Facing Up to a Killer Reputation

Though they share little screen time, Dr. Hannibal Lecter is never far from Clarice Starling. She feels him with her always--challenging her confidence, distracting her from the tasks she’s been assigned. Lecter’s shadow extends across the Atlantic from Florence, where the refined, cannibalistic menace now resides, having developed a love of Dante and a craving for Italian.

Julianne Moore--the “new” Clarice in director Ridley Scott’s film adaptation of Thomas Harris’ novel “Hannibal”--has a shadow of her own to escape: the omnipotent presence of Jodie Foster, winner of the best actress Oscar for her powerful portrayal of Clarice in the 1991 American classic and best picture winner, “The Silence of the Lambs.”

Calling on a cell phone from the set of “Evolution,” a sci-fi adventure directed by Ivan Reitman, Moore wastes no time declaring her intent to distance herself from her predecessor. “I’m a little uncomfortable with this line of questioning,” says Moore, as talk turns to Foster. “Just because it ends up talking about Jodie’s performance and my performance, which I don’t want to do.”

How can we not? “The Silence of the Lambs” exists as a revered, deeply disturbing gem--the kind of film that continues to sicken and titillate audiences years after they first watched it. To attempt a sequel is not only a box office risk. If it fails, “Hannibal” will be another in a long line of failed sequels, films that only served to underscore the greatness of the original.

Attempts in the past to recapture the brilliance of a classic film have seldom been glorious (though there are such rare exceptions as “The Godfather Part II.”). More commonly we are presented with schlock like the blasphemous “‘Exorcist II: The Heretic” and “The Evening Star” (which might as well have been called “Terms of Endearment 2: The Heretic”). The prospect of a sequel, while always exciting, is rarely fulfilling.

It is safe to assume that Foster, along with her Oscar-winning director Jonathan Demme, had their reservations about the legitimacy of “Hannibal” as a worthy successor to their masterpiece. In 1999, Demme bowed out, with word leaking that he objected to the story’s violent content. Then Foster followed, citing her preference for directing the yet-to-shoot “Flora Plum.” That left Anthony Hopkins to forage for flesh on his own as Lecter--the key returning player from “The Silence of the Lambs” team.

With the film opening Friday, moviegoers will be able to decide for themselves if Foster and Demme made the right decision or if they’ll be kicking themselves when the $80 million MGM film is celebrated at next year’s Academy Awards.

We spoke with Moore, Hopkins, Scott (“Gladiator”) and acclaimed screenwriter Steven Zaillian (the “Schindler’s List” scripter and David Mamet are credited with “Hannibal”; Ted Tally did the Oscar-winning “Silence” screenplay) about their concerns and challenges in attempting to craft a sequel to an icon. They responded separately to the same questions:

Question: How did you first become involved in the project?

Hopkins: I was sent a copy of [the novel], as was Jodie and Jonathan Demme. So I read it, and I thought it was very interesting--kind of outlandish. Then I phoned Jonathan, and he seemed very happy. He was talking to Thomas Harris, they were getting on fine. A few weeks later I heard that Jonathan was pulling out. I think he was troubled by some of the ending of the book. I thought he and Thomas Harris would work it out, but they didn’t.

I remember thinking, “I hope Jodie does it,” but I had a funny feeling that maybe she wouldn’t, and surely enough she turned it down. She’s a very strong woman with a great sense of integrity about her life. I don’t think she wanted to sell out. People are very wary of doing movie remakes, but I didn’t care, really, one way or the other.

Moore: I was in London doing press for “The End of the Affair,” and I got a phone call that Ridley wanted to meet me in L.A. I was surprised. It kind of came out of left field. I’d been sent the script and really liked it, but I knew that he was thinking about a lot of people. I flew there. We met in a hotel room. . . . It was very, very quick.

Scott: Three weeks before the end of “Gladiator,” I’m standing in the arena, surrounded by Romans at 9 o’clock at night, and Dino [De Laurentiis] walks in with [wife and producing partner Martha De Laurentiis] and, funny enough, Jon Bon Jovi [the team was working on “U-571” at the time]. He had a manuscript under his arm and said, “I want you to read this.”

Zaillian: About September ‘99, Dino called me, and I said no. I actually said no several times. It was unfamiliar territory for me. Unfortunately, Dino’s not completely fluent in English and doesn’t know the meaning of the word “no”--even though it’s the same in Italian.

Q: Any reservations about signing on?

Hopkins: I knew that Ridley had a very strong vision of what he wanted to do. And I was very pleased that they chose Julianne. I’d heard of the other actresses who were going to do it, and I thought they were all very good--like Helen Hunt, I think, was up for it. Then they came up with Julianne. It was very brave of her to take it on after Jodie’s performance. And she’s terrific in it. Different and as good as.

Moore: Every time you do a movie, your fear is you’re not going to be able to fulfill the role properly. Such a high standard was set with Jodie. It is intimidating, but you just do the best you can do.

Scott: Initially, sure. Jodie had already said that she had problems with the extremities of the book. And then when she knew Steve was doing it, she said, “OK, I’ll read the script.” But in her mind, for her to go back to where she was 10 years ago, she said, “I don’t know what more to do with it,” and she passed. And in a funny kind of way that helped me, because I was already thinking about “what if?” And Julianne immediately became a “what if.”

Zaillian: Of course. Frankly, I don’t think there’s much glory in doing sequels for a writer. With rare exceptions, sequels are unfavorably compared to the original. I just tried to think of it as its own piece.

Q: What did you find most powerful about “Silence of the Lambs”?

Hopkins: The way Demme did it was just terrific. The sense that Hannibal Lecter’s bottled up makes a more dangerous, more frightening film, but there are more psychological thrills with this. Hannibal Lecter’s out in the streets walking amongst us.

Moore: The characters are iconic. She’s the ultimate good girl, and he is the bad part of us we all imagine we would be if we were that bad. It’s about complete extremes. People are fascinated about the pull between good and evil.

Scott: Tony’s presence in that was one of the great milestones of characters we love to hate. Rooting for this serial killer is a true guilty pleasure.

Zaillian: The things that I remember best are the scenes between Starling and Hannibal in the asylum. Those were the most interesting scenes to me, which is why I was anxious to bring them at least as close together as I could early in the story.

Q: How does “Hannibal” differ from “Silence”?

Hopkins: In a way, this is a much more baroque, more florid film. A bit more outrageous than the other one. I get to do some pretty disgusting things. The film is slightly tongue-in-cheek, actually. And I look at [Lecter] as much more world-weary. I wanted to have a slightly burned-out, tired, lonely look.

Moore: Clarice was a student in the first one. She’d just come out of the academy. And now she’s a career officer who’s been in charge of stuff for a long time. She’s a grown-up.

Scott: First of all, it’s 10 years on, and we are outside--Hannibal is no longer incarcerated. Seeing Hannibal in his new environment experiencing the food and the culture is really great.

Zaillian: Everybody who worked on it with the exception of Tom [Harris] and Anthony are different. We bring a different sensibility to it.

Q: Demme criticized the book’s violence. Did that concern you about making “Hannibal”?

Hopkins: No. People are going to have a reaction to it one way or another. It’s not my concern. If it disgusts someone, fine. Don’t watch it. It’s just a piece of entertainment.

Moore: There’s some scary things in this movie, but I think it’s handleable. It’s certainly fun.

Scott: No, I think it’s how you serve it up, how you see it. I found a lot of the book was very amusing--a lot of dark humor.

Zaillian: That’s funny. I mean there’s no skinning of women in this one. There was actually an opportunity for me to get involved in “Silence” way back when, and I thought the violence involving Buffalo Bill was a bit extreme. I couldn’t quite see doing it, whereas [in “Hannibal”] the violence is a little more gothic and stylized. The violence is so fantastic that you know it’s not real.

Q: How much did you stray or borrow from the novel?

Hopkins: In the book, they have [Hannibal] having had facial surgery. Ridley asked what I thought about that, and I said no. It’s better to justify it this way: He’s so outrageous he walks around the streets of Florence, but the cops are too dumb to catch me. I don’t think he cares one way or another. He can outsmart anyone.

Moore: Clarice had no real reaction to the shootout in the beginning, which is enormous. All these people are shot. It’s really horrific, and in the script there was no reaction. I said to Ridley there needs to be something. So in the book she comes home and sits in her apartment, and that’s where she has her breakdown. And so Ridley and I put that in there.

Scott: Certain characters had to go. The sister [of the villain Mason Verger] was very amusing, but I felt Mason Verger was enough. The film is really about Hannibal and Clarice and the nemesis in the middle who brings them together.

Zaillian: I was concerned with the ending. It seemed to go against everything I felt I knew about the characters from “Silence of the Lambs.” So Tom Harris, Ridley and I sat down for a couple of days and figured out something that would satisfy all of us.

Q: How would you compare the level of fear and suspense in “Silence” to “Hannibal”?

Hopkins: I would think there’s more surprise entertainment levels in this. I think the audience will probably laugh a little more.

Scott: Two people were in a screening recently, and one of them fainted during the dining table scene. She had become very tense watching Julianne running in the woods and also when she was alone in her house. Those are both suspenseful scenes.

Zaillian: In both films, you never know exactly what kind of danger Starling’s in, but you know she’s in danger. Here, you’re never quite sure when he’s going to be in the same room with her. Even when you know he’s in Italy one moment, he may very well show up in her living room the next.

Q: For much of the film, Hannibal and Clarice are separated by the Atlantic Ocean. Did that present a problem?

Hopkins: Acting is a very simple process. I leave it to the director to figure out what to do with that.

Moore: It was an interesting way to shoot. Tony did the whole first month by himself in Florence, and then I did the whole next month by myself in Richmond, Virginia, and then we kind of spent the end of the movie together. I missed him. I was so happy to see him again.

Scott: If you look at “Silence,” I doubt Tony and Jodie were on screen together for more than 15 minutes. And in “Hannibal,” they’re never together except toward the end very briefly, but you must still try to bring the two together. That’s part of the process of a really great editor. Editing is not just cutting, it’s moving the story around. By having his voice on the screen with her, and hers with him, you put them together. And I put a lot of his head shots in her FBI room, so he was always with her.

Zaillian: In Harris’ book, the first third concerns Starling, the second third concerns Lecter in Florence, and in the third third, he comes to America and the scenes between them happen. I was kind of surprised that Harris hadn’t intercut those stories. So I thought it was important to have her on the case looking for him soon after the beginning. I tried to devise ways to have their paths cross--on the telephone or through a clue as to where he was. There are also flashbacks to things that happened in the past.

Q: Is the saga of Hannibal and Clarice ultimately a love story?

Hopkins: It’s a dark love story, yes. A romance. She’s obsessed with him. He knows that she’s not corruptible, and he admires her for that. But if she went off with him, he’d probably destroy her very quickly.

Moore: These two characters have a great degree of admiration for one another in how bright they are. It is kind of a love story, I suppose, but it’s a love story between good and evil. She admires him; I don’t know that she loves him.

Scott: Yeah, for me it was always a romance. When I was talking with Hans Zimmer, who did the score, he said, “What is it?” and I said I kept thinking of a “Death in Venice.” The subtext is romantic, and Hans built on that.

Zaillian: Is it a sexual love story? No, I don’t think so. It’s more a story of respect.