Follow us on Google News
Get the latest updates directly in your Google News feed
Very few network television shows end up leaving an impact as lasting as Mads Mikkelsen’sHannibal. The series is certainly not everyone’s cup of tea, with its romanticism of gore and dark themes bleeding into every single shot. However, for those who recognize its beauty for what it is, there is no going back from the change that ensues.
One of the biggest questions that the series faces to this date is to justify its presence. Considering the fact that Anthony Hopkins’The Silence of the Lambsis a classic film, one cannot help but wonder why another actor would try their hand at it and risk ruining something perfect.
However, anyone who has seen the series would argue that its existence was perfectly needed, all by simply looking at the differences in Mikkelsen’s and Hopkins’ portrayals of the character.
Mads Mikkelsen’s Devil is in the details
The Devil is a part of human history who has famously been looked at as the villain of the world. The worst that humanity has to offer has been under his spell, and all evil has been traced down to him. However, many works over the years, likeParadise Lost, have humanized Satan, portraying him simply as the punisher of sinners and not taking pleasure out of it.
Hannibal Lecter has been compared to the Devil more times than one over the years. However, it is difficult to ignore his personality and realize that he falls in the second portrayal of the fallen angel much more than he does in the first.Mads Mikkelsenseems to stand by this, revealing toEWexactly what he thought of the character.
Mads Mikkelsen: ‘I had an orange f—king jumpsuit’ on His Dream Role Despite Playing Hannibal Lecter and a Bond Villain
I believe that Hannibal Lecter is as close as you’re able to come to the devil, to Satan. He’s the fallen angel. His motives are not banal reasons, like childhood abuse or junkie parents. It’s in his genes. He finds life is most beautiful on the threshold to death, and that is something that is much closer to the fallen angel than it is to a psychopath. He’s much more than a psychopath, and there is a fascination for us. We can’t understand it, but wewantto understand it.
While Mikkelsen’s words stand true in his portrayal of the beloved cannibal, many might argue that the same sentiment cannot be used forAnthony Hopkins‘ version. Even though both their portrayals have been more than a decade apart, many fans stand by their belief that Mikkelsen does a better job at making the viewers understand the character than his predecessor.
Although there is something to be said about the amount of time both actors were given to do justice to their versions, Mikkelsen did not need much time to establish his part in the story.
First impressions and introductions
If one were to start talking about the differences between Mikkelsen’s and Hopkins’ versions of Hannibal Lecter, the conversation would last a very long time. However, for the sake of argument about the amount of time they got to establish their characters, one only needs to see the first three episodes of the NBC series and compare them toThe Silence of the Lambs.
The first impression that audiences have of a character can very easily affect the way that they feel about them when the story ends. Hopkins’ Lecter is first introduced as Hannibal the Cannibal, a ruthless and calculating man who is capable of truly horrid things. This impression does not change throughout the story, regardless of how much empathy and kindness he shows Clarice Starling.
Bryan Fuller on Hannibal: “We are making a pretentious art film from the ‘80s” Was the Only Instruction He Gave to Every Director Who Joined the Series
When Bryan Fuller was making his series, he switched this up completely, focusing more on his psychiatrist side than he did on his killing. In fact, audiences don’t see Hannibal doing anything inherently evil, even if implications are made and horrible consequences happen because of his actions. He was trying to be there for Will and a friend to Jack, toying with his dinner while helping them accept the darkest parts of their psyche.
Nothing changes when it comes to his background between the two works, and no justification is given for his actions. Where Hopkins’ Hannibal is run by malice, Mikkelsen’s is purely run by intellectual curiosity. This affects the way that the viewers perceive them, with both being frightening for completely different reasons.
HannibalandThe Silence of the Lambsare available for streaming on Prime Video.
Ananya Godboley
Senior Writer
Articles Published :2219
Ananya Godboley is a Senior Entertainment Writer at FandomWire, majorly focusing on TV shows, with over 2,000 articles published. She has been an entertainment journalist for the past two years. Currently pursuing an undergraduate degree in psychology from K.R. Mangalam University, Ananya also likes to fangirl as a full-time job. She covers news and analyses on anything from Rick and Morty to Hannibal and even Arcane. In between these lines, she also enjoys superheroes and Taylor Swift.A philosophy enthusiast, Ananya enjoys digging deeper into the media she consumes, trying to understand the root of her favorite characters' behavior.
