Status
Available
Call number
Call number
F Har
Genres
Collection
Publication
Dell (2000), 546 pages
Description
Fiction. Horror. Suspense. Thriller. HTML:Invite Hannibal Lecter into the palace of your mind and be invited into his mind palace in turn. Note the similarities in yours and his, the high vaulted chambers of your dreams, the shadowed halls, the locked storerooms where you dare not go, the scrap of half-forgotten music, the muffled cries from behind a wall. In one of the most eagerly anticipated literary events of the decade, Thomas Harris takes us once again into the mind of a killer, crafting a chilling portrait of insidiously evolving evilâ??a tour de force of psychological suspense. Seven years have passed since Dr. Hannibal Lecter escaped from custody, seven years since FBI Special Agent Clarice Starling interviewed him in a maximum security hospital for the criminally insane. The doctor is still at large, pursuing his own ineffable interests, savoring the scents, the essences of an unguarded world. But Starling has never forgotten her encounters with Dr. Lecter, and the metallic rasp of his seldom-used voice still sounds in her dreams. Mason Verger remembers Dr. Lecter, too, and is obsessed with revenge. He was Dr. Lecter's sixth victim, and he has survived to rule his own butcher's empire. From his respirator, Verger monitors every twitch in his worldwide web. Soon he sees that to draw the doctor, he must have the most exquisite and innocent-appearing bait; he must have what Dr. Lecter likes best. Powerful, hypnotic, utterly original, Hannibal is a dazzling feast for the imagination. Prepare to travel to hell and beyond as a master storyteller permanently alters the world you thought you knew. From the Hardcover edition.… (more)
Subjects
Original publication date
1999
Similar in this library
It by Stephen King
User reviews
LibraryThing member Mrs_McGreevy
Okay, let me confess up front: I loved Red Dragon and The Silence of the Lambs. Loved them. I enjoyed the movies, too: the movie version of Silence of the Lambs scared the pee out of me, and even so, I didn’t want it to end. So, long years later when I finally got hold of a copy of Hannibal, I
But I didn’t.
Well, that’s not entirely true. If I pretend that this wasn’t a sequel about characters I already know, then I can find some bright spots. The book has some fantastic descriptions of Italy. There are certainly some creepy scenes that gave me the shivers. I was fascinated by the concept of the memory cathedral. And I felt terribly bad for poor Clarice as her world crumbled in around her. The problem is, none of the characters seem remotely connected to the folks we met before.
Hannibal Lecter, an enigma in previous installments, now has a background. It’s tragic and horrifying, but is it enough to form the Hannibal we all know? Maybe. But even if it is, do we really have to know the details of why Lecter is who he is? I’m not convinced that this information makes him a more compelling character.
Clarice Starling, whose wagon was hitched to a rising star at the end of Silence, is on the verge of being pushed out of the FBI. She has been overlooked again and again for promotion and is reduced to being scapegoated by talentless superiors.
Jack Crawford, a hero and mentor in the previous books, is now (for the short time he appears here) a liability.
I understand that people change, but come on. So what happened? What changed between the publication of The Silence of the Lambs and the publication of Hannibal? Well, what changed was the character of Hannibal Lecter. In both Red Dragon and The Silence of the Lambs, Hannibal was a minor (though quite compelling) character. Harris went to great pains to point out that, although clever and extremely cunning, Lecter was not omniscient. There was always an explanation as to how he knew the things he did, and Crawford was equally clever at figuring it out. Enter Jonathan Demme.
When Jonathan Demme made the movie version of Silence, he said that he wanted the audience to believe that Lecter was the smartest man alive. It didn’t matter how he knew the things he did—he just knew. And to the credit of both Demme and Anthony Hopkins, it worked. The movie firmly established Lecter’s genius, and in the context of the film, it was brilliant: you never have to explain how Lecter gets his information, and his outrageous escape becomes plausible. Besides, the smarter Lecter is the more the audience worries about Clarice. Hopkins’ performance firmly established a picture in our minds of who Lecter was and how he worked.
Enter Thomas Harris, trying to write a sequel to a phenomenally popular book, which was also a hugely successful movie. Now everyone thought of Anthony Hopkins when they thought of Hannibal Lecter, and they believed he was the smartest psycho alive. Instead of writing about his own Hannibal, he tried to write about the Demme/Hopkins Hannibal, and that just didn’t leave him anyplace to go but over the top, which is a crying shame. The book collapses under the sheer magnitude of what we are expected to accept about these characters and where they end up.
Show More
really, really, wanted to love it, too.But I didn’t.
Well, that’s not entirely true. If I pretend that this wasn’t a sequel about characters I already know, then I can find some bright spots. The book has some fantastic descriptions of Italy. There are certainly some creepy scenes that gave me the shivers. I was fascinated by the concept of the memory cathedral. And I felt terribly bad for poor Clarice as her world crumbled in around her. The problem is, none of the characters seem remotely connected to the folks we met before.
Hannibal Lecter, an enigma in previous installments, now has a background. It’s tragic and horrifying, but is it enough to form the Hannibal we all know? Maybe. But even if it is, do we really have to know the details of why Lecter is who he is? I’m not convinced that this information makes him a more compelling character.
Clarice Starling, whose wagon was hitched to a rising star at the end of Silence, is on the verge of being pushed out of the FBI. She has been overlooked again and again for promotion and is reduced to being scapegoated by talentless superiors.
Jack Crawford, a hero and mentor in the previous books, is now (for the short time he appears here) a liability.
I understand that people change, but come on. So what happened? What changed between the publication of The Silence of the Lambs and the publication of Hannibal? Well, what changed was the character of Hannibal Lecter. In both Red Dragon and The Silence of the Lambs, Hannibal was a minor (though quite compelling) character. Harris went to great pains to point out that, although clever and extremely cunning, Lecter was not omniscient. There was always an explanation as to how he knew the things he did, and Crawford was equally clever at figuring it out. Enter Jonathan Demme.
When Jonathan Demme made the movie version of Silence, he said that he wanted the audience to believe that Lecter was the smartest man alive. It didn’t matter how he knew the things he did—he just knew. And to the credit of both Demme and Anthony Hopkins, it worked. The movie firmly established Lecter’s genius, and in the context of the film, it was brilliant: you never have to explain how Lecter gets his information, and his outrageous escape becomes plausible. Besides, the smarter Lecter is the more the audience worries about Clarice. Hopkins’ performance firmly established a picture in our minds of who Lecter was and how he worked.
Enter Thomas Harris, trying to write a sequel to a phenomenally popular book, which was also a hugely successful movie. Now everyone thought of Anthony Hopkins when they thought of Hannibal Lecter, and they believed he was the smartest psycho alive. Instead of writing about his own Hannibal, he tried to write about the Demme/Hopkins Hannibal, and that just didn’t leave him anyplace to go but over the top, which is a crying shame. The book collapses under the sheer magnitude of what we are expected to accept about these characters and where they end up.
Show Less
LibraryThing member conformer
When Thomas Harris took Hannibal Lecter out of his cage and put him center stage, he demonstrated the existence of two new universal truths. First, Lecter is a much more interesting, charming, and frightening character when he's relegated to the backdrop and his appearances are rationed out only
Show More
when the story calls for them. Obviously overconfident with the success of The Silence Of The Lambs, Harris somehow saw fit to make Lecter the protagonist, but without the veil of history to blur his atrocities, when Hannibal actually "performs," it comes across as contrived, artificially extreme, and silly.Second, Harris is a world-class hack. I mean, seriously; man-eating pigs? Supercharged sports cars? Lecter and Clarice skip off into the sunset, hand in hand? How stupid do some of these writers think we are? Show Less
LibraryThing member ParadigmTree
Just awful! And awfully boring! Harris also succeeded in totally destroyed Clarice's character and removing Hannibal's mystic. Not a book for the fans of 'Red Dragon' or 'Silence of the Lambs'.
LibraryThing member crabbylibrarian
I really wish I could've give this book negative stars. It felt like Harris rushed through it and gave it the most gruesome ending he could think of. Parts of it actually made my skin crawl! (Maybe that was the effect he was seeking. If so, congratulations!)
This was nowhere close to the writing in
This was nowhere close to the writing in
Show More
'Red Dragon' or 'Silence of the Lambs'. It felt like Harris had committed to writing this and he wanted to be finished with it quickly. Show Less
LibraryThing member joyleppin
Oh, the wicked things that men do. 'Well hello Clarice.'
LibraryThing member Leli1013
This is my favorite novel of all time. I've been through about 5 or 6 copies of it throughout the ten years since I first read it. I carried it with me all of freshman year of high school. When read along with "Red Dragon" and "The Silence of the Lambs" it almost feels like the story wrote itself.
Show More
The characters are so COMPLETE. They feel like they're real, living, breathing people and the choices and actions they make seem organic and in accordance to their individual nature. Show Less
LibraryThing member ShelfMonkey
What can be said about HANNIBAL that hasn't been said already? Hannibal Lecter has become an instantly identifiable icon, an image of madness and insanity that the public has lapped up in droves. His third appearance in fiction has as many detractors as rabid fans, arguing intensely over whether
Clearly, HANNIBAL is many things to many people. But let's view it for what it is: a horrific thrill-ride through the consciousness of a demon. The only crime Thomas Harris commits is in delivering a product that people didn't expect.
HANNIBAL puts the infamous serial killer Hannibal 'The Cannibal' Lecter into the centre spotlight, after consigning him to a supporting role in the previous novels, RED DRAGON and LAMBS. Enjoying his new-found freedom, he is slowly but relentlessly being pursued by Mason Verger; a survivor of Lecter's assaults, and an individual even creepier and unforgivable than Lecter is. Verger uses Starling as his pawn, reeling her along with the hope that Lecter will be unable to resist the bait.
The true flaw in HANNIBAL is that Harris takes for granted that the reader will know and understand the unusual relationship Lecter and Starling share. It works as a sequel, but is unable to stand up as an achievement in its own right, unlike both DRAGON and LAMBS, pinacles of the serial killer genre. This lessens the impact somewhat, as does his subplot involving the Barney the orderly, and Verger's body-building sister. They are interesting characters, but aren't given enough character arc to fit in completely.
But Harris redeems himself with his presentation of Lecter's life outside the prison cell. Lecter functions in the world quite well, attaining wealth and prestige through his not-inconsiderable intellect. The web that Harris draws around Lecter, disparate elements slowly converging to encircle and capture Hannibal, is a rivetting display of skillful plotting.
Some have criticized the decision to reveal parts of Lecter's past, but these glimpses only heighten the mystique that surrounds him. Harris is far more generous in his background to Verger, a malevolent creature of such despicable proportions that he could star in a novel of his own. Harris follows his now-familiar technique of comparing monsters, displaying Verger in stark contrast to Lecter in the same manner as Francis Dollarhyde and Jame Gumb were presented in DRAGON and LAMBS, respectively.
Starling is also presented in a memorable light. Far from being the idealistic young trainee of LAMBS, Starling is now a disgraced agent who is haunted by her past actions, both on the job and with Lecter. She is completely at odds with her world, finding herself used and controlled both by Verger and Lecter, as well as certain elements of the FBI. Her downfall, and eventual conclusion, adds a heart-breaking note to the chase.
And the ending. Without spoiling the surprise, it is both unexpected, and fair to the characters, despite the uproar it caused. I believe it is Harris's attempt to wrest control of the characters back to his domain. Considering the immense pressures that were undoubtedly heaped upon Harris after the gigantic sucess of LAMBS (both as novel and film), a lesser artist would have merely given the public what they wanted. Harris does something more: he provides the audience with an ending that would silence those who make Lecter into a heroic figure. Never losing sight of the fact that Hannibal is a monster, Harris plays off of Lecter's legend, leaving the reader unnerved. It's the author's way of screaming, "He's my character, not yours! Now, back off!"
And perhaps it's a blessing that HANNIBAL ends the way it does. Harris is far too talented a writer to be constrained into writing sequels. By laying Lecter to rest (in a manner of speaking), Harris can dive into new territories, surprising us in the same way that he caught us off guard with RED DRAGON. Hannibal may be silent, but let's hope Harris refuses to remain so.
Show More
the book is true to what has happened previously, or whether it stains the memory of Lecter and his unusual relationship with FBI Agent Clarice Starling. Jodie Foster, Starling's physical manisfestation in the movie version of THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS, stated that she wouldn't reprise the role for HANNIBAL, seeing the novel as an insult to her perceptions of how Clarice would grow as a character.Clearly, HANNIBAL is many things to many people. But let's view it for what it is: a horrific thrill-ride through the consciousness of a demon. The only crime Thomas Harris commits is in delivering a product that people didn't expect.
HANNIBAL puts the infamous serial killer Hannibal 'The Cannibal' Lecter into the centre spotlight, after consigning him to a supporting role in the previous novels, RED DRAGON and LAMBS. Enjoying his new-found freedom, he is slowly but relentlessly being pursued by Mason Verger; a survivor of Lecter's assaults, and an individual even creepier and unforgivable than Lecter is. Verger uses Starling as his pawn, reeling her along with the hope that Lecter will be unable to resist the bait.
The true flaw in HANNIBAL is that Harris takes for granted that the reader will know and understand the unusual relationship Lecter and Starling share. It works as a sequel, but is unable to stand up as an achievement in its own right, unlike both DRAGON and LAMBS, pinacles of the serial killer genre. This lessens the impact somewhat, as does his subplot involving the Barney the orderly, and Verger's body-building sister. They are interesting characters, but aren't given enough character arc to fit in completely.
But Harris redeems himself with his presentation of Lecter's life outside the prison cell. Lecter functions in the world quite well, attaining wealth and prestige through his not-inconsiderable intellect. The web that Harris draws around Lecter, disparate elements slowly converging to encircle and capture Hannibal, is a rivetting display of skillful plotting.
Some have criticized the decision to reveal parts of Lecter's past, but these glimpses only heighten the mystique that surrounds him. Harris is far more generous in his background to Verger, a malevolent creature of such despicable proportions that he could star in a novel of his own. Harris follows his now-familiar technique of comparing monsters, displaying Verger in stark contrast to Lecter in the same manner as Francis Dollarhyde and Jame Gumb were presented in DRAGON and LAMBS, respectively.
Starling is also presented in a memorable light. Far from being the idealistic young trainee of LAMBS, Starling is now a disgraced agent who is haunted by her past actions, both on the job and with Lecter. She is completely at odds with her world, finding herself used and controlled both by Verger and Lecter, as well as certain elements of the FBI. Her downfall, and eventual conclusion, adds a heart-breaking note to the chase.
And the ending. Without spoiling the surprise, it is both unexpected, and fair to the characters, despite the uproar it caused. I believe it is Harris's attempt to wrest control of the characters back to his domain. Considering the immense pressures that were undoubtedly heaped upon Harris after the gigantic sucess of LAMBS (both as novel and film), a lesser artist would have merely given the public what they wanted. Harris does something more: he provides the audience with an ending that would silence those who make Lecter into a heroic figure. Never losing sight of the fact that Hannibal is a monster, Harris plays off of Lecter's legend, leaving the reader unnerved. It's the author's way of screaming, "He's my character, not yours! Now, back off!"
And perhaps it's a blessing that HANNIBAL ends the way it does. Harris is far too talented a writer to be constrained into writing sequels. By laying Lecter to rest (in a manner of speaking), Harris can dive into new territories, surprising us in the same way that he caught us off guard with RED DRAGON. Hannibal may be silent, but let's hope Harris refuses to remain so.
Show Less
LibraryThing member ponsonby
Better than the film because we see more clearly into Hannibal's mind and appreciate its scope. The ending seems unnecessarily sensational and the transformation of Clarice into Hannibal's very willing amour unlikely, although one can see them having some kind of more barbed relationship
LibraryThing member rsplenda477
A pretty good conclusion to the Hannibal Lecter series, but definitely lacks the energy and drive of Red Dragon and The Silence of the Lambs. Although some additional insight into Hannibal's background is much appreciated, I felt that it could have been explored a bit further and with more tension
Show More
(but I'm assuming that will be fully covered in Hannibal Rising). The most interesting characters were actually Mason and Margot Verger. Their dysfunctional family unit left the biggest impact. Show Less
LibraryThing member Michael.Rimmer
Disappointing after Red Dragon and Silence of the Lambs, which were good of their kind.
The opening scene in the fish market reeds like a film script, which is either good or bad depending on your view.
Lector is presented as a rather glamorous figure, aside from his homicidal tendencies. This could
The other serial killer, the one who drinks children's tears (really? Isn't that a bit heavy-handed?) is a two-dimensional very bad man.
And what was with Clarice Starling? I do not buy that ending at all! (Well, actually, I did buy it, the book that is, but I didn't keep it: no chance of me wanting to re-read.)
All of which is annoying, as Harris can clearly do better and this could have been an excellent novel if he hadn't fallen in love with Hannibal Lector and let himself get carried away,rather like Clarice .
The opening scene in the fish market reeds like a film script, which is either good or bad depending on your view.
Lector is presented as a rather glamorous figure, aside from his homicidal tendencies. This could
Show More
be seen as an extra layer of complexity to his character, or some misguided attempt to make him more sympathetic - a misunderstood anti-hero rather than the monstrous villain he is. It didn't ring true with me.The other serial killer, the one who drinks children's tears (really? Isn't that a bit heavy-handed?) is a two-dimensional very bad man.
And what was with Clarice Starling? I do not buy that ending at all! (Well, actually, I did buy it, the book that is, but I didn't keep it: no chance of me wanting to re-read.)
All of which is annoying, as Harris can clearly do better and this could have been an excellent novel if he hadn't fallen in love with Hannibal Lector and let himself get carried away,
Show Less
LibraryThing member dsoj84
It is a great look at Dr Lecter and the relationship with exists between himself and Clarice Starling. If you would like to read a book which will take you into the twisted mind of Hannibal Lecter, then you have the right book.
LibraryThing member NovelBookworm
I thought I had to add this book to my library and could only tag it as a notable book. It was most certainly a memorable book, if only because it is so awful.I felt like I needed to take a week long shower after finishing this book. I think that the author has been caught up in the
Show More
"Hollywood-ization" of his work, and so he simply cranked out the most violent and incomprehensible swill he could come up with to make into an also disgusting movie. Until this book, I've enjoyed all of Thomas Harris books. I almost wondered if this was a "[descriptive word] you" to all the greedy movie types. You know the old--"You want a movie, fine.. I'll give you a stinking movie...Why I actually read this whole book is beyond me, it was simply a terrible book.... Show Less
LibraryThing member Djupstrom
Thomas Harris is an excellent suspense writer. I love this series. I think Red Dragon was my favorite, but this is a clase second. I can't believe I was rooting for a cannibalistic serial killer, but GO HANNIBAL!!!
LibraryThing member Dissidence
I was obviously relishing my next installment in the world of Clarice Starling and Dr Hannibal Lecter. The book opens explosively with dramatic happenings, despite Starling's FBI career being a slight anti-climax due to influences from former enemies. Again, I'd seen the film before I read the book
Show More
and so most of the major plot occurences I was already aware of, but there are more differences between the two Hannibal medias than in the films of Harris' previous two novels. The film had the advantage of being able to show us Mason Verger's appearance in all his glory, and yet - possibly in the attempt to demonize Hannibal Lecter further - didn't reveal the information from the book which showed Mason was always ugly, faceless or not. The book offers more insight into Dr Lecter's psyche as well as Clarice's, and yet neither are open pages. The reason that I decided to read this series was because the film Hannibal was tragically haunting near the end, and so it would be my luck that the end is where the two medias differ extremely. Although, it was intriguing to see the extra interactions between such complex characters, it was almost as if I was enjoying the insight of where we were at, without really knowing how we got there. Nearer the end I almost felt as though Clarice was a completely different character than what I had originally thought. Rather ironic, that the sane character is the one who confused me, whilst I could count on Dr Lecter to be mysteriously predictable, but not by any normal standards. Thomas Harris writes directly to the reader, acknowledging we are not part of the happenings and invites us to tour silently the halls of his characters' minds and abodes, yet he also writes from within such characters as they endure terrifying and confusing events. We live through the most meaningful parts of their lives and yet by the end, neither of the main characters are open books to us. I think the revelations of Dr Lecter's past experiences almost made him seem weaker to me, and that's not what I wanted from a book of his namesake. I wasn't entirely pleased at Dr Lecter's thoughts following hypothesis made by Stephen Hawking, as I'd always held the thought that despite the murders and cannibalism he was actually sane, which would be most disturbing of all, and yet these thoughts seemed to hint otherwise. As always, I am a romantic and yet I feel the film's ending was how it should have ended - for two characters such as they, only a tragic parting seemed befitting. Fantastically written, Harris mixes the vulgar and the culturally fanciful at every turn. I read the book to try and understand the characters better, and instead I think I may have confused myself further. The only constant is the two main characters, Clarice Starling and Hannibal Lecter, and the feelings, thoughts and actions which occur when their paths collide. I doubt there is anyone who wouldn't be fascinated the crackling sexual and mental tension between Starling and Lecter, as they are inevitably consumed by thoughts of each other.I enjoyed this trilogy, through The Dragon and Buffalo Bill, through Will Graham's plight and from Clarice Starling's first encounter with Dr Hannibal Lecter through to the point of no return. Fascinating reading, and although I think Hannibal maybe wasn't the best climax to Silence of the Lambs (I agree with others about the changes in characters, and the difference in...quality, maybe?) I'm sure this will still play on my mind in years to come. Show Less
LibraryThing member hermit
I've never been one for mysteries, but I was sent this one, by the same person who sent me Silence of the Lambs. The characters were well developed. In this book we see the insight of the Doctor's mind. All I can say is Wow! Many will not want to read this...I wish I had not. Be that as it may,
Show More
this is a quick read, with scenes and action on every page. Despite the sometimes gruesome parts, it keeps the reader breathless throughout. And the ending was . . . well, I really don't want to say how it ended. It just wouldn't be fair to those who want to read a book that is not tasteful to say the least. Talk about the dark recesses of the human mind. This book is not for everyone. Some will call it gross....Even Jodi Foster had the good taste to refuse to play Clarice in the sequel .... The book is well written but I do not recommend reading this. Show Less
LibraryThing member AlexanderDS
I enjoyed its predecessor, Silence of the Lambs, more than this book, but it wasn't bad either. The descriptions are once again vivid and perfectly detailed (never going overboard), but the tension is sometimes held for too long. At times, I found myself losing interest. The characters were a tad
Show More
bit too shallow as well. I would have loved to learn more about Margot Verger, for example. Some other characters were also intriguing to me and it was a shame we didn't get to see more of them. I'd also have liked more insight in the change Jack Crawford went to, and what happened to him and Clarice Starling in the seven years that have passed since Buffalo Bill. Show Less
LibraryThing member .Monkey.
I'm realizing that I really dislike Harris the more I read him and read of him. This was most certainly the worst thing of his that I read. And, shockingly, I actually prefer a lot of the movie changes over the book.
Harris made a pretty big blunder fairly early on. The section chief of Behavioral
I found a lot of fault with him reading this one, which may be slightly colored by having read Monster of Florence and getting an idea of his personality (which was none too pleasing in the eyes of the Italians he offended), but it's more than that. There was a lot of things, such as his trying to use "fancy" words all the time, rather than how humans actually speak. And I don't mean Lecter, it was the narration doing it. For example Clarice (I believe) passed by a medicine cabinet and it was noted that there was lots of "unguents" instead of just saying salves, I mean come on, no one is impressed by having to find a dictionary for something that does not remotely need a special word! And then there's the fact that, while still ruthless, Lecter is completely not himself about Clarice. And the end, ack, the movie definitely had the right end; the end was so not remotely true to the characters and so frustrating.
I'd really only suggest the serious Lecter fan may want to read this, to finish the story line. But even then, you may just want to stick with the movie.
Harris made a pretty big blunder fairly early on. The section chief of Behavioral
Show More
Science asked Starling if Hannibal "liked her." Um, he's a sociopath, through & through. Sociopaths don't like people, sociopaths don't feel emotions the way the rest of us do. I sincerely hope that the chief of this department would be quite aware of this fact. Otherwise, wow, how did he ever get his job?? And then, this same issue recurs in the end, in another form. While I enjoy the series (it's rare for crime novels to focus so intently on a genius sociopath monster, and to even make him into a character you actually kind of like, and respect (albeit keeping a wary distance); it's different and intriguing), it just gets worse over time. I'm a little worried about reading Hannibal Rising, but since it's supposed to be a prequel, I guess I don't have to worry about Harris stretching trying to make the relationship between Clarice and Hannibal work somehow.I found a lot of fault with him reading this one, which may be slightly colored by having read Monster of Florence and getting an idea of his personality (which was none too pleasing in the eyes of the Italians he offended), but it's more than that. There was a lot of things, such as his trying to use "fancy" words all the time, rather than how humans actually speak. And I don't mean Lecter, it was the narration doing it. For example Clarice (I believe) passed by a medicine cabinet and it was noted that there was lots of "unguents" instead of just saying salves, I mean come on, no one is impressed by having to find a dictionary for something that does not remotely need a special word! And then there's the fact that, while still ruthless, Lecter is completely not himself about Clarice. And the end, ack, the movie definitely had the right end; the end was so not remotely true to the characters and so frustrating.
I'd really only suggest the serious Lecter fan may want to read this, to finish the story line. But even then, you may just want to stick with the movie.
Show Less
LibraryThing member es135
By the time this book was published, Hannibal Lecter had become a common piece of pop culture, largely due to the success of the film, The Silence of the Lambs. Despite the amount of anticipation for the followup to the novel Silence of the Lambs, on which the film was based, Thomas Harris managed
Show More
to present a thriller that is a worthy successor. The scares and thrills are bigger and better than any of the other two novels to feature the character, and I really enjoyed the ironically poetic ending. With this installment, Harris proves why his novels are some of the best psychological thrillers of a generation. Show Less
LibraryThing member fothpaul
Enjoyed reading the book and was quite often dragged along by the thrilling nature of the story. But at the end of the all I couldn't help but feel it wasn't as good as the other books. Hannibal as a character seems to have changed over the course of the books. He certainly lost a lot of his
Show More
frightening nature from when he was imprisoned. Whether affected by his freedom or by his admiration of Clarice it's hard to say, but if truth be told I preferred the creepy cannibal of the first two books. This being said I did enjoy the ending of the book and felt that it was a good conclusion to this particular story. Show Less
LibraryThing member MarkSouza
This entry into the Hannibal Lecter series didn't live up to the others. The issue isn't Hannibal, he's doing what he always does and is true to form. It's Clarice. Let's just say there is a shift in her behavior that doesn't ring true. Fiction is the creation of a new world with new and
Show More
interesting characters in it. When one of those characters becomes known to you, like a friend, then acts contrary to who they are, the spell is broken and the reader realizes the author's world is just ink on a page. That happened to me with this novel. Show Less
LibraryThing member kmoynihan
The Hannibal Lecter series is by far my favorite of any series, by any author to date. In Hannibal, I got the ending I had so been hoping for... however twisted that might sound!
LibraryThing member richard_hesketh
Chunks of the old style but, in the main, a disappointment. Most of the edgy moments are given to Mason Verger and the ending is sheer bloody, porcine nonsense.
LibraryThing member AlCracka
Man, this book was just terrible.
LibraryThing member shrubbery
Harris is so in love with his hero that he completely loses all perspective. How can one of the world's most wanted criminals just get a job in Italy? Nonsense. It's still quite readable, but markedly inferior to Red and Silence, and shows the unwise nature of ploughing the same furrow. The ending
Show More
remains very funny, a jaw-dropping clunker. Show Less
LibraryThing member dulcinea14
Putting aside the implausible ending, the book was decently written. However, I think Hannibal as a character works better as a twisted "side kick" (like he did in Red Dragon and The Silence of the Lambs) than the villian of focus. Also the Italian detective was not as fleshed out as much as Graham
Show More
and Starling, so I think Harris failed there as well. I missed the cat-and-mouse dialogue between Lecter and Graham/Starling. I preferred the presence of another serial killer in the story, making Lecter almost a "good guy" by helping the FBI. I love being tricked by a writer into sympathizing with an essentially evil person. It means they've done their job! Sadly, this book failed. Show Less
Pages
546