#23 - The Silence of the Lambs

Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter, glowering out toward the audience in "The Silence of the Lambs".

REVIEW:

I've come to realize that a common problem I have with films I consider overrated is that they often operate within inconsistent realms of reality. I can forgive the schematic nature and occasional ludicrousness of the masterful Se7en because it positions itself so consistently as a modern-day moral allegory. The Silence on the Lambs, on the other hand, wants to be taken seriously as an FBI procedural but also thrill us it with its more lurid elements, and it's a failed combination. Demme wallows in the grotesqueries of Buffalo Bill (of "it places the lotion in the basket" fame) in a way that left a sour taste in my mouth. In fact, the whole film bases it success on a whole unsettling-for-the-sake-of-unsettling dynamic (revealed in the film's lower-key moments, like one in which an insect specialist with a lazy eye hits on Jodie Foster's Clarice Starling). The movie was hailed in many quarters as a feminist breakthrough, since it not only has as its protagonist a female FBI trainee (brilliantly played by Foster), but also makes as its subtext the power and intimidation of the male gaze on females. Still, for all that, as critic Dave Kehr pointed out, Starling is still at the mercy of Hannibal Lecter's superior intelligence and pines for her male boss' approval...hardly progress. As for Lecter, he has of course become an icon and been hailed as one of the all-time great movie villains, but where others see pure evil in the character, I see nothing but a cinematic construction of evil from beginning to end. Photographed in annoyingly imposing frames by Demme, Hopkins is nothing but a fake contraption, and not a particularly frightening one either. The character's appeal is all based on contrived one-liners ("Oh, and senator...love the suit!"), the gruesomenness of his crimes (fava beans, etc.) and worse, the idea that Lecter might be an all-judging surrogate for the audience. The closing line of the film carries with it the implication that Lecter's intended victim has what's coming to him. The movie wants to impart the clinical, realistic professionalism of the FBI profiler (which has itself been proven a somewhat fraudulent occupation in recent years), but it just can't resist its more lurid thriller elements. Look at Lecter's prison escape: it ends with him gutting one of the guards and hanging him from the prison bars in a crucifixion tableau. All very artsy, but think of how long that would take one person to do...and how much strength! I don't demand 100% realism, but when a film breaks from it so noticeably, one has to wonder why. Could it be to enhance the perceived coolness factor of Lecter? If so, The Silence of the Lambs reveals itself as not only a failed thriller, but also a morally dubious one. Having said that, it still should be noted that next to the abomination that was Hannibal, Demme's film feels like a Jean Renoir-directed study in compassion.

MY RATING:

44/100

WOULD IT BE IN MY TOP 250?

Nope.

WHY IS IT IN THE IMDB'S TOP 250?

Not only is the film consistently ranked as one of the great horror films (which is bizarre, since it's more of a grim procedural), The Silence of the Lambs even struck a nerve at the time of its release, sweeping through the Academy Awards. If I'm being charitable, I'll say that it's because people were responding to the empowerment of the Foster character and the novelty of the Lecter character. I may not have found Lecter scary in the slightest, but many people certainly seemed to.

Uncharitably, though, it certainly seems as if people grooved a little too much on the Lecter character for anyone to feel all that good about our society. If Hannibal is any indication, people viewed Lecter less as a truly disturbing monster and more as, dare I say, an admirable moral arbiter with the odd quirk of eating his victims. Or as just an entertaining villain in the tradition of Lugosi's Dracula. Either way, I clearly missed the appeal, and while I'll acknowledge that the movie has some unsettling moments, its flawed or occasionally ludicrous scenes nag away at me too much to be in lock-step with the general consensus.