|
Hollismason posted:Where can you find the Directors cut of Manhunter? Someone mentioned in the thread they'd seen it but I've never seen it. http://www.amazon.com/Manhunter-Limited-Edition-William-Petersen/dp/B0000509C1 This is the only way. The transfer for it is pretty bad but I really do like it more overall for the reasons I posted. Note that I don't know if this is a "director's cut" like this is Mann's true vision or a "director's cut" like "this work print is a few seconds longer so it must be better just press it."
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2013 15:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 11:05 |
|
|
EvilTobaccoExec posted:Bonus fact: here's an argument for both Manhunter and "Strong As I Am" I have to agree with this. Also, the jungle whistles that open "Strong As I Am" fit perfectly with Shriekback's "Coelacanth", used earlier in the tiger scene, and it creates a kind of leitmotif for Dollarhyde as well as callback to Reba's intimacy with dangerous beasts. Lotish posted:What I kind of want to see is a sequel for Graham. I never finished Hannibal nor either of these movies, but reading Red Dragon and Silence of the Lambs you know Graham is explicitly hosed up by the end of the book. I wanted to see him either get back together. There had been rumors that Ed Norton as Graham was really for testing the waters for a post-Hannibal sequel, since the novel had left Clarice Starling brainwashedby Lector who would only be released under either her death or Lecter's. I wrote a paper for college about Manhunter and Red Dragon and the novel that they were adapted from. There was so much in that I'm tempted to just post the whole loving thing but I still maintain a friend's single sentence review of Red Dragon as "the pretty boy version of Manhunter". One of the things that caught me when doing that review is that there's a lot about gaze in Manhunter and how which William Blake painting used in the films plays into that. If you don't know, the Red Dragon paintings are a series, but the painting in Thomas Harris' book is "The Great Red Dragon and the Woman Clothed with the Sun" but it's described as "The Great Red Dragon and the Woman Clothed in Sun", because, while the subjects are the same, their positioning, their expressions, and who draws focus is different between the two. It's supposedly a mistake that Harris made when doing research on the book, the Brooklyn Museum that hosts the "in the Sun" painting had mislabeled the work. Mann used the "with the Sun" version, wear the Red Dragon is looking at the Woman and she at him, her arms stretched out in an almost welcoming manner, which encapsulates Dollarhyde's gaze and his dream of "being wanted and desired". Meanwhile, Ratner uses the "in the Sun" version, where both the viewer and the Woman look upon the Red Dragon towering over her, his face turned away, with the Woman's expression being one of fear. The focus is on the power and majesty of the Red Dragon entirely. It also leads into how the Dollarhyde character is portrayed: in Red Dragon Dollarhyde seems to be more dissociative and seems to be acting under the Red Dragon, while Manhunter Dollarhyde has already become the Red Dragon in his mind and is looking for his own Woman. It also shows up when he awakes to find Reba on the dock after they have sex, bathed in the light as the sun rises. One of my favorite bits in Manhunter is Graham's dream sequence on the plane, when the first shot of his wife is her walking into focus wearing mirrored sunglasses reflecting the light from her eyes. Young Freud fucked around with this message at 04:30 on Dec 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2013 04:14
|
|
|
Way back when I was an English major at UCLA, the late Professor Hutter regularly taught a class called "Detective Fiction." The last assigned book was Red Dragon, and as a bonus the class watched the film - with Michael Mann giving a Q & A afterwards. (This was probably around 1990.) A few things I remember (maybe he talks about the same stuff on the commentary - I haven't listened to it):
As you can see, the class focused a lot on the last part of the movie where Mann heavily deviated from the book. It was interesting to hear why he made the choices he did, and the thought that went into them. Btw, Cox owns Bones as Lector, and since I saw him play the role first, his is the definitive version for me. Wizchine fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Jan 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 10:21
|
|
|
Great post. Thanks for typing that all up and sharing. Do you remember anything else? Not that you didn't already go above and beyond with detail, its just fascinating. I really need to get around to listening to the commentary track.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 10:54
|
|
|
Manhunter is easily better. Red Dragon is really boringly made (shot choice mainly)
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 11:51
|
|
|
You really threw that thesaurus at the cons description of Red Dragon, Closefriend, heh. I haven't seen Red Dragon in about 4 or 5 years and I don't think I've really dived into Mann's work, I might check out Manhunter soon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 12:27
|
|
|
Wizchine posted:[*]Mann also went on an interesting tangent when talking about Dolarhyde's psychedelic home decor and his playing Ina Gaga Da Vida, though I'm a bit hazy on the specifics. It was along the lines that he thought the psychedelic movement in the 60's and 70's was ultimately very destructive, and that it really created some damaged individuals that sort of dropped off everyone's radar when the scene died. He wanted Dolarhyde to be emblematic as one of these damaged cases and what they might be like a decade later. (I'm paraphrasing heavily from some very old memories here...) I've always thought this is what he was going for, but I feel like that kind of eccentricity is used as lazy shorthand nowadays. Interesting that he zeroed in on that though, very cool post.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
EvilTobaccoExec posted:Great post. Thanks for typing that all up and sharing. Thanks - if I remember anything else I'll post it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
Wizchine posted:[list] I totally get where Mann was coming from with that. In the book a lot more time is spent on Dolarhyde and how damaged he is because of his traumatic childhood. He's a big, muscle-bound dude who walks around thinking he's a loser because that's the way his mother treated him. He's really self-conscious about talking because of his hair-lip, but the book makes clear that this is almost 100% in his mind, most people he meets don't even notice it. So I can see why Mann felt he needed to cast someone who could project that vulnerability without having to spend precious minutes of screen-time on it. Noonan is perfect because he's very awkward and you can see how people would find him offputting, yet at the same time he is very big and physically intimidating.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:I still maintain a friend's single sentence review of Red Dragon as "the pretty boy version of Manhunter". My thoughts exactly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2014 20:47
|
|
Cat Army
|
So I rewatched Manhunter and Red Dragon yesterday because why the gently caress not? Manhunter is still easily the better movie. I don't hate Red Dragon, it's all right, especially for a Brett Ratner movie. Whoever said it's a huge waste of a fantastic cast was right though. Jotted down a couple notes while I was watching them. -I love how it opens just straight into the story with Jack Crawford trying to get Will Graham to help them(that gorgeous shot in the OP of them sitting on the wood). Watching both movies back-to-back made me realize how fast Manhunter moves comparatively. Both have similar runtimes, and I know Red Dragon takes a little more time developing Francis Dolarhyde's hosed up childhood, but it seems like such a slog at points. -I pretty much hate the opening to Red Dragon. I get that Hopkins is basically the selling point here, but that prologue with the dinner party(that has some truly god-awful dialogue and acting) and the Lecter/Graham confrontation is pretty pointless. -I used to like the scene in Red Dragon after Will talks to Lecter for the first time, when he takes his jacket off and you see he's sweated through his shirt. Now though it's completely outclassed by William Petersen's mad-dash down those stairs to get out of the building. The score and his frantic running really sell his panic attack. It's like he's not just trying to escape Lecter, he's escaping the institution too. Beats the hell out of sitting in a breakroom all sweaty. -Brian Cox just straight-up does a way better job than Hopkins in the phone-call scene when Lecter's getting Will's home address. -I like in Manhunter that Dolarhyde isn't seen at all until Freddie Lounds' kidnapping. Makes that scene scarier and more alien to me. Red Dragon was definitely going with something else by peppering in Dolarhyde earlier(including that VO of his awful grandmother) and it kind of works when it comes to the Reba relationship, but not much else. It didn't make me sympathize with him more, I had the same feelings towards the character in both movies. -I do find Dolarhyde eating the Red Dragon painting to be a legitimately cool, creepy image, so kudos to Red Dragon for that. But nothing in the movie matches the imagery in Manhunter: the dream of Mrs. Leeds glowing eyes, Petersen's jump through the window, Tom Noonan storming through a huge panting while holding a shotgun. -I also think that Will finally figuring out the connection between the Leeds and Jacobi families feels like a huge victory in Manhunter. I wanted to sigh with relief when he finally puts it together. Plus William Petersen and Dennis Farina yelling at each other will always be more compelling than Ed Norton and Harvey Keitel mumbling at each other. -Both movies use the line "You're so sly, but so am I", so that's awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:
Yeah, he's not just trying to get out of the institution and away from Lector, he's trying to get out of his mind. And the way he just winds around and around in a downward spiral, not really getting anywhere and straight-out panicking by the end, underscores how much he's afraid of the prospect of losing himself. I know people scoffed at Mann's using the Guggenheim as a mental hospital because it's so recognizable, but the symbolism of Graham's mad dash to escape it just so perfect. Wizchine fucked around with this message at 07:57 on Jul 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
Wizchine posted:Yeah, he's not just trying to get out of the institution and away from Lector, he's trying to get out of his mind. And the way he just winds around and around in a downward spiral, not really getting anywhere and straight-out panicking by the end, underscores how much he's afraid of the prospect of losing himself. I know people scoffed at Mann's using the Guggenheim as a mental hospital because it's so recognizable, but the symbolism of Graham's mad dash to escape it just so perfect. This is really strong because of the sudden approach to it as well. We get sucked into the institution with this really quick zoom into a door Peterson/Farina/etc. walk through. There isn't really much of an establishment the place it just very quickly zooms into that door while Peterson and company are already chatting about the killers. Also strong because of how Graham flips out and tosses Lounds into a car window right after they leave. This is that deleted scene I mentioned earlier, it kind of breaks up the pacing but I do still like it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzvDpfnuG3k This clip was taken off of a tv showing of the movie so it's not even cropped right, weird. EDIT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqcEWVAjaYY Here's the original, left the old one up so people have a go to example other than Die Hard about how cropping this stuff for tv sucks. 
Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Jan 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:-I do find Dolarhyde eating the Red Dragon painting to be a legitimately cool, creepy image, so kudos to Red Dragon for that. This is one of the best parts of the book, and including it is indeed one of the few points in the movie Red Dragon's favor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2014 05:48
|
|
|
DeathChicken posted:Con: That soundtrack *sucked* and is pretty much the most hilariously inappropriate thing ever for the movie they were going for. Its not great but it certainly not inappropriate. Grahams Theme(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elf0S0FOm1s) represents perfectly the turning point of his character. The melody is powerful, especially when the viewer finally recognizes the source from which it was copped. Graham relapses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2014 02:02
|
|
|
The complete lack of mention of Brian Cox in the OP almost made me vote for Red Dragon out of spite. But that would be unfair to Brian Cox. Agree with pretty much everything else people have said about voting Manhunter though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
EvilTobaccoExec posted:Great post. Thanks for typing that all up and sharing. One more thing that I remember is that Mann thought the central premise was bunk - that this law enforcement officer was so good at getting into the heads of serial killers that he risked being one himself. He said it's not a new premise - the idea of a hazy border between cop and criminal - but again based on his experience working with various law enforcement people over the years and getting to know them (I can't remember if he mentioned meeting profilers specifically) and their professionalism and dedication, he thought the actual likelihood of that kind of dilemma was practically nil. That said, I'm sure he recognized it as a great hook and a way to explore the psychology of a serial killer (he probably said as much; I don't remember), and so it rightly remains at the heart of the film.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2014 03:33
|
|
|
Wizchine posted:One more thing that I remember is that Mann thought the central premise was bunk - that this law enforcement officer was so good at getting into the heads of serial killers that he risked being one himself. He said it's not a new premise - the idea of a hazy border between cop and criminal - but again based on his experience working with various law enforcement people over the years and getting to know them (I can't remember if he mentioned meeting profilers specifically) and their professionalism and dedication, he thought the actual likelihood of that kind of dilemma was practically nil. The problem is that Graham isn't really a law enforcement officer is he? It seems weird that Mann talks about what Graham would and wouldn't do as a lawman when he's just a profiler. It's certainly a major point in the TV Show, he's basically a civilian, albeit a very gifted one. I think it's stated that he failed the entrance exam because of his personality because they looked for certain traits which he showed. But then it's been so long since I read the book at that I can't remember if it's an invention of the show.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
Wizchine posted:Btw, Cox owns Bones as Lector, and since I saw him play the role first, his is the definitive version for me. While I like his portrayal, the scene where he has his feet up on the wall seems really weird. I fully admit that my view is nitpicky as hell, but for some reason it seems really out of character for a person who exhibits extreme control over his physical demeanor, with never a wasted movement or nervous tic. Why are his feet propped up against the wall? It always strikes me as weird and out of place. Also, the "smell yourself" line works much better in the book than the movie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:The problem is that Graham isn't really a law enforcement officer is he? It seems weird that Mann talks about what Graham would and wouldn't do as a lawman when he's just a profiler. It's certainly a major point in the TV Show, he's basically a civilian, albeit a very gifted one. I think it's stated that he failed the entrance exam because of his personality because they looked for certain traits which he showed. But then it's been so long since I read the book at that I can't remember if it's an invention of the show. I believe it's an invention of the show. Graham's was supposedly a "Special Investigator" in the backstory of the book and the movies and I think Crawford treats him as almost being reinstated throughout the narrative. He's still a civilian contractor throughout but you also have to remember that whenever Graham makes a move, it's always with Crawford, such as him using himself as bait or the raid on Dollarhyde's house. Or at least with Crawford's permission, such as talking to Lector.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
To go a bit broader for a moment. Has the subsequent performances spoiled Hopkins' turn in SotL for anyone? For a 12 minute performance it's easy to see how he made the impact that he did, but prolonged across two hours and then again in Red Dragon it doesn't quite work anymore. It draws too much attention to the tics that Hopkins employs. He's so broad and just weird that it's hard to believe that Lector was once 'respected'. It's easy to see why the Hannibal of the TV Show, or even Brian Cox, would be seen as a normal member of society.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
Whoa, do graham and dollarhyde show up in the Hannibal tv show? Am I going to have to start watching that? Also, I was watching To Live and Die in LA for the first time the other day and holy poo poo. If you want to see the broken conclusion of William Peterson's character if he just became the biggest piece of poo poo cop ever, watch that movie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
Will is the protagonist of the show and it has my favorite version of Lecter. Dollarhyde hasn't showed up yet but we do have Dr. Chilton, Jack Crawford, Freddie Lounds, and they say Mason Verger is showing up in season 2.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:Also, I was watching To Live and Die in LA for the first time the other day and holy poo poo. If you want to see the broken conclusion of William Peterson's character if he just became the biggest piece of poo poo cop ever, watch that movie. To Live and Die in LA is an underrated gem with some great twists.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:Whoa, do graham and dollarhyde show up in the Hannibal tv show? Am I going to have to start watching that? The showrunner said that if there's a season 4 it'll be Red Dragon. Wizchine posted:To Live and Die in LA is an underrated gem with some great twists. William Petersen running on the walkway divider is my loving jam LesterGroans fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Jan 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:Will is the protagonist of the show and it has my favorite version of Lecter. Dollarhyde hasn't showed up yet but we do have Dr. Chilton, Jack Crawford, Freddie Lounds, and they say Mason Verger is showing up in season 2. It also has Laurence Fishburne actually having something to do for the first time in years. It's sad his role gets a little sidelined in the latter half of the season, because he has some great scenes. It's like when you see Sam Jackson actually act occasionally and it's a surprise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:The showrunner said that if there's a season 4 it'll be Red Dragon. If this happens, the torture and death scene of Freddie Lounds is going to be loving brutal. It's one thing to see Stephen Lang and Phillip Seymour Hoffman getting offed by Dollarhyde, because they come off as utter sleazebags who kinda deserve it, but you know there's going to be some sexual subtext to Lara Jean Chorostecki being part of Dollarhyde's "becoming".
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2014 04:22
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:If this happens, the torture and death scene of Freddie Lounds is going to be loving brutal. It's one thing to see Stephen Lang and Phillip Seymour Hoffman getting offed by Dollarhyde, because they come off as utter sleazebags who kinda deserve it, but you know there's going to be some sexual subtext to Lara Jean Chorostecki being part of Dollarhyde's "becoming". Sadly Fuller isn't lucky enough to get the show going that far. The one thing that saved it is that it's an International co-production and has short seasons, so it actually doesn't cost the network that much to produce. If they get higher ratings this year then they should be fine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2014 12:32
|
|
|
Wizchine posted:Way back when I was an English major at UCLA, the late Professor Hutter regularly taught a class called "Detective Fiction." The last assigned book was Red Dragon, and as a bonus the class watched the film - with Michael Mann giving a Q & A afterwards. (This was probably around 1990.) I don't blame them for this -- it's the biggest problem I had with Fiennes as Dolarhyde. The book was written in the 80s, before everyone and their neighbor was a gym rat and/or tattooed, so the scene where the unusual but apparently mild-mannered photo developer takes his shirt off and reveals not only his big powerful muscular body but this huge and frightening tattoo covering his whole back should have been a really shocking moment. At least Tom Noonan had the height and his innate off-kilterness to make him intimidating. Instead in Red Dragon you have average-height, average-muscled Ralph Fiennes flexing in a pose, and he just looked disappointing and harmless. Like a little lion cub who is trying to roar at you but is only making cute squeaking sounds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2014 18:37
|
|
|
Ralph Fiennes was ripped in the movie, man.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbiDj6vJfug No kidding. I'd say that's pretty much the definition of "Guy who should not be that big and disturbing but suddenly is."
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:To go a bit broader for a moment. Has the subsequent performances spoiled Hopkins' turn in SotL for anyone? For a 12 minute performance it's easy to see how he made the impact that he did, but prolonged across two hours and then again in Red Dragon it doesn't quite work anymore. It draws too much attention to the tics that Hopkins employs. He's so broad and just weird that it's hard to believe that Lector was once 'respected'. It's easy to see why the Hannibal of the TV Show, or even Brian Cox, would be seen as a normal member of society. Yes. I think in Silence of the Lambs he was brilliant, and had that been his only time doing the character, I think I would still rank him above both Mikkelson and Cox, but after Hannibal and Red Dragon I appreciate the other 2 a lot more. Hopkins plays him as an oddball insane genius, Cox plays him as a giant rear end in a top hat, and Mikkelson plays him as Satan. LesterGroans posted:-Brian Cox just straight-up does a way better job than Hopkins in the phone-call scene when Lecter's getting Will's home address.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
AFewBricksShy posted:There's something about him chewing the gum that I always liked. It's so normal. "Let me just chew this gum and get this guy's family killed" It's really hard emotion to place. I'm not sure if Cox Lektor even gets any pleasure from killing someone, it's just a thing that he does. He does seem to get it from fooling people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:It's really hard emotion to place. I'm not sure if Cox Lektor even gets any pleasure from killing someone, it's just a thing that he does. He does seem to get it from fooling people. I think that was Lechter playing the part of a busy white collar dude(attorney? cant remember) and he's just that good at it. In that context the gum could have been a tool he used to sound more casual on the phone. I think Cox's Lechter really takes it personally that Will caught him and considers their business unfinished. Arranging for his family to be killed is just petty revenge, something that would be below Mikkelsen's version.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
That's what Cox's Lecktor gets about that kind of personality: grandiose, yet petty. It's as far as you can get from the "dark artist" virtuoso serial killer thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
Wizchine posted:One more thing that I remember is that Mann thought the central premise was bunk - that this law enforcement officer was so good at getting into the heads of serial killers that he risked being one himself. He said it's not a new premise - the idea of a hazy border between cop and criminal - but again based on his experience working with various law enforcement people over the years and getting to know them (I can't remember if he mentioned meeting profilers specifically) and their professionalism and dedication, he thought the actual likelihood of that kind of dilemma was practically nil. Voodoofly posted:The complete lack of mention of Brian Cox in the OP almost made me vote for Red Dragon out of spite.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
CloseFriend posted:My apologies; I forgot to mention it. I actually prefer Cox's Lecter myself. His portrayal feels more subtle and nuanced to me than Hopkins' sibilant snake-perpetually-about-to-strike. Hopkins' Lecter feels like he could kill you at any time, but Cox's Lecter feels like he could control you at any time, and I find the latter considerably more dangerous and interesting. Yea the problem most people seem to have with Hopkins is that its hard to imagine his Lecter as an actual practicing psychiatrist. In Hannibal he's reintegrated into society, but he's still basically the same form of creepy as ever. Even Mikkelsen can sometimes be hard to buy as a legitimate psychiatrist, I think Cox does the best job of playing a chameleon that could basically fit in anywhere. And in much less screen time than the other two have had.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Yea the problem most people seem to have with Hopkins is that its hard to imagine his Lecter as an actual practicing psychiatrist. In Hannibal he's reintegrated into society, but he's still basically the same form of creepy as ever. Even Mikkelsen can sometimes be hard to buy as a legitimate psychiatrist, I think Cox does the best job of playing a chameleon that could basically fit in anywhere. And in much less screen time than the other two have had. That whole telephone sequence is great proof of Cox's Lektor. He just seamlessly switches roles from a helpless double amputee to get around the institution's limit on dialing out to a fast-talking reporter to get Graham's address. It's very sociopathic performance and it works. Also, what does everyone think of Chilton in Manhunter? There's a deleted scene with him talking to Graham about Lektor that seems pretty interesting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqcEWVAjaYY Ignoring SotL and it's goofy, showboating portrayal by Anthony Heald for a moment, the Chilton in Manhunter seems like he's on the edge of becoming a devotee to Lektor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:That whole telephone sequence is great proof of Cox's Lektor. He just seamlessly switches roles from a helpless double amputee to get around the institution's limit on dialing out to a fast-talking reporter to get Graham's address. It's very sociopathic performance and it works. I posted this scene and mentioned it a few posts up, but for a different reason, I think it's the only scene that really sells the idea that Graham could possibly go nuts and kill people because of how they limit showing Graham's face. You can't SEE him so you can't understand or know him during this scene, we just get Chilton briefly looking freaked out as Graham gets in his face to get him to stop prodding him about his methods. Chilton himself I don't think is actually too interesting here, because he's presented as not too different from Lounds as some guy trying way too hard to get into Graham's personal space. Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Jan 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 11:05 |
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:I posted this scene and mentioned it a few posts up, but for a different reason, I think it's the only scene that really sells the idea that Graham could possibly go nuts and kill people because of how they limit showing Graham's face. You can't SEE him so you can't understand or know him during this scene, we just get Chilton briefly looking freaked out as Graham gets in his face to get him to stop prodding him about his methods. Which would mirror Dollarhyde's appearance, since we don't see a good look at him until about half way through the picture. Neo Rasa posted:Chilton himself I don't think is actually too interesting here, because he's presented as not too different from Lounds as some guy trying way too hard to get into Graham's personal space. When I'm saying "devotee of Lektor", I don't mean as a guy using him to get ahead, I mean as if Lektor's presence is grooming Chilton into becoming something like him, like a set of hands from beyond Lektor's cell. The stuff about his methods sounds almost as if Chilton's going to go on a spree himself and wants to avoid getting caught by Graham or the FBI. Or pass the knowledge on to Lektor. Luckily, the only scene in the feature of Chilton is him cooperating with the FBI regarding the toilet paper note.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2014 06:34
|
|