Review of Red Dragon (2002) by Apoklyps — 22 Jun 2015

This movie desperately wants to be "Silence" but falls short in so many ways.

Let's start off with what the movie did well. They chose an amazing cast of extremely talented actors. Hoffman always seems to play sleazy roles well, and this is no exception. However, Ralph Fiennes' performance was undoubtedly the standout role. Francis Dolarhyde is without a doubt one of the creepiest movie villains in history. He manages to create such an inhuman creature that it is almost awkward to watch at times, but always punctuates it with enough humanity at the right times in order to create a truly frightening villain.

That said, most of the other thrills fall flat. Compared to "Silence", there was a sense of crassness about the thrills (e.g. the explosion) that seemed artless and felt out of place in a movie about Hannibal Lecter. Additionally, the interactions between Lecter and Graham were poorly done and lacked the suspense of Starling's and Lecter's dialogues. While "Silence" was a masterpiece that was as much about Starling selling her mind to Lecter in exchange for his help as it was about catching Buffalo Bill, "Red Dragon" lacked the psychological game of cat-and-mouse so cleverly demonstrated by "Silence". Instead, we watch Graham offer deals and bark ultimatums at Lecter in order to get what he wants. There is never the same sense of powerlessness that we see in "Silence".

Graham's character is also an exercise in laziness. The "reluctant hero" archetype is so cliched that it gets somewhat irritating at times. While I like Edward Norton and thought he played the character well, there is only so far that a talented actor like Norton can take a role like this. Family man, traumatic past, a theme of character development through overcoming his fear... Did the writers even try?

I also thought that the ending was extremely poorly done. While I relished the final twist, I thought the execution was extremely poor (an explosion... really???). Graham's family moving back into the same house in Florida has to be some of the laziest writing I've ever seen. Hannibal Lecter knows where Graham lives and has a grudge against him. Lecter has already proved dangerous enough that a ridiculous number of precautions surrounding him are in place, and even those prove useless at times. He is incredibly intelligent and has already proven himself capable of finding creative ways to contact and direct a serial killer from within his cell. So why would Graham, one of the cleverest guys in the FBI and one who knows Lecter better than anyone else, do something as stupid as moving back into the same house? I was amazed that he'd do that even before the events of the finale. Personally, I'd be moving my family to a different state (country?) and changing my name, like any sane individual would. An ending like this is truly an insult to the intelligence of the viewers.

All things considered, I'll give this movie a 5/10. While a movie like this is a black mark on the legacy of "Silence", I did acknowledge that the weak plot and characters may be due to limitations in the source material (which, to be fair, I haven't read). The movie was also saved from being a 2/10 by Fiennes' performance, which was a disturbing treat to watch.