
a
10-year anniversary essay
by rob gonsalves |
director
Jonathan
Demme
screenwriter
Ted Tally
based
on the novel by
Thomas Harris
producers
Kenneth Utt
Edward Saxon
Ron Bozman
cinematographer
Tak Fujimoto
music
Howard Shore
editor
Craig McKay
cast
Jodie Foster (Clarice Starling)
Anthony Hopkins (Dr. Hannibal Lecter)
Scott Glenn (Jack Crawford)
Ted Levine (Jame Gumb/"Buffalo Bill")
Anthony Heald (Dr. Chilton)
Brooke Smith (Catherine Martin)
Diane Baker (Sen. Ruth Martin)
Kasi Lemmons (Ardelia Mapp)
Tracey Walter (Lamar)
Frankie Faison (Barney)
Ron Vawter (Paul Krendler)
Roger Corman (FBI Director)
Chris Isaak (SWAT agent)
Charles Napier (Boyle)
Alex Coleman (Pembry)
Stuart Rudin (Multiple Miggs)
Harry Northup (Mr. Bimmel)
mpaa rating: R
running
time: 118m
u.s.
release: February 13,
1991
video
availability: VHS -
DVD
other jonathan
demme films
reviewed on this website:
- the
complex sessions
- the
manchurian candidate (2004)
- philadelphia
- stop
making sense
- storefront
hitchcock
- swimming
to cambodia
see also:
- manhunter
- red
dragon
- hannibal
- hannibal
(review of Harris book)
|
Dr.
Lecter, murderer of nine, had his fingers steepled beneath his
nose and he was watching her.
Behind his eyes was endless night.
- Thomas Harris, The Silence of the Lambs, p. 147
It's fun now, in retrospect,
to list all the reasons The Silence of the Lambs should
have failed. True, it was based on a bestseller -- then again,
so was The Bonfire of the Vanities (similar title, too),
whose movie adaptation had just died mere months before. True,
Jodie Foster was in it -- but the movies she'd done after her
first Oscar win (for 1988's The Accused) were hardly audience
favorites (anyone remember Stealing Home or Backtrack?).
And the director, Jonathan Demme -- great director of underattended
films, most recently Married to the Mob, which had shrivelled
up and died in theaters in 1988. (Demme's only previous attempt
at a thriller, by the way, was 1979's tedious Hitchcock rip-off
Last Embrace.) And that release date -- who puts out a
horror movie in February? On Valentine's Day?
Anthony Hopkins? Oh, sure, he'd been great in The Elephant
Man, but that was ten years ago. Just prior to Silence
he'd been in stuff like A Chorus of Disapproval and Desperate
Hours -- remember how much you loved those classics?
It's almost impossible now to conceive of how hot he wasn't.
That dependable, somewhat boring Welsh actor. Yeah. This
is the guy you want to cast as Dr. Hannibal Lecter, the biggest
thing to happen to psycho fiction since Norman Bates? The movie
had "noble failure" written all over it. If they didn't
screw up Thomas Harris' book too much, it might be a decent
Saturday-night thriller. Maybe.
Well, we all know what happened. Silence of the Lambs
happened, and it happened big. People went and kept going
back. It was the rare thriller that hit an emotional chord. (The
Sixth Sense, another "this is probably gonna suck"
movie before anyone saw it, was a runaway hit for the same reason.)
It swept the Oscars -- becoming only the second film ever to
win in the five major categories -- in the face of predictions
that Nick Nolte would win Best Actor for The Prince of Tides,
Susan Sarandon was a lock for Thelma & Louise, Oliver
Stone had a strong shot for JFK, and Bugsy and
Beauty and the Beast were the front-runners for Best Picture.
Silence would be one of those great movies that don't
win anything. That was the consensus in early 1992. Remember
that whenever the Oscar-prediction pundits weigh in about the
year's nominees.
Silence changed the face of Hollywood thrillers, though
it was hardly the first to do what it did -- 1986's Manhunter,
also based on a Thomas Harris novel (Red
Dragon) and featuring Hannibal Lecter in a much smaller
role (played by Brian Cox), laid some of the groundwork. But
Silence broke ground in other ways. It's difficult these
days, in the era of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Tomb
Raider, to imagine how unheard-of it was for a woman
to carry a major motion picture and be the strongest person in
the story, not defined sexually or romantically but simply as
a smart, courageous woman doing her job. This was in 1991,
mind you, not 1951. (Then again, roles for women, despite their
frequent innate sexism, were a hell of a lot juicier in the '40s
and '50s than they were in the '80s and '90s -- or now. Today's
Hollywood, as has been tirelessly noted, is not an atmosphere
in which a Bette Davis or a Joan Crawford could survive, let
alone thrive.)
Clarice Starling was the undisputed hero of the story, but America
didn't buzz about her, didn't quote her or do imitations of her,
didn't warm to her as much as they fell in love with a
psychopath who is nearly immobile behind Plexiglass for most
of his limited screen time (forty-five minutes out of the 118-minute
film). Some commentators have found this bothersome. I find it
entirely understandable. Good is the rock, the ideal, what we
aspire to be. Evil is mesmerizing, the worst-case scenario, what
we fear we could be. Aside from all that, Hannibal Lecter is
actually very good company (at least as seen from a safe distance).
He's witty, charming, polite, brilliant, and shows moments of
intense insight and compassion. If not for the inconvenient fact
of his cannibalism, he'd be perfect. One could argue that he's
hardly polite to the people we see him hurting, physically and
psychologically, in the film, such as the two unfortunate cops
and Senator Martin; but a case could be made that, since "discourtesy
is unspeakably ugly" to him, he is merely callous towards
those who show disrespect or distaste towards him first. Clarice,
in opposition, never speaks to Lecter with anything less than
courtesy, which is important to him: "You were doing fine
-- you'd been courteous and receptive to courtesy," he tells
her while regretting that she almost blew it with her "ham-handed
segue."
Silence is about as unflashy a thriller as
you'll find -- so much so, in fact, that a few snot-nosed Ain't It Cool News
"talkbackers" have slammed it for being a TV movie.
Working with Ted Tally's faithful script, Jonathan Demme allows
the story to unfold against gray, drab, realistic backdrops whenever
possible. The lurid inner world of Buffalo Bill therefore seems
phosphorescent by comparison. Like William Friedkin in The Exorcist,
Demme sets up a normal, everyday world -- the cluttered American
landscape of shopping centers, trailer parks, and offices (there
are precious few exterior shots in the film; this is one claustrophobic
movie, though it begins with Clarice running and ends with Lecter
strolling) -- and then lets the demon loose. Buffalo Bill himself
lives in a rather banal-looking house; you have to look in the
basement to see anything wrong with this picture.
It's useful to look deeper into Buffalo Bill, too. At the time,
Silence took a lot of heat for being homophobic, or at
the very least transphobic: Buffalo Bill exhibits all the stereotypical
gay mannerisms, and, as many critics fumed, "even has a
poodle named Precious." And if he wasn't gay, then he was
transsexual, and either way, do we need a blockbuster movie telling
millions of people that gays and/or transsexuals are rabid flayers
of women? I would sympathize with the charge if it had a basis
in fact; problem is, it doesn't, though I can understand why
some viewers might not take Lecter's word for it when he emphasizes
that Buffalo Bill isn't transsexual. He's not gay either; he
isn't anything, really. His sexual preference, if he has
any conventional sexuality (y'know, of the sort that involves
another live person), has nothing to do with his particular psychosis,
which is all about becoming something other than what he is --
which is male. In Silence and also in Red Dragon,
Thomas Harris gave us boogeymen whose mania was rooted in self-loathing.
Hannibal Lecter, by contrast, could hardly be said to hate himself
(perhaps another reason for his popularity -- the man has unearthly
aplomb and self-assurance, if nothing else). The homophobia charge
troubled some people involved in the film, including Demme, whose
next film, as if to make up for it, was the gay-friendly Philadelphia;
and in the next Lecter film, Hannibal,
the loutish Justice Department official played by Ray Liotta
grunts about Lecter, "I always thought he was queer,"
and this inane remark is meant to be as laughable as his other
inane remarks.
When Harris wrote what is almost certainly his final Lecter novel,
Hannibal,
and played Cupid for Lecter and Starling, the outrage from many
readers didn't make much sense to me. The dynamic between the
two, as seen in Silence, is loaded with sexual tension,
or at least mutual fascination. Lecter is used to people being
fascinated by him; he'd never expected to find someone else fascinating.
Their first encounter follows the standard romantic formula --
they get off on the wrong foot. Clarice sends her questionnaire
through after some parrying (his expression after she says "No,
you ate yours" has "Touché" written all
over it), and he ridicules it and rattles off a cruel capsule
review of her life. He dismisses her -- "You fly back to
school now, little Starling" -- and turns her back to her,
a rudeness he did not commit in the novel ("Hannibal Lecter,
polite to the last, did not give her his back"). When Multiple
Miggs lobs a handful of semen at Clarice, Lecter calls her back
and gives her a useful clue. "I would not have had that
happen to you," he says, and then, of course, "discourtesy
is unspeakably ugly to me." The point is, if that had happened
to someone he genuinely disdained (like the ludicrous Dr. Chilton),
he would probably have laughed himself sick. He is offended on
her behalf for the same reason he was cruel to her just moments
before: he finds her interesting, and we feel that she has passed
whatever test he was administering.
Clarice has a backstory worthy of Batman; she lost her father
when he was shot by a couple of thieves, and between her daddy
complex and her saving-the-lambs complex, she's got one big need
to impose order on a chaotic world. If she is order, Lecter is
chaos; they're a perfect fit -- opposites attract. Throughout
the movie, Clarice has to stare down at morgue tables and examine
girls who, unlike her, didn't make it out. There's great emotional
cruelty in the idea of heavy girls charmed by a man who seems
interested in them despite their size -- charmed until they find
out he's interested in them because of their size, and
for a very practical purpose. Buffalo Bill's agenda takes misogyny
about as far as it can go, and Clarice focuses her nausea and
anger onto the case. Being appalled is a human reaction, but
isn't going to do much to stop Buffalo Bill before he kills again.
The Silence of the Lambs moves at a clip, but a smooth clip;
the mission is urgent, but we never feel rushed through the narrative.
Demme has the control of a born master of suspense, though in
a couple of instances he moves the camera in for a close-up when
it's not really necessary: once when Dr. Chilton doesn't have
his pen and we dolly in on Lecter silently gloating about it,
and again when drops of blood fall onto the gurney sheet in the
elevator. In both cases, I think the effect would be more chilling
without the camera's saying "Look!" It's also never
made quite clear how Lecter gets his hands on the pen Dr. Chilton
leaves in the cell; we seem to be missing a brief scene of Lecter
being unshackled, breaking the pen down to the tiny piece he
uses, and hiding it in his cheek. Otherwise, though, Demme's
direction is restrained and crystal clear. The violence is never
there for a cheap thrill, and in any event we mostly see only
the sad aftermath -- the heavy girl on the slab, with remnants
of glitter polish still on her fingernails. The detail of that
glitter polish is more devastating than any gut-wrenching gory
close-up Demme could show us; the detail gives us a sense of
a girl interrupted, a girl who'd put on some new polish that
day for whatever happy or hopeful reason, never knowing that
Buffalo Bill was watching and waiting.
So much has been written about and so many awards given to the
two lead performances that it seems a little pointless now to
discuss them further; their excellence is a given, like the elements.
Jodie Foster, as befitting her character's name, has been compared
to countless small but resilient mammals; Anthony Hopkins has
been likened to however many deadly animals in repose until they
strike (tiger, cobra, etc.). Lecter himself is either Moriarty
to Starling's Sherlock, or an evil Sherlock to Starling's Watson,
depending on one's mood. What grows between them is mutual respect,
and, in Lecter's case, affection. For Starling's part, she even
grows to trust him somewhat: "He won't come after me,"
she says after he has escaped. "He would consider it rude."
She certainly trusts him more than she does the dolt Dr. Chilton,
a glory hound who at one point can be heard making sure reporters
get his name right. I cherish individual moments between Foster
and Hopkins, such as when Lecter says "Was it a butterfly?"
and Starling is almost bouncing in her seat as she recognizes
she's getting warmer, or when Starling shrugs off Lecter's needling
questions about Jack Crawford as "something Miggs would
say," and Hopkins' delivery is all the more funny and chilling
for being so quiet: "Not any more."
Hopkins and Foster have fine moments independent of each other,
too. Foster flashes through about ten different moods when Starling
is examining the girl on the slab; she goes from revulsion to
sadness to rage at the killer to a businesslike list of the wounds
inflicted, and finally to excitement when she sees a clue. In
the book, Harris writes, "She felt she could look at anything,
if she had something positive to do about it. Starling was young."
Foster gets that across wordlessly (the words she's saying in
the scene have nothing to do with how she's feeling). Hopkins,
too, is fascinating to watch away from Starling; you feel that
he would never harm Starling but has no problem savaging anyone
else, either verbally or physically. His brutality during his
escape comes as a sharp reality slap after we've come to see
him almost as Starling's kindly confessor ("Thank you, Clarice,"
he says -- "caught in the moment when he did not mock,"
writes Harris). I particularly like Hopkins right before he gets
out of his cuffs, a placid expression on his face as he hums
along with Glenn Gould; the camera (this is a brilliant touch)
pans away from him carelessly, sharing the inattention of the
guards, as if he constituted no threat.
One other performance bears mention but hardly ever gets it:
Ted Levine as Jame Gumb, a.k.a. Buffalo Bill. The comical timbre
of his voice as he explodes at Catherine Martin ("Put the
fucking lotion in the baaasket") makes the scene funnier
than it's supposed to be -- you're supposed to be seeing that
even this monster is touched for a moment by the pain
of a human being he has carefully programmed himself to think
of as "it." Levine had the great fortune and misfortune
to play a vividly sick killer in one of the biggest critical
and financial hits of all time; I've seen him in other roles,
mainly on TV or in the kinds of movies that usually go directly
to video, playing a cop or something. He was brave not only to
throw his career away by defining his screen image so strongly
as the killer (try to think of ten other actors who'd have the
balls to play the "I'd fuck me" scene and play it without
irony), but also to try so many faces on as the killer and still,
somehow, have it cohere into Buffalo Bill: now he's the guy moving
the couch with a cast on, now he's the effeminate-acting sicko
staring down into the pit (pulling at his shirt to mimic breasts
is a particularly contemptible gesture and a credit to whoever
thought of it), now he's a sort of fantasy figure performing
for his camcorder (the song is "Goodbye Horses" by
Q. Lazzarus, which is also on the Married to the Mob soundtrack),
now he's playacting the role of the hick ("Oh wait, was
she a great big fat person?"), now he's on the hunt in the
dark, wearing those infrared goggles that make him look like
the basement-dwelling insect that hasn't yet become the moth.
Levine is best in the moment when he gives Starling the once-over
and can't quite restrain his glee: he's used to overpowering
big-boned girls; this tiny one he could snap in half.
Much has been made of the ending,
slightly changed from the novel, in which Lecter sends Dr. Chilton
(under federal protection) a note promising to pay him a visit.
In the movie, we see Chilton, the idiot, getting off a plane,
apparently on some vacation -- not the smartest move when one's
flesh-eating nemesis is on the loose. How Lecter knew Chilton
would be there is inconsequential -- it's a fine, macabre note
to end on. (In Ted Tally's earlier drafts, the movie ended with
Chilton tied up while Lecter loomed over him, saying "Shall
we begin?") Lecter, like Michael Myers at the end of Halloween,
is Still Out There Somewhere, but oddly we don't feel much anxiety
about it. We don't seem like the sort of people he would bother
with, or at least we'd like to think so. After all, he tends
to feast "only on the rude," as his former caretaker
Barney points out in Hannibal. So as long as we're polite
and intelligent, and don't threaten to blow his cover, we should
be safe. That's the movie's final, funniest joke -- that we've
devolved so much that we should need the fear of an elitist cannibal
to coerce us into being courteous. Discourtesy, after all, is
unspeakably ugly to him.
|