Hannibal Rising

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM) | Release Date: February 9, 2007

4.9	USER SCORE Mixed or average reviews based on 137 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

grandpajoe6191Sep 29, 2011

I thought about watching the whole Hannibal franchise. After watching "Hannibal Rising", I realized I should watch a different movie franchise that is NOT Hannibal.

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

imthenoobMar 12, 2012

It was ok. Not as bad as the critics say imo. The cast is alright, Gaspard Ulliel is a great choice as the young Hannibal. The plot was ok. It explained a bit more about Hannibal but it wasnt as insightful as I hoped it would be. It neverIt was ok. Not as bad as the critics say imo. The cast is alright, Gaspard Ulliel is a great choice as the young Hannibal. The plot was ok. It explained a bit more about Hannibal but it wasnt as insightful as I hoped it would be. It never really got interesting either, The little interest there was fades through out the film. Its also a little bit too long of my tastes as well. It was still a decent film though.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

kareOct 6, 2013

its ok...i mean is not awesome ..but is ok, I seen worse is the kind of movie that you watch in tv if you have nothing better to do but still is 50/50 i can't put it neither in the bad or good category

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

AdityaMookerjeeNov 13, 2013

The movie is a tragedy of humanity, as if we evolved as a society, to see more and more of the same. Hannibal Lecter is a very unusually gifted, and perceptive individual. He has no role model in society, and he has been led to believe, thatThe movie is a tragedy of humanity, as if we evolved as a society, to see more and more of the same. Hannibal Lecter is a very unusually gifted, and perceptive individual. He has no role model in society, and he has been led to believe, that individuality won the Soviets the war, and people didn't depend on anyone, but themselves, winning the war. In his experience, his small adorable child of a sister, is killed by people, who feel that he and his sister are the cause of they killing them. How he wins to survive, seems to be how everyone felt, in Stalingrad, in Berlin, in London, and everywhere. Who won the war for the victors, small children like Hannibal, or Stalin, or Churchill?
Hannibal can eat foie gras, and it seems that he is a cannibal, because he detests cannibalism, and perhaps he is condoning the perpetrators. He is asked by the associate of his sister's killer, whether he would feed the killer to his sister, but the associate forgets, that the killer gives the amulet that his victim wore, to his own daughter, and this means, he would have killed and eaten his daughter, in the circumstance, perhaps to Hannibal.
This is what society means, and what it portends, to many like Hannibal. The world war is justified to create a world order, that would have existed in a different way anyway. There is no role model to Hannibal, and even for the leaders, who rule nations. The Second World war had people who had the attitude of Hannibal, but were prudent not to act similarly.
Apparently, Hannibal negates all the bad and good that he does, he does good, if he does, to say that he is not associating himself, and he does bad similarly. He eats the frontal lobe, that part of the brain, which was removed by surgery, in the process of lobotomy, after he removes it, perhaps because he identifies the lobe in a certain way. It might be, that since he cannot perform lobotomy, he has to kill people to perform the procedure.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

TheArchetypesSep 9, 2016

Hannibal Rising is defter and more earnest than what the mass critical consensus reveals. The breadth of the photography and framing is adept and deliberate, the 20 minutes of the WWII prologue is imperative on the motivation of theHannibal Rising is defter and more earnest than what the mass critical consensus reveals. The breadth of the photography and framing is adept and deliberate, the 20 minutes of the WWII prologue is imperative on the motivation of the protagonist, and the detail generates possibility of grander actions to ensue. Subsequently, the crucial frailty of the movie is its perfunctory vengeance exemplar.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

FilipeNetoMar 5, 2018

This film is a prequel to "Silence of the Lambs" and seeks to tell how the young Hannibal Lecter, affected by the dramatic events of World War II, became a dangerous cannibal. Directed by Peter Webber and written by Thomas Harris, this filmThis film is a prequel to "Silence of the Lambs" and seeks to tell how the young Hannibal Lecter, affected by the dramatic events of World War II, became a dangerous cannibal. Directed by Peter Webber and written by Thomas Harris, this film has a cast headed by Gaspard Ulliel, Gong Li and Rhys Ifans.

This film is not bad, but its too far from the success and quality of "Red Dragon" and "Silence of the Lambs". It cannot be analyzed as a horror film because never frightens us. Its closer to the thriller or police movies.

It has a dubious script, which explains the reasons why Hannibal is what he is in previous films. This is its first problem: it want to transform a perfect villain in a dubious antihero. The idea simply does not stick with anything that the character will do in the movies played by Anthony Hopkins. The idea of inserting Japanese elements in the story also seems a wrong option, something that does not fit properly, despite the good acting of Li Gong.

In fact, speaking of actors, she seemed to me the best performance of the film, discreet and elegant as called for her character. The actors who played the villains was reasonable. Gaspard Ulliel, in the leading role, is a casting error: although he managed to give its character lots of coldness and cynicism, he wasn't able to give it charisma and sense of taste, striking personality traits of Lecter that are quite visible in Hopkins movies.

The film contains several intense action scenes with moments that may hurt some people's sensibilities, so be warned. Still, its far from violence and gore visible in "Hannibal". Its a film that focuses on action and romance, not on blood. The special, visual and sound effects are good and get better as we approach the end. The soundtrack seemed to be regular, fulfilling its role without stand.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

RobertRJul 22, 2007

Hannibal Rising is defter and more earnest than what the mass critical consensus reveals. The breadth of the photography and framing is adept and deliberate, the 20 minutes of the WWII prologue is imperative on the motivation of the Hannibal Rising is defter and more earnest than what the mass critical consensus reveals. The breadth of the photography and framing is adept and deliberate, the 20 minutes of the WWII prologue is imperative on the motivation of the protagonist, and the detail generates possibility of grander actions to ensue. Subsequently, the crucial frailty of the movie is its perfunctory vengeance exemplar… Expand