The Silence of The Lambs

So yeah I know that I'm behind on a couple of reviews and this is actually the most recent thing I've watched. Usually it would have to wait its turn but I'm thinking you can either read a review of an Academy Award winning movie or you one of a Nathan Lane film and and 80s B horror movie... as much as I have to say about those films, neither of those blew my socks off like The Silence of the Lambs did.

The Silence of the Lambs follows the story of prospective FBI agent Clarice Starling (played by Jodie Foster). She is going through the academy when she is brought in by an agent named Jack Crawford (played by Scott Glenn) to do a character study on a horrific serial killer named Dr. Hannibal Lector (played by Anthony Hopkins).

Through a series of events, Clarice is brought in on the investigation into another serial killer still on the loose that goes by the name of Buffalo Bill (played by Ted Levine) . The FBI figures that if Clarice can talk with Dr. Lector, they can hopefully get information out of him that would lead to the capture of Buffalo Bill.

That is the broad explanation of what this movie is about but damn there is so much to this film and it is really a great film. I had forgotten until about half way through that this film was awarded multiple academy awards for Best Actor (Anthony Hopkins) Best Actress (Jodie Foster) and Best Picture. I'm actually really glad I didn't know that because I went into this movie with no expectations beyond just the pop cultural references that everyone seems to know the movie for.

And I'll get what everyone thinks is the best part of this film, the iconic scenes between Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins. And yes, these scenes are great.

The fascinating thing that I kind of knew but didn't understand fully until I saw the movie is that Anthony Hopkins really isn't in this movie very much. He leaves a huge impact and there is a section of the movie that focuses on him a little bit more, but I'm actually a little surprised he got a Best Actor award for this when he feels more like a Supporting Role. The bottom line is, there is a reason that he is known for this role and why this role is so iconic, it's because it is an amazing role.

It's easy to maybe think this role is a little bit overhyped, especially in the first 10 minutes of the film. I mean it has become a bit of a pop cultural phenomena since and everyone knows the Chianti line, but it's maybe easy to think this role is a little overhyped when you see Anthony Hopkins staring non blinking in that first scene.

But then you get washed over with the entire movie and you actually realize that that first scene that everyone thinks is so iconic, isn't even the best scene between Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins and it's certainly not the best scene in the movie. It's good, I assure you, but it is just an introduction. It's the introduction of a character that has gone down in film history as probably one of the most iconic and evilest characters of all time and it's totally warranted. It is an amazing performance by Hopkins.

And the reason he became so iconic was because of the filming and the mood of this story and how well they use him. Like I said, they use him enough that I feel he's more of a supporting role, but when he's being used it is amazing.

But the real person who stole this show was Jodie Foster.

Clarice Starling is actually one of the most sympathetic, badass, and yet incredibly vulnerable characters I've seen in a movie in a long time. I know Anthony Hopkins gets a lot of the credit for this film's success but in my opinion, Foster doesn't get enough. She is great.

Like I said, she is not even an FBI agent yet, she's in training and she's thrown into this really dark twisted world of serial killers and you can see she's kind of out of her depths but she pushes through and continues over and over again to be a really strong and brave character. Hopkins gives a great character performance, Foster creates a very deep character.

I've been keeping up with the news about Harvey Weinstein and the toxic abuse of power many men in the industry have. And while I could talk about that, I find I'm better at talking about movies, but what I will say is that Clarice Starling is a great example of how to write a female character. I'm sure someone will be able to point out how Silence of the Lambs is still sexist or whatever and I'm sure there are flaws but in my opinion it still holds up as a feminist look into story telling and it brings a lot to the table that is this movie.

Something I will say about this film, watching it in 2017, is that it does feel like a very long Criminal Minds episode.

Now, if it was a Criminal Minds episode it would be a phenomenal one and that's not taking into account the cinematography which is masterful, but it does that thing where they focus on the law enforcement, then they show what's going on in the serial killer's lair and all the while you just feel kind of gross throughout the entire thing because let's be honest, serial killers are freaking terrifying.

Now to be fair, I think a lot of what makes Criminal Minds successful probably derives from this movie. And there's a reason for that, this movie is really well done. So I'm not saying that Criminal Minds comment as a bad thing, it's just a note about watching it now in 2017 after watching multiple episodes of Criminal Minds.

But how this movie separates itself I think is that while it is a Crime thriller, i've seen this movie placed under horror film recently. And while I would still call it a crime thriller above all, there are some really creepy and eerie stuff in this film worth talking about.

There are no jump scares, but the movie just creates a sense of creepiness and there are some scenes that I was totally engrossed in. I usually live tweet the films I watch or at least have my laptop on my lap to take notes or do other stuff while I watch films but I had to put my lap top off to the side because I wanted all my attention on this film it was that good.

One thing I'll say about the film that isn't a bad thing just a comment, is that it was a little oddly paced. I really don't mean that in a totally bad way but it definitely doesn't feel like it follows the same story structure of a lot of major films, especially in its time. While there are a couple of cliches that they actually probably started or made popular, the film most keeps the audience guessing on where it's going to go next and who is going to bring up the next clue to continue this investigation.

If you went into this movie like I did, you might have thought there was going to be more Anthony Hopkins in this film. You will be very surprised at some points in the film because you'll think to yourself, hey, I haven't seen Anthony Hopkins in a while and that's because you haven't. He kind of disappears for a good section of the movie. Again, he's not the focus, Jodie Foster is.

Overall, The Silence of the Lambs is not what you expect in the best way possible. You may think you're going in for one thing but come out with something totally different. You may think that something is going to happen and then something different happens. It just blows my mind how well this movie holds up, especially almost 27 years later. It is subdued and yet haunting, and by the end you're feeling incredibly entertained and more than likely unable to sleep.

But those are my thoughts on The Silence of The Lambs. What did you think? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your requests on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I'll leave you with this. Interesting little trivia from Jodie Foster about the filming of movie. Enjoy!