--- title: "Hannibal" year: 2001 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/hannibal" fi1m_id: "hannibal" imdb_id: "tt0212985" tmdb_id: 9740 wikidata_id: "Q722682" fi1m_score: 54 critics_score: 52 critics_reviews: 11 published: "2026-10-05T02:20:43.618810+00:00" updated: "2026-10-05T02:20:44.115283+00:00" region: "SI" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Hannibal (2001) Directed by Ridley Scott · 2h 11m · Crime, Drama, Thriller ## Identity Hannibal - **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/hannibal - **Type:** Film - **Fi1m ID:** hannibal - **IMDb ID:** tt0212985 - **TMDB ID:** 9740 - **Wikidata ID:** Q722682 - **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0212985/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/9740, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q722682 **Fi1m score: 54** · Critics 52 from 11 reviews *In a sentence:* Anthony Hopkins has a lovely time being appalling; everyone else has to wait their turn > Ridley Scott gives *Hannibal* considerable polish, and Anthony Hopkins supplies some malicious fun. But slack suspense and the thin use of Julianne Moore leave too much resting on our appetite for grotesquerie. ## Synopsis Dr. Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins), a cannibalistic serial killer with cultivated tastes, is the focus of a story that takes in Florence. Clarice M. Starling (Julianne Moore) returns to his story, alongside Insp. Renaldo Pazzi (Giancarlo Giannini), Mason Verger (Gary Oldman) and Paul Krendler (Ray Liotta). Adapted from the novel by Thomas Harris, this continuation of *The Silence of the Lambs* shifts its attention towards Lecter himself. The people around him have to contend with a man whose sophistication coexists with his capacity for violence. ## Review Ridley Scott’s [*Hannibal*](https://film.one/tv/hannibal-2013) is a polished, sporadically entertaining thriller with too little suspense to justify its 131 minutes. It invites us to enjoy the company of Dr. Hannibal Lecter, then leans heavily on that enjoyment when the story needs to move. The taste for grotesque spectacle is understandable; the lack of urgency is harder to excuse. We can enjoy an extravagantly unpleasant film, but this one spends too long assuring us how much trouble it has taken over the unpleasantness. Anthony Hopkins supplies most of the amusement. We laughed at the pleasure he takes in Lecter’s superiority, particularly the playful manner that makes other people seem like interruptions to his day. There is precision in the performance, and enough mischief to keep the character watchable. The problem comes when that pleasure becomes the point of a scene: we begin waiting for another display of cleverness instead of worrying about what he might do. John Mathieson’s cinematography keeps the grotesque material insistently handsome, a choice that makes revulsion oddly comfortable. Norris Spencer’s production design contributes to that well-appointed atmosphere; Florence is the stretch where looking at the surroundings is a pleasure in itself. Hans Zimmer’s music lends the material a seriousness that the plotting seldom earns. The care is evident, but the film gives us too much time to notice it when we ought to be concerned about the characters. Julianne Moore offers the steadiness the film badly needs as Clarice M. Starling. Her seriousness gives us someone to care about without asking us to share the film’s fascination with Lecter. Yet the screenplay by David Mamet and Steven Zaillian leaves her too little scope, and we keep waiting for her to be given something substantial to do. Gary Oldman as Mason Verger and Ray Liotta as Paul Krendler have more opportunity to enjoy the excess, but their energy cannot compensate for her underuse. Pietro Scalia’s editing has the thankless job of giving this story momentum. Individual performances hold our attention, but the stretches between them do not accumulate enough pressure, and the increasingly mechanical plotting makes the lack of suspense harder to overlook. At 131 minutes, it is not length alone that causes the trouble. It is the repeated feeling that another grotesque flourish will be offered before the film has made us care sufficiently about anyone involved. Within the serial-killer thriller, there is nothing wrong with giving the killer charm or letting horror become funny. The risk is that everyone else begins to look like supporting entertainment for him, and *Hannibal* too often accepts that arrangement. Its cruelties should trouble us more than they do. The relish for Lecter keeps making him comfortable company, which is a peculiar difficulty for a film that also wants us to be frightened of him. There is an audience for horror this pleased with its own bad taste, and parts of *Hannibal* reward that appetite. We would still hesitate to recommend a whole evening of it. Choose it for Anthony Hopkins enjoying himself, provided suspense is not the main requirement. *Fi1m score 54, published 5 October 2026.* ## What the critics say The reviews lean towards a mixed response to Hannibal, with praise clustering around its visual polish and performances rather than its storytelling. Anthony Hopkins’s Lecter remains a source of pleasure for several critics, who find his performance compelling or enjoy its playfulness; Julianne Moore also receives credit as Clarice Starling. The more favourable accounts find an engaging, stylish entertainment, even when the grotesque material threatens to become excessive. Reservations centre on weak suspense, sluggish pacing and plotting that fails to sustain interest. The spread is wide: RogerEbert.com finds style and strong performances enough to keep the film engaging, while The Guardian sees a tensionless sequel whose gore and camp overwhelm the drama. Hopkins himself divides opinion, with his playfulness reading as parody to some. Even among the more receptive reviews, enjoyment often comes with the caveat that this is a less compelling sequel to The Silence of the Lambs. ## Straight answers **Is Hannibal worth watching?** *Hannibal* offers malicious fun from Anthony Hopkins, but we score it 54 out of 100 and hesitate to recommend it beyond those with an appetite for grotesque horror. Ridley Scott gives it considerable polish, yet slack suspense and too little for Julianne Moore to do make its 131 minutes feel unnecessarily drawn out. **How long is Hannibal, and what is it rated?** *Hannibal* runs 2h 11m. It is a crime and drama film. **Where can I watch Hannibal in Slovenia?** *Hannibal* is streaming on SkyShowtime in Slovenia. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service. **How violent or frightening is Hannibal, and is it suitable for children?** *Hannibal* carries a UK 18 certificate and is unsuitable for children, with cannibalism, violence and grotesque spectacle making it a poor choice for squeamish viewers. We find its indulgence in cruelty more prominent than sustained fear: Hopkins’s playful performance and the handsome surroundings make the horror oddly comfortable, but that does not make it family viewing. **How does Hannibal compare to Manhunter?** *Hannibal* is the more indulgent, grotesquely comic film; we recommend [*Manhunter*](https://film.one/film/manhunter) as the stronger choice for suspense, with a more disciplined pursuit of a killer and colour that creates unease. Hopkins makes Lecter entertaining company in *Hannibal*, while Brian Cox’s restraint in *Manhunter* is frightening, and the earlier film’s controlled investigation holds our attention more firmly. **Is Hannibal based on a true story or a book?** *Hannibal* is adapted from a novel by Thomas Harris, rather than presented as a true story, and continues the story of *The Silence of the Lambs*. The film shifts attention towards Lecter himself; our reservations concern its slack suspense and underuse of Clarice, rather than any knowledge of the novel it asks viewers to bring. **What should I watch after Hannibal?** After *Hannibal*, try [*Manhunter*](https://film.one/film/manhunter) (1986, Fi1m 84): A more disciplined pursuit of a killer, with colour doing unsettling work. Then [*Eyes Without a Face*](https://film.one/film/eyes-without-a-face) (1960, Fi1m 86): Surgical horror whose restraint makes its cruelty harder to shrug off; and [*Cure*](https://film.one/film/cure) (1997, Fi1m 85): Patient police work and quiet encounters that make ordinary rooms feel unsafe. ### Reviews we read (11) - **RogerEbert.com**, Roger Ebert (3/4): Ebert finds the film stylish and engaging, though its grotesque material can be excessive. He singles out the performances as a strength. [Read](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/hannibal-2001) - **Variety**, Todd McCarthy (70/100, inferred): McCarthy finds the film engrossing and tantalizing, though less powerful and less consistently compelling than The Silence of the Lambs. He praises Anthony Hopkins’s riveting portrayal of Lecter, while faulting the more mechanical plotting after the story leaves Florence. [Read](https://variety.com/2001/film/reviews/hannibal-2-1200466959/) - **Screen Daily**, Emanuel Levy (64/100, inferred): The visible page does not reveal the critic’s verdict. It provides no praise or complaint because the review text is behind a paywall. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/hannibal/404983.article) - **The New York Times**, A.O. Scott (64/100, inferred): The page is identifiable as a review of the film, but its text is inaccessible. The critic’s verdict and specific praise or complaint cannot be verified. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/09/movies/film-review-whetting-that-large-appetite-for-second-helpings.html) - **Time Out**, GA (64/100, inferred): The available page identifies this as a review, but provides no accessible critical verdict. Its standfirst introduces Lecter as a sophisticated cannibalistic serial killer, without revealing what the critic praises or faults. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/hannibal) - **Radio Times**, Jeremy Aspinall (3/5): The review presents the sequel as a tongue-in-cheek continuation, with Julianne Moore giving a creditable performance as Clarice Starling. It notes the production’s troubled path to the screen and Anthony Hopkins’s playful return as Lecter. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-eumqsr/hannibal/) - **Total Film**, Total Film (3/5): The review finds Hannibal disappointing as a sequel but entertaining as an adaptation of the novel. It praises Anthony Hopkins’s performance while faulting the film for lacking suspense and a strong narrative thrust. [Read](https://www.gamesradar.com/hannibal-review/) - **The Guardian**, Xan Brooks (15/100, inferred): Brooks finds the film a bloated, tensionless disappointment that turns Lecter into a parody of his former self. He briefly praises the Florence scenes for sparking to life, but says Moore is underused and the film’s gore and camp overwhelm its drama. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/News_Story/Critic_Review/Guardian_review/0,,438460,00) - **Empire**, Ian Nathan (10/100, inferred): Nathan finds the sequel inert, dull and a disappointing use of its central character. He faults its lack of atmosphere and thrills, while noting that Liotta and Oldman have fun in their roles. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/hannibal-review/) - **Den of Geek**, Dave Adamson (3/5): The critic finds Hannibal interesting but overly self-indulgent, and weaker than Silence or Red Dragon. They praise its attractive visuals and Hopkins’s performance, while faulting the mediocre script and slow pacing. [Read](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/hannibal-blu-ray-review/) - **Eye for Film**, Angus Wolfe Murray (30/100, inferred): The critic sees the sequel as a failure, with implausible story details undermining it despite Ridley Scott’s polished style. Julianne Moore’s performance is singled out for praise, while Anthony Hopkins’s Lecter is described as oddly comic. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/hannibal-film-review-by-angus-wolfe-murray) ## Details - **Director:** Ridley Scott - **Director:** Ridley Scott - **Screenplay:** David Mamet, Steven Zaillian - **Novel:** Thomas Harris - **Cinematography:** John Mathieson - **Editor:** Pietro Scalia - **Music:** Hans Zimmer - **Production design:** Norris Spencer - **Costume design:** Janty Yates - **Producer:** Dino De Laurentiis, Ridley Scott, Martha De Laurentiis - **Cast:** Anthony Hopkins as Dr. Hannibal Lecter; Julianne Moore as Clarice M. Starling; Gary Oldman as Mason Verger; Ray Liotta as Paul Krendler; Giancarlo Giannini as Insp. Renaldo Pazzi; Željko Ivanek as Dr. Cordell Doemling; Frankie Faison as Barney Matthews; Francesca Neri as Allegra Pazzi - **Runtime:** 2h 11m - **Release (Slovenia):** 27 September 2001 - **Genres:** Crime, Drama, Thriller - **Budget:** $87 million - **Box office:** $352 million - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20rd9VQ1Wx0 ## Where to watch in Slovenia - SkyShowtime: streaming, hd *Checked 2026-10-05.* Also available in: AR, AT, AU, BE, BG, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, CZ, DE, DK, EC, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HR, HU, IE, IL, IN, IT, JP, KR, LT, MX, NL, NO, NZ, PA, PE, PH, PL, PT, RO, RS, SE, SG, SI, SK, TH, TR, UA, US, VN, ZA. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## Awards - European Film Award - People's Choice Award for Best Director 2001: European Film Award - People's Choice Award for Best Director (nominated) ## If you liked this - *Manhunter* (1986), Fi1m 84: A more disciplined pursuit of a killer, with colour doing unsettling work. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/manhunter.md) - *Eyes Without a Face* (1960), Fi1m 86: Surgical horror whose restraint makes its cruelty harder to shrug off. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/eyes-without-a-face.md) - *Cure* (1997), Fi1m 85: Patient police work and quiet encounters that make ordinary rooms feel unsafe. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/cure.md) - *The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover* (1989), Fi1m 78: For cultivated cruelty and grotesque appetites, with a stronger sense of purpose. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-cook-the-thief-his-wife-and-her-lover.md) - *Stoker* (2013): Precise compositions and poisonous family manners, for those drawn to elegant nastiness. --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/hannibal