Manhunter (1986)

★★★★★ Watched 13 Oct, 2002

The release of Red Dragon with Anthony Hopkins finally made me sit down and watch this original adaptation of Harrison’s novel Red Dragon – prequel to The Silence of the Lambs. I watched Red Dragon straight after, which made the comparison even more interesting.

Although Hopkins is undisputed as Hannibal Lecter and ‘Lambs’ still keeps the title of the best Hannibal movie, Manhunter comes very close and manages to stay on top of Ridley’s Hannibal and latest Red Dragon. Latter, being the worst in the series, but still watchable, thanks to the always amazing performance by Hopkins.

Mann shows great talent and a sense for directing (we see a lot of his trademark close-up shots we got used to in his later movies – Heat, Insider, and Ali), along with a good feeling for adapting the script (for example, his later script adaptation of Last of the Mohicans). William L. Petersen is excellent in the role of FBI agent, which in some ways reminds me of his role as the head of the C.S.I. TV series. I haven’t read the book, so I’m judging from what I’ve read that Red Dragon follows the book more closely than Manhunter, and in general, Red Dragon makes things clearer for the audience. On the other hand, Manhunter keeps the tension and has better character development. Especially the main role of Agent Graham and the relationship with his wife, which in Red Dragon is significantly less developed.

In Manhunter, Hannibal has an important, but not as emphasized, role as in Red Dragon for obvious reasons. The focus is on Agent Graham and his struggle with himself and the killer, whose motivations are never as clear as in Red Dragon. Red Dragon itself is mentioned only once in the movie. I guess Mann thought digging deeper into Red Dragon mythology would take the focus from Agent Graham.

The title itself – Manhunter – indicates the focus of the story, much like the Red Dragon title indicates greater importance of the killer’s motives in the remake and obviously in the book itself.

Manhunter is an excellent detective story with great psychological tension, a tight plot, and a memorable performance, especially from the main character.

Source: Letterboxd
Info: IMDb

4 thoughts on “Manhunter (1986)

  1. Thanks for commenting at my site, http://www.dark.sport.blog … keep on coming and writing your thoughts they’re important!

    As for your review, I think Hannibal Lecter is an important figure in pop culture mythology. Even Donald Trump references him. Lecter represents the “wild element” in the civilized man, begging to break free. Like so many “evil” characters, he has an allure to him that the “normie” man, limited to grilling burgers in his backyard, feels inexplicably drawn to.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. As soon as you said “C.S.I.” I remembered who William L. Petersen is. AND realized the gravitas he brings to detective work. And Michael Mann- sounds amazing… Original C.S.I. (Las Vegas) became one of my favorite shows for about 4-5 seasons. I would watch new episodes live every Thursday? I think it was. It would come on right after survivor. Both shows were in their prime… I look forward to watching this – may save it for closer to Halloween season. If I can wait!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I don’t remember how many CSI seasons I’ve seen (at least 6). I’ve seen a couple of episodes of the Miami spinoff (I did not like it) and maybe 4 seasons of New York, and then I switched to Criminal Minds. I’ve also watched some of the Cyber spinoff.

      I also remember Survivor, which I watched on Finnish TV.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Very nice review on MANHUNTER. You’re probably right about RED DRAGON second version of the novel, but I think what Mann does with it is far more artistic and unique. He focuses on the detective to show how confused a personality could be. It’s very similar to the character of Sonny Crockett in MIAMI VICE, torn between the cop side and the lover side.

    MANHUNTER | LE TOUR D’ECRAN

    Like

Leave a comment