At least it was better than the book.

Rating: 2/10 (30 May 1999)

Academy Awards are rarely the sign of a great movie. The children of the Academy members, who do the actual voting, have notoriously pedestrian tastes. This movie does add some dramatic scenes and character development to improve on a poorly written novel. This movie's big draws, it would appear, were cannibalism, masogeny, and over-acting. Really great acting is transparent. If you're marvelling at the fantastic acting during the movie, then what you're enjoying is watching someone "ham it up" on the screen, not fine acting. The important thing is that the villain didn't have sex with the women, he just murdered them and skinned them, thus avoiding an x rating. And the females that we were aware of that did have sex were properly tortured for their sins. What I really find offensive is that Hannibal the Cannibal is portrayed as a likable monster, even after cutting off the face of an innocent guard in order facilitate his escape. Hannibal's a winner and American's love a winner, regardless of the atrocities he commits in order to achieve his goals. This movie sends the message that if we are clever and have no moral limits as to what we are willing to do, we'll succeed -which Hannibal does! This movie is truly a bottom feeder in the cesspool of American cinema.