now ..."

Further Information and links ...

• Fan comments main menu
• Comprehensive list of external links - click here

• Top of this page
• Red Dragon home
• Manhunter home