I have now seen "Red Dragon" twice. I must say that was a huge mistake! I have seen Manhunter (the original "Red Dragon" movie) 5 or 6 times. The whole point with Manhunter is to show the world what kind of a man Will Graham, William Petersen is. We get to see that he is smart. He is different thinking. He is thinking exactly like a killer would think in order to catch the killers. I am not sure weather Edward Norton is doing such a bad job on purpose or if it is just the script? He is probably doing his very best, but after seeing the original movie, this makes me sick. I was 9 or 10 the first time I watched "Silence of the lambs", just watched "Hannibal" a couple of years back and thought to myself that I loved them. "Silence of the lambs" is more than great! Jodie Foster as (agent Starling) is doing a great job and she and Anthony Hopkins work great together. And, a big and this is, the atmosphere is there. The atmosphere that makes you scared. But off course it did. I was young back then, watching a scary movie. But I still think "Silence of the lambs" is great. What my point is about "Red Dragon" being so bad is that this is not only a remake of "Manhunter"! This is a disaster! What makes "Manhunter" what it is, is probably because of Michael Mann, the man behind "Miami Vice". Like "Miami Vice", "Manhunter" has a special feeling to it. This is a story told for those interested to watch it, not because it is about a 3 hours long movie, but it is told the way it is. What makes "Manhunter" the better version of this movie is that the story is not short and cut off like "Red Dragon" is. This remake feels more like Anthony Hopkins wanted to play Hannibal once again only because Brian Cox did it in "Manhunter". The thing is that I have seen Edward Norton doing a great job in "American History X", "Fight Club" and "Primal Fear" and I am ashamed of what I have seen here. This remake feels cut off. Most of the original story is missing, the important stuff like who is Will Graham and what does he do? I noticed that clues that kind of melts in and slowly shows up in "Manhunter" are just there in "Red Dragon", this is bad. No, I didn't see it. I stared at the screen and could still not see it. Where was it and what was it. Now this makes me mad! I have always been a huge fan of most of the big names in "Red Dragon", Anthony Hopkins used to do such a great job, but now he feels more like a slob. Brian Cox is doing a lot better because Hannibal is supposed to be ice cold and selfish. Ralph Fiennes, I saw "The Constant Gardener" just the other day and loved it. I have seen other movies as well with him, but he to made me very disappointed here. His role as Francis Dolarhyde was not very convincing in my opinion and he didn't manage to scare me one bit. His eyes may be to honest or something, but it didn't his the right spot. In order to see my point here, you need to see "Manhunter". I promise after seeing "Manhunter" 5 or 6 times and now this disaster twice, I tried to not look to much on "Manhunter" story, but it is impossible to not see all the things that is missing, cut away and the new stuff added that feels like a huge mistake. The ending was different from "Manhunter", but not really to the better. So many things are not right here! Why make a bad remake of something brilliant?
Review of Red Dragon
