Hannibal

>Best Lecter
Mikkelsen
>Best Graham
Norton
>Best Crawford
Fishburne or Keitel
>Best Dolarhyde
Fiennes

Discuss.

I haven't seen the show, is it really worth watching & why?

I honestly like William Petersen the best as Graham.

Same.

>you now remember Hannibal Rising

The thing is that Hopkins plays a version where he doesn't have to hide that he's Hannibal, as opposed to Mikkelsen

It is worth the visuals alone. And Mads is way more charismatic as Lecter than Hopkins.

>Mikkelsen

No.

Maybe if they'd cut down on the homogay shit, but the show was fucking terrible. Then again, what to expect when you let a faggot actually think it's people?

Mads seems better because he carries a shit show, but Hopkins is more iconic and memorable.

Fuck you.

Was the weebshit in the books as well?
It seemed out of place.

Childhood is liking The Slience of the Lambs
Adulthood is realizing Hannibal Rising is true kino

Been watching it recently, I'd say it overall probably isn't worth the watch. It is just too farfetched, grandiose and frankly too vulgar to feel convincing as a psychological thriller.

>people defending the tumblr homo-lust show

LMAO

is jack crawford supposed to be a dumbass or is the show version just like that?
i barely remember the books/movies

They all kinda bring different things. I don't remember how the guy was in Rising though.

I feel like Brian Cox's Hannibal was pretty subtle, but he didn't have much screen time. He came off as a quietly eccentric/intelligent dude that you wouldn't instantly suspect but given context you can go "yeah I can see that now". Which is terrifying.

this isn't a Sherlock thread m8, do one

Hopkins
Petersen
Dennis Farina
Noonan

Cox played it too "sane" imo

In captivity, he was too normal, didn't seem deranged at all

Hopkins and Mads had that insanity within for sure

>Best Lecter: Mikkelsen

rëddit has arrived

I love Hopkins' performace but Cox accurately portrayed a psychopath.

No he didn't. He portrayed a sociopath who killed his wife to collect the insurance money. That was the problem.

>I feel like Brian Cox's Hannibal was pretty subtle, but he didn't have much screen time. He came off as a quietly eccentric/intelligent dude that you wouldn't instantly suspect

>Cox accurately portrayed a psychopath

This sums up his performance basically.

I don't actually have a favorite. I don't particularly care because they all have their merits. When people say Cox was too boring or sane I have to disagree.