Silence Of The Lambs (DVD)

...the book by Thomas Harris, Silence of the Lambs is actually a sequel to the lesser-known and Hopkins-less "Manhunter" (later remade with Hopkins as "Red Dragon"). It features rookie FBI agent Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster) on the hunt for serial killer Jame "Buffalo Bill" Gumb (Ted Levine), so named for his habit of skinning his female victims. To track this elusive killer, Starling is forced to enlist the help of the ...
...the Labyrinth: The Making of Silence Of The Lambs
Original Featurette
Deleted Scenes
Anthony Hopkins Phone Message
Outtakes Reel
Stills Galleries
Teaser Trailer
Hannibal Trailer
Original Theatrical Trailer
TV Spots
Collectable Booklet

Conclusion
---------------

Winning all five major Academy Awards (Best Movie, Best Director, Best ... more

"A census taker once tried to test me. I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti."

John Hurt, Patrick Stewart, Jeremy Irons, Jack Nicholson and Sean Connery were all considered to play the role of the cannibalistic serial-killer Dr Hannibal Lecter in Jonathan Demme's 1991 psychological thriller/horror "Silence of the Lambs." Fortunately, however, we were spared the thought of James Bond becoming the silver screen's most notorious serial killer when the role was handed to Anthony Hopkins. A legend was born.

Hopkins is on the screen for precisely 24 minutes and 17 seconds, yet his powerful presence casts a shadow over the movie from start to finish. His performance as the psychotic doctor was so memorable that not even this lack of screen time could prevent him from picking up the Oscar for Best Leading Actor.

Based on the book by Thomas Harris, Silence of the Lambs is actually a sequel to the lesser-known and Hopkins-less "Manhunter" (later remade with Hopkins as "Red Dragon"). It features rookie FBI agent Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster) on the hunt for serial killer Jame "Buffalo Bill" Gumb (Ted Levine), so named for his habit of skinning his female victims. To track this elusive killer, Starling is forced to enlist the help of the intelligent but insane Doctor Hannibal Lector (Anthony Hopkins) currently residing in the Baltimore state hospital for the criminally insane. Lector, remorseless and seemingly emotionless, is quick to point out the main difference between himself and most other serial killers - the fact that he never kept any trophies. "No." remarks Clarice "You ate yours".

The character of Dr Hannibal Lector has become one of the most iconic of all time. In a strange way, the brutal yet charismatic psychopath is almost the hero of the trilogy, and the fact we can have sympathy, and even at times admiration, for such a nightmarish character, is a huge tribute to Hopkins talents as one of Hollywood's leading lights. It would have easy to play the character as a cartoonish monster - a Freddie Krueger or a Jason Vorhees. Instead the combination of Thomas Harris, Jonathan Demmes and Anthony Hopkins portray his as a complex, contradictory character, and this just makes him all the more interesting to watch and analyze.

His relationship with the young rookie FBI agent Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster) is particularly revealing. His growing affection for her is genuine, if slightly creepy. His successful attempt to punish fellow prisoner Miggs for his "discourtesy" to Clarice which Lector describes as "unspeakably ugly to me", is misguided but it is possible to believe Lector had the best possible intentions. Miggs throws sperm at Starling as she is walking down the corridor to her first meeting with Lector; the doctor's revenge is to whisper to Miggs through the cell wall all night. Miggs is found dead the next morning, having swallowed his own tongue. Biting people's faces and eating their organs is acceptable it seems. Rudeness, however, is not.

The scenes between Lector and Starling are the most memorable in the film. They are captivating and disturbing in equal measure as the doctor turns the line of questioning back to Starling's childhood traumas and nightmares of screaming lambs in an attempt to psychoanalyze her. "You don't want Hannibal Lecter inside your head." Is the wise advice from Jack Crawford (Scott Glenn), but Starling is unable to resist as Lector offers her the choice; If I help you, Clarice, it will be "turns" with us too. Quid pro quo. I tell you things, you tell me things. Not about this case, though. About yourself. Quid pro quo. Yes or no?"

Caged, muzzled and restrained through the majority of the film, Lecter is no less intimidating for his captivity. It is difficult to overstate the air of menace he exudes as he prowls the small room like a predator, never taking his eyes off his prey. Despite the physical barriers, you get the impression of Lector as being like a deadly snake, this all-knowing, all-seeing, deceptively powerful and intelligent creature coiled ready to strike.

There is no doubting the prey; Starling, young and naïve, is trapped in a battle she can never win. Foster, however, deserves immense credit for portraying such an atypically strong female lead. It is a powerful performance, deserving of her Leading Actress Oscar. As she herself so modestly stated, her performance is "one of the most true and progressive portrayals of a female ever". One of my only personal grievances of the film, however is how her southern drawl starts to grate after a while. In fact, she argued with the Director about it at the start of the film. Also, in the first scene involving herself and Hopkins, he makes a mocking imitation of the accent. Apparently, it was totally improvised by Hopkins, and Foster saw it as a personal attack. The scene made the final cut however, as it shows Lecter mocking the origins which Starling has spent a life time trying to hide.

Hopkins has revealed several influences on his creation of the character; HAL from 2001: A Space Odyssey, a complex, intelligent computer incapable of any kind of humanity; a combination of Truman Capote and Katharine Hepburn; various serial killers including Charles Manson; and the devil. "I have always perceived the devil as very charming, witty, seductive, sexual - and lethal."

Several clever techniques are used to build the menace of the character. When Starling is walking towards Lector's corridor, the scene is suffused in a red light - this is the gateway to hell. The disembodied voices she hears from the cells are the cries of the damned. In the cell itself, Lector is waiting for her - staring straight at the camera; reinforcing the feeling that this is not a man, but some supernatural omnipotent creature who even knows we are watching. It really adds an air of claustrophobic intimidation to the film and makes us fill we are in the cage with the monster. In most of the scenes between Starling and Lecter, the doctor is always present - sometimes just in blurred reflection making him seem like some malevolent, mocking ghost.

However, in many ways, Lecter is not an evil man. In fact, when Hopkins found out he had been cast in the role because of his performance "The Elephant Man", he questioned the decision as ""Dr. Treves was a good man." To which Demme replied "So is Lecter, he is a good man too. Just trapped in an insane mind." Hopkins later went on to describe Lector as "a man who is locked in the monstrosity of his own mind", suggesting his actions are almost involuntary. He is intelligent, charismatic, dignified, charming and seems oblivious to the chaos he wreaks. It is this inherent humanity that makes Lector such an iconic character.

It is interesting to note the contrast in the first two times we see him make contact with another human being - he strokes Clarice's finger with his own in the first, bites a man's face off the next. Again we see this enigmatic, contradictory character - this humane monster.

Lector's nemesis, Dr Frederick Chilton (Anthony Heald ), in many ways is a far more loathsome creature than the criminal's he studies. His analysis of Lector, through years of careful study is "he's a monster", which just goes to show his lack of understanding of the man. Greasy of hair and tongue, he is brilliantly played by. Here is a man just begging to be eaten.

Compared to Hannibal Lector, the second serial-killer, Buffalo Bill, is something of a lightweight. Lacking the Doctor's depth, the character was criticized by many for being a homophobic stereotype. Occasionally lapsing into the sort of drag-queen act that must haunt Lilly Savage's nightmares, it's easy to see why. We see very little reason for the character's behavior and psychological problems, which was apparently a source of regret for the director. It is not a bad performance by Levine by any means, but he is up against possibly the greatest movie villain of all time and can't help but pale into insignificance.

Some people have also critizised Hopkins' performance, citing it as too "theatrical". He certainly does play the part to its extreme and there is little subtlety. In my opinion however, it is one of the finest character performances of all time. When he is on screen, he is mesmeric and hypnotic, like an explosion waiting to happen. Even when he is off-screen, he dominates the film. His performance is utterly unforgettable.

The films brown and grey tones lend a somber sobriety to the film, whilst the sound is clever and excellently used - along with the standard orchestra, whale and submarine noises mark Starling's journey to the "underworld" of Lector's dungeon-like cell. This makes the character seem isolated, lost and out of her depth, and lends a real weight to their first meeting.

Although heavily psychological in general, there are also several dramatic scenes. Revealing what these are would spoil the movie, but they are superbly clever and are real heart-racing moments of the highest order. Two scenes in particular beautifully deceive the audience and throw our assumptions back in our faces

There are also several moments which could almost be called "comic", but these are, however, the blackest of black humour. It mainly involves Lector ironically ridiculing himself - "people will say we're in love", he tells Starling.

At 118 minutes, the film is well paced, gripping, tense and perfectly constructed. It is a piece of film-making art of the finest caliber - dark and disturbing yet stylishly handled for commercial appeal. Featuring two actors at the very top of the professions, the performance of Hopkins in particular was career-defining. Doctor Hannibal Lector as an icon, as a name and as a personality is unrivalled in modern cinema. Part mythological bogey-man, he is cold and calculating, utterly insane, yet crucially human.

Age Suitability
------------------
Despite it's subject matter, SOTL is deceptively void of a huge amount of blood or violence. Most of the gory scenes are shown in flashes, though occasionally this can serve to make the images even more harrowing. There are also few profanities, although the ones that are used are strong in the extreme. However, fairly obviously, a film about cannibalistic serial killers and skin-stripping psychopaths is not exactly Disney. This is absolutely unsuitable for children or more sensitive adults. It is more a thriller than a horror, but there are horror elements to it and Hopkins' portrayal of Dr Lecter is both harrowing and disturbing. Criticism has been leveled at the film that it glamorises murder and violence, and there is a certain amount of truth in this. In fact, this was said to be the reason that Michelle Pfeiffer turned down the role of Starling.

Film Facts
-------------
- Thomas Harris, author of the Hannibal Lecter series has apparently never seen the film as he feels it would influence his writing too much

- SOTL is arguably the only horror to win an Oscar for Best Picture

- The idea of dressing Hopkins all in white later in the movie comes from Hopkins' fear of dentists

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

Below are a couple of facts about the film which I find interesting. However, some of which could be considered spoilers if you haven't already seen it. Please scroll down if you don't want to read these.
- The character of Jame "Buffalo Bill" Gumby was based on three real-life serial killers; Ed Gein who skinned his victims and used the skin to cover his body and body parts as house decorations. Ted Bundy used an arm cast to get sympathy and attract victims. Gary Heidnick imprisoned his victims in a dungeon similar to the one Gumby uses.
- It is never properly revealed in the film, but the reason Gumb doesn't shoot Starling in the scene at the end whilst he has the chance is because he wants her "glorious" hair and doesn't want to destroy his prize. The only clue to this in the film when he reaches out in the darkness to touch her face and hair. In fact, although in my opinion the film is superior, the ending in the book is far better.
- In the book, when a moth lands on the dying Gumb he asks "How does it feel to be so beautiful?" This is another detail missing in the film which I think would have been a nice touch.

END OF SPOILERS!!! END OF SPOILERS!!!

The DVD
-----------

Available for under £5 from Amazon, although widely available at a similar price from many outlets

The cover is also worthy of note - a striking image of a deathly white Jodie Foster, with mouth covered by a Death's Head moth, wings spread to reveal skull-like markings

Extras -

Inside the Labyrinth: The Making of Silence Of The Lambs
Original Featurette
Deleted Scenes
Anthony Hopkins Phone Message
Outtakes Reel
Stills Galleries
Teaser Trailer
Hannibal Trailer
Original Theatrical Trailer
TV Spots
Collectable Booklet

Conclusion
---------------

Winning all five major Academy Awards (Best Movie, Best Director, Best Leading Actor, Best Leading Actress, Best Screenplay) is quite an achievement. Doing it a year after the movie is released is nothing short of miraculous. But that's what happened with Silence of the Lambs, a masterpiece composed of superb writers, actors and a skillful director at the top of his craft.

There are faults, as with any film. Some of the scenes stretch the imagination somewhat. Jame "Buffalo Bill" Gumb is a somewhat two-dimensional character can never compete with the insane, alluring and deadly Doctor Lecter. It is morbid, disturbing and revels somewhat in the blood and violence, which led to accusations it glorifies murder.

As a film though, whether classed as a horror, a thriller, a drama, or a detective story, it scores full marks. It beguiles us, misleads us, scares and thrills us. For a long time afterwards, the audience's dreams will be haunted by the screaming of the lambs

I do wish I could write more, but... I'm having an old friend for dinner......

 

...less