Rating: 
Summary: Great novel
Review: The most important part of this novel is the introduction so before it came out I knew if it had a weak intro it would be that good. The reason for that is that there is a big span of time between silence of the lambs and hannibal so he had to catch you up on what has happened. and I found out he did it well. The introduction ws complete and detailed. And he did it so well. He found a way to explain the past events by not using to many flashbacks in the first act of the novel. That is something only few people can do. There were no flaws in the introduction.Also in the novel the way he wrote it caused that he had to also have the second act where you meet dr. lector just as strong as the first because it served as an intro too. Its where you catch up with Dr. Lector and what has he been doing since the silence of the lambs. I loved the second act it was very detailed in history you can tell he did a lot of research for the novel. It is also very graphic because it shows you what put him in the cell in the first place. The second act was my favrite because of the high amounts of details he put in it. There were no flaws. The third and fourth acts are also great with the depiction of its characters I believe that they are also strong and achieved what it needed to achieve. But the only flaw was that it was coming to an end to quickly. It does not end with the fourth act but you could tell it was trying come to a conclusion. I beleive that is the only flaw that it did not need to rush but it did. The last act which is the fifth act was not the most important but it was the weakest in the novel. A little to weak. I did not mind the ending to much. You could kind of tell that it was going to happen because that seemed to be what the book was stressing on the connection between claurice starling and Hannibal Lecter. But It seemed to me that the author does not plan to write another book on the subject I hope he does because Hannibal did not close the story. I was dissapointed on the weakness of the ending because it left way too many questions. There needs to be another one. Overall it is a good novel not as good as the book silence of the lambs but it got close. It needed more of an explaination of Hannibal lector to be complete. But it diserves four stars.
Rating: 
Summary: Gripping and disgusting in equal measures
Review: I found this book extremely gripping, but ultimately not satisfying. Certainly not as good as the author's Red Dragon or Silence of the Lambs. My major gripes are that Lecter becomes a virtual superman in this book, capable of almost any feat, and the ending, of course. At least it was unexpected, if disgustingly absurd.
Rating: 
Summary: far too explicit
Review: "The Silence of the Lambs" is one of the most thrilling thrillers I have ever read. So naturally this made me look forward to the sequel Hannibal. Even though the style of writing is still slick, I found the descriptions of what one can do with human beings (dead or alive) way too explicit. Sometimes it is better to leave a little bit to the imagination of the reader.
Rating: 
Summary: I'm not sure this book is at all what it professes to be
Review: The first time I read Hannibal, I remember feeling a nebulous sense of shame (not to mention nausea). I just finished reading it again and am left with the sense that Harris is saying something about all of us who turned a monster into a cult figure/antihero and demanded more. In my least generous mood, I would venture to say he was either laughing at or furious with his readers: the whole book feels like a slap in the face. There are some interesting ideas, and some memorable moments, but there is a burlesque quality to so much of the book that doesn't ring true to the understated creepiness of Harris' earlier work. I am haunted in particular by the description of the crowds that go to see the exhibit of torture devices. Read Chapter 20 and ask yourself honestly: how bitter is the ring of the opening paragraph, and can you really believe that Harris is doing anything other than "slapping the clammy flab of our submissive conciousness"? I won't venture to guess whether Harris' intent was to amuse himself by creating a nasty parody, to shock us into seeing how decadent we've become, or none of the above (which would mean my reaction was solely due to a guilt complex). All I know is that the "Atrocious Torture Devices" epsiode has a startling weight to it - especially given the its relative unimportance to the plot - and its tone is bitter and acidic, yet with a ring of authenticity that much of the rest of the book lacks.
Rating:
Summary: Hannibal--Much Better Than the Movie!!!
Review: The book is much better than the movie. (but then books always are!!!)Be ready to hate Mason Verger! He is a truly despicable character! You will be touched by the way Dr.Lecter interacts with Starling. You also gain insight into Lecter's traumatic childhood, and begin to understand him. (something I wish the movie had included)It is a long book, but a page-turner. Don't plan on getting anything else done until you finish reading this one, as it's a hard book to put down. I also enjoyed Red Dragon, also by Thomas Harris
Rating: 
Summary: Finding the Greater Good and the Greater Evil
Review: I suspect that many of us who so enjoyed The Silence of the Lambs on the big screen chose not to go to the movie sequel because of its 1) negative reviews, 2) emphasis on cannibalism, and 3) loss of Jodie Foster as the lead actress. Buying and reading the book was my alternative, and I recommend it very highly. I read this book at the same time that I was reading Nigel Nicholson's Executive Instinct, Managing the Human Animal in the Information Age; Kurt Eichenwald's The Informant (about routine corruption in the highest levels of corporate America) and several other books which I am reviewing. I mention this because in that context I do not find Hannibal to be about cannibalism, or find Starling to have converted to evil--instead what I see is one rennaissance man, so conflicted with the corruption in society at large that he chooses a very unconventional means of "biting back". I see Starling as his soul mate, someone who was bullied and terribly abused by the government system she swore to serve loyally, who in the end chooses to join Hannibal in exile, having upheld the law (protected Hannibal from torture and murder) and taken physical and psychological revenge against the book's true antagonist, slime-ball opportunist Krendler. I found this book so compelling that I bought a second copy when my first was left behind on an airplane, and in the second reading I found even more detail supportive of the above perspective. Most of us will never be as talented as Hannibal, and most of us will never, thankfully, feel that our society is failing us so terribly that we must cast off the bounds of convention that maintain our stability and relative prosperity. Most of us would--in extremis--kill but not eat another human--and I hope that this leaves us with the question the author intended: which is the greater evil: murder for the sake of revenge, or calculated selective dining on targets that are--even by the standards of the conventional critics--among the lower beings that society has to offer up--Donnie Barber, for example, the butcher of deer, or the final course, Paul Krendler, who violated every oath he ever took? I hope the author pursues this theme, for mankind is confronting itself these days with terrible misbehavior, from trade in women and children to toxic dumping to the legal poisoning of our domestic water and food supplies. I would be most fascinated by how Hannibal might play if cast on a world stage, in the midst, say, of a G-8 or World Trade Organization Meeting. This is a seriously addictive story line by a very talented author, and it is very highly recommended for reading as a gentle means of provoking some of our deeper darker thoughts. This book does not condone nor encourage cannibalism--that is but a vehicle for helping us think outside the box. Superb!
Rating:
Summary: Give very serious thought to reading this book...
Review: Many readers hated this book, Stephen King felt it was the best of the series, my opinion comes closer to King's. This story is less sensational than Red Dragon or Silence of the Lambs. Those are great books each but they essentially tell the same story--unique FBI agent needs Hannibal Lecter's iside info to catch a serial killer on the loose before he kills again. The purpose of this story is to let us into Hannibal's mind--literally. Harris is able to make Lecter's flawless memory, super-developed sense of smell, and his love of cooking both fascinating and chilling. The ending (changed for the movie) is much better in the book. It offends many people but, after Lecter's escape at the end of Silence, this ending takes his success to the ultimate degree.
Rating:
Summary: Why is this book (and movie) so popular?
Review:
I've been trying to figure out what made Hannibal the book and the movie box-office hit that it is... and why I liked it as much as I did. While reading the book My Ishmael, by author Daniel Quinn, I finally figured it out. It's not the horror of cannibalism that's made it such a hit, it's Hannibal Lector's stepping outside the "keeping of food under lock and key,"* and dining on "free-ranging" human flesh, that fascinates people so much; the violation of a taboo that is absolutely essential to our culture (*See My Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn). If you want another take on this taboo in a tribal setting, see the book Alive, which was also made into a movie. In Alive, a high school ball team, stranded by an airplane crash high in the Andes mountains, agonizes over staying alive by eating the flesh of their dead companions on the plane. The point is only heightened by Hannibal's highly intelligent, charismatic, and cultured demeanor in both the book and as portrayed in the movie by Anthony Hopkins (one of the finest actors I've ever watched). Try to imagine either the book or the movie even being published in the 1950s, say? Let alone being a major hit? I give it 5 stars and hope for the future!
Rating:
Summary: Horrifying yet captivating...
Review: The first time I read the book I put it away with other books that I plan to never read again. I was thoroughly put out with the ending - and couldn't conceive of Clarice's change of behavior. About six months later I took it out and read it again, more slowly this time. This time I was able to feel, from Clarice's POV how utterly wretched Krendler and the FBI had treated her and could understand why she would end up taking off with the delectable Dr. Lecter. I should admit that Dr. Lecter attracts me in a variety of ways, but I think mostly because I enjoy his wicked sense of humor. He may be partly a monster, but a monster with his own moral code. He stays true to himself. Loved the scenes where Pazzi was bungling through trying to capture Dr. Lecter and get the reward money for himself. You knew that he just was not as mentally agile as Lecter and would end up dead, one way or another. I liked the film version of Pazzi's death better than the book while I MUCH preferred the book's ending to the movie's. After the second reading, I wanted Lecter and Clarice together. While I'm not sure he is able to truly love, he comes as close as it gets with Clarice - he admires her truth, her morality (while ragging on her about it), her mind (and her feet). I think she does come to love Lecter, faults and all. His wit, his elegance, his intensity all attract her. Of course, being able to visualize Anthony Hopkins in the role of Lecter helps a lot towards me accepting Lecter. The man has charisma to spare. (A note: DON'T try and cast someone else as Lecter in "Red Dragon," it just won't work.) Bravo! Now, how about a book set about 5 years after the ending of this one and letting us see where they are at and what they are up to? One note, I liked the little bon mots that AH added during the movie. The "goody-goody" and "okey-dokey" during tense scenes was just enough to keep you from jumping out of your seat. Would like to see them made part of any future book(s).
Rating:
Summary: Terrible
Review: Harris should have just written a screeplay, rather than try to make the story into a Novel. It's very poorly written. He put all his ideas down without any sense of grammar--makes for a very difficult read. Go see the movie--forget the book!
| 
