[ SECRET POST #2358 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2358 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________



19.


__________________________________________________



20.


__________________________________________________



21.


__________________________________________________



22.


__________________________________________________















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #336.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

13. http://i.imgur.com/nrRYW4r.jpg

This is me, looking sarcastic.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, because all cannibals look like cannibals. Also, all rapists looks like rapists, and kidnappers look like kidnappers. Everyone evil always looks evil. And evil people are always serious. Always.

Re: This is me, looking sarcastic.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't get this comment. The secret isn't complaining about Hopkins' performance being untrue to reality.

[arianne]

I haven't seen the show so I won't comment, but I think it's brilliant how they did the lighting in the bottom picture to look exactly like the skull on the moth on the Silence of the Lambs poster.

[kallanda_lee]

I think they both make an interesting, albeit very different Hannibal. Shrug.

[(Anonymous)]

Lets see if people will still be talking about Mads' performance as much as they still talk about Hopkins' two decades from now.

[(Anonymous)]

What would that prove? People talk about poor acting just as much as they talk about excellent acting.

[(Anonymous)]

that's how we know for sure that george lanzerby was the best bond, after all

Gratuitous use of exclamation points ahoy!

[elephantinegrace]

Hopkins!Hannibal was more like BBC!Moriarty. The creepiness came from seeing a playful character with a thin veneer of sanity that blinks in and out, and knowing that he could easily kill you painfully if he suddenly decided to (and that nothing would stop him if he did). Mikkelsen!Hannibal is more like book!Hannibal; the mask of sanity (that the audience only is aware he wears) doesn't look like it'll slip at any moment, so viewers relax a bit more and deem him not scary (which I guess is why so many people woobify Mikkelsen!Hannibal).

Re: Gratuitous use of exclamation points ahoy!

[deadtree]

so viewers relax a bit more and deem him not scary

which is why it's so amazing when he does something absolutely off-the-rails insane.. he's lulled you into thinking he's not really all that bad, despite all the people-eating ;)

Re: Gratuitous use of exclamation points ahoy!

[(Anonymous)]

This is a weak comparison. BBC!Moriarty is hammy, cheesy acting at its very worst/best.

Re: Gratuitous use of exclamation points ahoy!

[(Anonymous)]

... yeah. I know that's the BBC Sherlock fandom explanation for why Moriarty isn't an embarrassingly hammy doofus. I'm willing to concede that's what they might've been aiming for, but I'm not convinced they succeeded.

[helenadax]

I like Hopkins' Lecter. The first time I watched The Silence of the Lambs he scared the shit out of me. His Lecter was different from Mad's Lecter ; older and with no reason to pretend he was any other thing but a monster. And at the same time, he looked so harmless that his moments of violence were shocking. I'd never have suspected of him.

[(Anonymous)]

Hopkins is so ugly, there is no charm or allure about him, which someone like Hannibal obviously should have. Yeah I'm shallow, who cares. He's seriously fug.

[(Anonymous)]

He used to be hot.

[(Anonymous)]

I like your secret's Freudian slip.

[brandiweed.livejournal.com]

Aw, I liked Hopkins' Lecter precisely BECAUSE he was so hammy! Then again, I'm a Vincent Price fan so I obviously enjoy a good slab of ham now and again.

[(Anonymous)]

Other British hams in entertainment history:

!Benedict Cumberbatch!

[transcriptanon]

[Picture is a close-up of the face of Anthony Hopkins playing Hannibal Lecter from the movie "Red Dragon". Beneath that, there is a close-up of the face of Mads Mikkelsen playing Hannibal Lecter from the TV series "Hannibal".]

Text for the picture with Anthony Hopkins:

I thought he made a terrible Hannibal Lecter. He turned a frightening figure into a goofy caricature

FFS, Lecter wouldn't say things like "Okey-dokey" and "Goody goody!" That's just Anthony Hopkins' crap overacting and no one had the guts to tell me to knock that shit off

Text for the picture with Mads Mikkelsen:

I'm not a fan of this guy, either

But at least he looks the part and doesn't blurt out ridiculous catchphrases for the hell of it

[Transcription notes:

FFS: For Fuck's Sake]

[(Anonymous)]

You better knock that shit off, OP.

[otakugal15]

Says you. I prefer Hopkins. Besides, most of his "catch phrases" were in Hannibal, which many people don't like, movie wise.

[(Anonymous)]

I think Hopkins's Lecter became a lot less terrifying because it got parodied so much. He was incredibly frightening the first time I saw it way WAY back in the day when it first came out and before it became a cultural phenomenon. People actually RAN out of the theater and screamed during several parts of it.

[tabaqui]

In the book, when he stabbed someone, he said something along the lines of 'that looks just like a doodlebug going down a hole' (can't quite remember).

Not exactly urbane and witty, so...grain of salt.

[(Anonymous)]

"and no one had the guts to tell [him?] to knock that shit off"

Is there any evidence for this being the case? Because I fucking hate when people imagine up their own narrative for what went on behind the scenes (with no knowledge whatsoever of what actually happened) and then use said fiction to reinforce their dislike.

[(Anonymous)]

Forgive me if I'm wrong since I don't know that much about the source material(s), but aren't these two set in completely different time frames? I mean, isn't the show more like "the early Hannibal years", whereas the Hopkins movie is set later, after he's "caught". So of course there will be differences in the characterization...

I can't say I've read the books, but honestly, I've stopped expecting any alternative media to be true to its book origins, because I don't want my life to be spent in disappointment.