Bates Motel and Hannibal

[My imaginary friend is GOD]

Both shows are about serial killers, one about a serial killer in his teen years before he was a killer, and one about a serial killer in action, undetected even though he is working with an expert on serial killers.

So, my impressions of Bates Motel so far: I like it, and it's interesting, but it seems really stupid that the show is modern instead of set in whatever era Norman Bates actually would've grown up in. It's less effective this way.

My impressions of Hannibal so far: The gifted prodigy imagining himself as the killer is a cliche. A lot of the stuff Hannibal did in the first episode didn't make any sense. Why warn another serial killer he was about to get caught? Why stay in the hospital with the killer's intended victim overnight? Are we supposed to believe that Hannibal has empathy? I don't understand. The show has potential, I'm just skeptical based on the pilot.

[Aractus]

Seriously there's a TV series called Hannibal? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard - didn't they learn their lesson when they remade Manhunter into that fucking awful movie? Or even worse, when Harris wrote "Hannibal Rising" and created the worst imaginable plot line, contradicting his character? Did they find an actor with six fingers to play Hannibal this time? If you ever watch the movie Hannibal - and I dare say noithing against the great Sir Ridley Scott - in it Verger gives Starling an X-ray which makes no sense in the movie, but in the book it's from the surgery Hannibal has to remove the extra digits on his hands.

Why warn another serial killer? Haha, sounds stupid enough to me. Hannibal tries to get serial killers to kill for him - that's his MO. He doesn't give a sahit if they get caught...

[Darth]

I read Hannibal rising ages ago, he does(did?) have empathy, eh I didn't think it was that bad Daniel. I don't remember anything about another serial killer being warned. Yeah that doesn't sound like him.

[Rev. Rye]

Seriously there's a TV series called Hannibal? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard - didn't they learn their lesson when they remade Manhunter into that fucking awful movie?

It's not that bad. Red Dragon's certainly more faithful than Manhunter. Better than Hannibal or Hannibal Rising, anyway.

Or even worse, when Harris wrote "Hannibal Rising" and created the worst imaginable plot line, contradicting his character? Did they find an actor with six fingers to play Hannibal this time?

Yeah, don't blame Harris for Hannibal Rising. Dino de Laurentiis insisted on it. In his own words: "I say to Thomas, 'If you don't do [the prequel], I will do it with someone else...I don't want to lose this franchise. And the audience wants it...' He said, 'No. I'm sorry.' And I said, 'I will do it with somebody else.' And then he said, 'Let me think about it. I will come up with an idea.'" So now you know why Hannibal Rising was so stupid; Thomas Harris just didn't care.

As for the series; the storyline is flawed, but it's interesting. I always wanted to know what Hannibal was like when he was a free man, as a psychologist and serial killer and now it looks like we got it. And I have to say that the performances are good. Hugh Dancy's Will Graham actually reminds me somewhat of a combination of both movie versions and Benedict Cumberbatch's Sherlock Holmes. Mads Mikkelsen's Lecter may actually be better than Anthony Hopkins' performance. I can certainly imagine Mads coming from an upper-class Continental background more than Anthony Hopkins. Also, Lawrence Fishburne's Jack Crawford is good. I like seeing this character as being less of a non-entity than in the previous films.