Rating: 
Summary: It was a waste of my time and my money!
Review: I was very dissapointed in this book. It seems to me that Thomas Harris only wrote this book so that there would be a sequel to "The Silence Of The Lambs." Now that was a book that I could not put down and this is one that I had trouble picking up. I only finished it so that I could fairly review it. If you have not bought it don't waste your time and your money. The author could of done much better. I was truly dissapointed.
Rating:
Summary: Hannibal must have eaten Harris' brain.
Review: This book was absolutely terrible. Harris wastes page after page droning on about how cultured, articulate and intelligent Lecter is. Rather than researching fine wines, Dante, china, opera and art (and then blathering for chapter upon chapter about Lecter's knowledge of each), Harris should have spent more time developing a coherent plot. I enjoyed the films Manhunter and Silence of the Lambs (and have been told that the books are even better). However, these characters would have been better served by another author. For whatever the reason, Harris seems to have decided on a parody for this third installment. Harris attempts to turn Lecter (an outstanding villain) into some sort of hero, whom Harris obviously yearns for us to admire. The "bad guys" are laughable: 1) a drooling pederast (whose face has been chewed off by dogs); 2) the pederast's bodybuilding sister; 3) a corrupt Italian cop (who serves no purpose whatsoever); 4) a misogynistic FBI agent who hates Starling; and, among others, 5) a former mental institution orderly who wants to see every Vermeer painting in the world. Starling's fate is pathetic at best (I'll spare those of you who have not yet read the book). Save yourself the money and wait for the movie. Hopefully, the producers will have the sense to base the film VERY loosely on the book. It would appear that Harris suffers from the same diminishing talent as the formerly great Stephen King.
Rating: 
Summary: A great story that fizzles at the end.
Review: This book clearly has several purposes, not the least of which is to generate a movie sequel to Silence of the Lambs, which will give us another chance to see Sir Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter. The author struggles to maintain Lecter's monstosity while making him sympathetic enough to almost be the hero of the book. The author implies that witnessing brutality as a child pushed sensitive and intelligent Hannibal over the edge into psychopath, and yet delights in describing the brutality of the sympathetic monster against those who draw his well deserved attention. Once we enter the mind of Lecter, the mask of invincibility crumbles, although he still performs superhuman feats when required. Ultimately, the conclusion does not ring true with the reduction of Starling from independent heroine to trophy. I enjoyed reading the book, completing it in four days, and the grisly descriptions will haunt my dreams, but I hope they change the end for the movie (as with The Firm by Grisham).
Rating: 
Summary: Haunting, arguably open-ended--Judge it for yourself
Review: Despite the panning here I decided to read it anyway, as I trusted Stephen King's review in the Times more. . . I was not disappointed. Yes, Hannibal is vivid and gross, but not as vile as I was expecting. After all, how gross can it be when there is but a brief description of a man's brain being removed and sliced, but then a much longer description of how said brain was drenched in brioche crumbs, sauteed, and dressed with a butter and truffle sauce, all to the amusing and often witty repartee of the parties eating the brain and the brain's owner himself? It seems like Harris is trying to take you to a very, very different perspective on such an act. The fact that we are all disturbed is expected. But, what does one think if such a passage makes you hungry?In addition, to me, the whole issue as to whether Clarice can take Mischa's place in the world, or vice versa, whether or not this is in fact a better place or worse one for Clarice, and the fact that such a delicate balance remains always in Lector's hands will haunt you long after the book is over. This and other more subtle psychological points is why this book represents a step forward from the "now he's caught and it's over" of other books of the genre. The only character that disappointed me was Mason Verger, who needed at least one redeeming feature (everyone has one) to make him more believable.
Rating: 
Summary: Stylish thriller marred by implausible ending
Review: I listened to the unabridged book-on-tape (Daniel Gerroll), and found it to be a nearly perfect narrative until the last couple of chapters. I could accept the surreal logic of Lecter and Starling's encounter following the action with Verger, and these were some of the most wickedly imaginative scenes. But I must agree with many other reviewers: the "epilogue" is an impossible proposition, and betrays the characters Harris created. Nonetheless, that was only 2 out of 100+ delicious chapters, and until then it was an exciting ride. Harris has a demented imagination and a gift for sensory and aesthetic detail. I enjoyed the descriptions of Lecter's exquisitely refined tastes, and also appreciated the free education in Renaissance culture during the Florence section. I didn't even mind the shifts from 3rd to 2nd person narrative, or past to present tense. These same devices bugged the hell out of me in Red Dragon, but somehow seemed more artful when delivered by a skilled actor. I'll anticipate the movie, but hope they can negotiate a better ending.
Rating:
Summary: Mr. Harris, Dr. Lecter & Clarice live happily ever after.
Review: This one certainly has some improbable plot details. But it appears to me that Mr. Harris wants Hannibal and Clarice to live the good life after all is said and done. He also obligingly wound up the lives of some of the other fine characters he created. The good life is difficult for a serial killer even one as smart as Dr. Lecter. We recall that at first he was detained in "Silence". As for Clarice, what's an excellent law officer to do about politics? Since Mr. Harris started out with some improbable dispositions of characters, the ending wasn't so impossible. I read it twice because he is so engaging. Maybe Mr. Harris has had enough of Dr. Lecter and Clarice like Sir Arthur Conan Doyle had enough of Sherlock Holmes. I say it was engaging, some times improbable, liked some of it, didn't like other parts. But as always, I was entertained (enchanted by the Italian descriptions) and shuddering as I read the gory stuff. What's new for us, Mr. Harris? Will our author move on to another subject? Ardelia's life and struggles? Will we have to write our own sequels? Whatever happened to Will Graham? Did/Will his wife change her mind? I hope so. Nothing to do but wait.
Rating: 
Summary: Condescending garbage
Review: Thomas Harris is laughing all the way to the bank. It seems to me that the whole point of this book was to systematically destroy every preconceived notion we might have had after reading the 2 previous Lecter outings, Red Dragon and SotL. Not a bad thing; I like surprises. But this book was inexcusable. By means of this over-long piece of drivel, he has expressed his contempt for us, the reading public. Here we were hoping for another thrill ride of extreme psychological terror, and here we received a story that was, frankly, boring, condescending, inconsistent, and filled with lifeless characters. Yes, the ending was quite stupid. But I guess this is what happens when an author suddenly becomes so famous that one of the provisions in his contract states that there will be no outside editing of the story at all (as is the case here). The author gets a little too full of himself and thinks he can churn out any old garbage and the faithful readers will suck it up. Well, I for one will never again purchase another book with the byline "Thomas Harris".
Rating:
Summary: Incomprehensible, choppy, terrible
Review: I was shocked to find a really horrible book by Thomas Harris. I was a big fan of all of his other books. This one, however, was BAD, BAD, BAD. The plot was not interesting, the characters wholly unlikeable, and the ending ridiculous. I can't believe that I wasted my time! Don't waste yours.
Rating:
Summary: Overtism in all Sences
Review: To say that this book is the most captivating of all books I have ever read is just a slight understatement in all aspects of the word. With every ploy created by the emotionally closed and almost totally unmoved mind of Dr Hannibal Lector, gave my mind a week of utter intensivness which a novel has not sparked in a long while. The uraveling and insight into Lector's tumultuous childhood revealed not only motive behind his being but also enabled us to empathise and accept his horrific mutilations, Hannibal seemed this time not to mutilate the good and the innocent but only those who possesed an air of self absorbism, and evil intentions. Out to help see the demise of Dr Lector, the victims chose to do so not on grounds of human protection or the welfare of others but for thier own interest to see the fattening of thier own bank accounts. accounts. Poor Mason, being disfigured like he was, could not be described less than horrific, but the torture he made children endure was by far a worser crime! Good on you Dr Lector! All the same I am thanlkful that the character of Hannibal Lector is not living down at the end of my street! Thankyou Thomas Harris for yet another suberb, account of a criminal mind at its greatest.
Rating:
Summary: Pas gourmet, mais gourmand...
Review: With ample anticipation, I purchased Thomas Harris' novel with the impression that my grasp of Hannibal Lecter and other characters would become more lucid through the author's usual penetrating eye and style. However, as I turned from page to page, it became evident that something was awry. The clever repartee that I awaited was not extant. The characters, although fully fleshed, remain feeble and superficial. Mason Verger, the novel's antagonist (and I use this term loosely) is more annoying than sinister, and his henchmen loiter around the perimeter of the work, never seeming to join in (which is perhaps wise on their part). Both Mason and his sister Margot are not much more than "Jerry Springer"-esque individuals who canker the types of characterizations that Jame Gumb and Francis Dolorhyde made sacrosanct in the previous works. Verger's grand scheme to take vengeance on Lecter is nothing more than the puerile devises of an imbecile plotting against a genius. I found myself guffawing at his ideas. I pray that Harris intended Verger to be the fool that he is. Clarice Starling endures as a strong-willed FBI agent; however, she seems to flounder as second banana. Finally, there is Dr. Hannibal Lecter: psychiatrist, connoisseur, and cannibal. When I undertook the challenge of reading the novel, it was the insights into Lecter's personality and peculiar history that I eagerly awaited. What I discovered was a frightened little boy grown up, exercising frightening abilities all for the sake of finding his lost little sister. Pardon me, but big woo! As far as plot, it falls back on itself, unable to stand confidently in the face of extreme absurdities such as Verger's breeding of vicious man-eating swine and Paul Krendler's gourmet lobotomy, not to mention the "possession" of Clarice Starling at the end of the work. To put it simply, it became increasingly difficult to suspend willingly my disbelief as I progressed through the murky echoes of flashbacks and inane disclosures. Winding around the corners, it became apparent that I was lost within a labyrinth of my own creation. That is to say, I was bound to Harris' previous novels by invisible and velvet chains, while this essay seemed to imprison me within the confines of some medieval torture device. Although I could not put the novel down-mainly in hopes that it would improve and come to its senses-something about the rhythm of the text seduces the reader, hypnotizes him, deludes him into believing that arcane mysteries will be unveiled. I for one found myself muttering and grumbling at the fact that something was simply not right and that it never was going to be. In any event, I must commend Harris on his detailed research. Every particular is polished-each fragment brilliant. His work is reminiscent of Eco or Borges in its permeating gaze and de Sade in its brutality. However, even these perquisites are not enough to liberate Hannibal from the ominous death knell that critics will ring. Hannibal will be remembered (and most likely forgotten) as the novel whose reach extended beyond its grasp. Nonetheless, Hannibal, taken on its own is a striking, if often graphic exposé of the deviant and preternatural. It is the answer to the rhetorical question that readers often ask at the end of a novel: what happens next? Unfortunately, this question is one that no one really wants answered; it ultimately dispels the illusion the reader has carefully crafted in his mind. The novel is a good example of when too much is not a good thing. Hannibal is an inferior addition to an otherwise sterling set.
|
