When Anthony Hopkins first received the script for Silence of the Lambs. He initially thought it was a children's story. Such an incredible performance.
One of the best performances of all time. Anthony Hopkins deserved the Academy Award and praise he has gotten from this performance. Great video man, hope you’re doing well. Take care!
This was an eye opening movie, with a brilliant actor at his prime. I recall watching this movie in the theater and being mesmerized by his performance. Just brilliant Excellent analysis, I’m going to rewatch this movie this weekend.
I'll never forget Jodie's delivery of the line in response to "Is he some kinda vampire?" and she says "They don't have a name for what he is". And there really isn't!
I love that. Cinema is the pinnacle of art combining many different art forms. It always saddens me when someone says “the book was better” bcuz they don’t understand the amount of work and collaboration that goes into making a movie. The fact any movies get made is a miracle
We knew we were watching a scary, unpredictable performance from a top actor - we were entertained, but the analysis of Hopkins' creative input is great. Helps to highlight just how much he deserved his statuette.
At 13:16 the tune he's whistling is the nursery rhyme "Rock a bye baby". That gives the scene an additional ominous twist given what he's doing as that song contains the lyrics "When the bough breaks the cradle will fall / And down will come baby, cradle and all."
i did notice the robotic inflection from the get-go, but the specific tonality oHepburn was a revelation, something brash and posh about it simultaniously
It's a perfect performance. From the first moment you see him, the way he's standing perfectly still right in the centre of his cell really is creepy. At the time the film came out, my mum had just been working at the theatre with Tony and had been telling us how lovely he was to work with, and how friendly and generally nice he was, which meant that I couldn't quite absorb the character knowing what the actor was like for real.
The asylum cell also works as a stage allowing Hopkins to really play with his delivery without ever coming off as ridiculously over the top. Try repeating some of those lines IRL. It only works for him in that context.
Much as I love Brian Cox in Manhunter, Hopkins' reading of Lecter is from another dimension. One of the greatest screen performances of the 20th century.
Hopkins changed "The serial killer" villain when all we had was slashers. We have so many nonfiction characters like Dexter and NBC's Hannibal Lecter to credit to him
@@Hilz28 He doesn't get to do a lot (the writer was probably unsure of how good the character was), but his performance is eerie in the same way real-life psychopaths are, but that's not exactly what Hopkins nor Mikkelsen were going for. They go for a more stylized take in line with the books, where he is described as something that transcends definitions.
What a great video this is, not too long, not too short - this performance by Anthony Hopkins is so incredible that I can’t put it into words - thanks “Just an observation” for doing just that!! There can never be too much praise for Sir Anthony Hopkins!
Anthony Hopkins has the Midas's touch, he adds so much nuance to his characters, simply one of a kind. Other 2 of my favourite roles he played where you can see the same refined subtlety he used in Hannibal Lecter, are Captain Bligh from The Bounty (1984) and Stevens in The Remains of the Day (1993). He's able to convey a lot just with his eyes, in fact there are 2 scenes that immediately came to mind as you were highlighting how he usually expresses himself with understated intensity: - in The Bounty, the scene at the table when Fletcher Christian rejects Captain Bligh's offer of friendship following Christian's insubordination, his eyes go from warm to icy in such a smooth transition it's incredibly expressive. - the other are the scenes from The Remains of the Day when Steven (a butler) is mistaken for gentry at a pub and struggles to keep the façade of one who knows about politics, and then the film cuts to a scene where he remembers an occasion when the upper class mocked him and used him as an example of how the lower classes are ignorant and uniformed and shouldn't govern themselves... As far as extraordinary performances go, I think Stevens from The Remains of the Day is right there on par with Hannibal Lecter in depth. This was really enjoyable, with a lot I hadn't considered before, like for example the sibilance in how he says "he covetsss" meant to evoke the serpent of Eden, brilliant analysis.
A starling is also a bird. By saying "little starling, fly, fly, fly". He is undermining her, calling her little bird, as if she were delicate and powerless
Good take, but I always thought he was referring to the moths. Since he knew a lot about Buffalo Bill and didn't really need Clarice's case files (correct me if I'm wrong here), then he was just toying with Clarice all along, manipulating his way out of Dr Chilton's Institution by all the quid pro quo and making deals with government people stuff. Which means, the fly, fly, fly would be one important piece of information that he knows Clarice would discover eventually, and for him it's just his way of excercising a show of intellectual superiority. If the fly, fly, fly was indeed the reference to the moths, then I must say it's clever writing. (Edit: Dang, it was added by Hopkins himself!)
Starling birds are ruthless killers / robbers of other birds nests , eggs & offspring . Think about this . Do your research . This film is beyond brilliant ! I have said SO many times , when something is heavy weight wise that it is , " Heavy as bodies " . This statement is sadly lost upon most .
I’ve always felt so conflicted about how much I like this character. Watching this breakdown of Hopkins acting makes me feel a bit better about empathizing with and rooting for Hannibal throughout the film series. I truly is one of the greatest cinematic performances of all time, villain or otherwise.
There are so many studio-fabricated myths about improvised lines in movies, but it’s completely credible that Hopkins brings this level of talent and elevates everything he works in. He’s a modest actor and incredibly attentive to detail, unlike the De Niro and Pacino types, who rarely try, and even more rarely manage, to escape their persona types in service of their craft. (It’s also why I consider both De Niro and Pacino to be overrated.) It’s why I consider Hopkins one of the very best actors of his or any other generation, and certainly one of my very favourites. A great actor to study. There’s also a great Nerdwriter video from some years back studying an unassuming scene with Hopkins from season one of Westworld. Again, it’s a subtle, but detailed performance from Hopkins, and the breakdown in the video does a great job of bringing attention to Hopkins’ genius as an actor.
Pacino in The Godfather, and de Niro in Taxi Driver -- every bit worth their praise. But if you live long enough you live to become the villain, and where Hopkins has been (relatively) more selective in his film choices recently (The Father being a great example), de Niro and Pacino have settled more into payday movies. But that's ok too, they've nothing much left to prove.
@ The De Niro and Pacino performances you mention are both fantastic, era-defining for the industry. But that’s partly the problem. Despite generational performances from both early in their careers, they failed to evolve as craftspeople, spending the rest of their careers largely playing to type and showing a distinct lack of range, creativity and depth. It feels like safe - and lazy - choices to mask their possible limitations as actors or simply a lack of creative ambition that resulted in them never really stretching themselves. They’ve shown little growth and have seemingly been drawing from the same internal resources and references that they started their careers with, never having developed any new ones. (De Niro should have stopped saying Yes to Martin Scorsese projects after The King of Comedy. Not because they were bad projects and certainly not because they were bad films, but because KoC was a great departure opportunity, and their future collaborations would only be safe and lazy choices for both of them. And, yes, I’m aware that means no De Niro in Goodfellas, Casino, and The Irishman. IMO, Goodfellas was a mistake for De Niro, even though it’s unclear if the film would have been made or been as good without De Niro onboard. It was the last point in his career where he had the chance to make new creative choices, but he took the safe choice, opting instead to build a home within the walls of his own comfort zone.) I should also add that while I love Hopkins, and consider him a superior craftsman to both De Niro and Pacino, and capable of subtle, restrained, yet sophisticated performances that neither De Niro nor Pacino have in their palette, no actor is free from having a stinker or two on their resume. *cough* The Mask of Zorro (1998) *cough* 😉 Still, in his defence, at least he wasn’t playing to his comfort zone.
Brother… Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino are none of those things you said. Both of them are extremely attentive to detail. Its wild to me that you would make such a statement without researching how they’re both known for their intense preparation for roles. Also, watch a movie called “Cape Fear” and tell me the main villain is just another “persona” smh. The “not trying” you describe are closer to Tom Cruise and Matthew McConaughey movies
@@akastewartBro DeNiro is 81 and Pacino is 84. I think you might be placing unrealistic expectations on them 😂 Again, watch Carlito’s Way and tell me Pacino is just playing a persona
@ If they do “intensive preparation” then, tbh, I’m not sure what that preparation could be, given their choice of roles and how many of their defining performances are, to too great an extent, interchangeable. (Perhaps less so with De Niro than with Pacino, though not by much.) I watched Cape Fear (1991) at the cinema back when it was released. (Not a great date movie as it turned out 😉). It was a chilling and psychotic role, but sits comfortably on a continuum between Travis Bickle and Louisssss Gara (Jackie Brown). Compare the characterisation of that role in the 1991 De Niro/Nolte remake and that from the earlier 1962 Mitchum/Peck version, and tell me if there’s more or less sophistication and subtlety in De Niro’s rendition. (It’s a strange reference to offer up as evidence that De Niro can create distance from personas characterised by vendetta-driven menace, prone to psychotic outbursts of violence.) As for ‘not trying’… Yes, there are absolutely more obvious examples of actors ‘not trying’. The reason that I focus on actors like De Niro and Pacino is because we saw early in their careers what they were capable of. It’s the distance between what they appeared capable of, the sheer promise and freshness of their voice, and what relatively little they ended up doing with their craft that, imo, marks them out as more disappointing than, say, the Cruises or McConaugheys of the industry. Both Cruise and McConaughey are talented actors (though I’d probably consider McConaughey a ‘braver’ actor than Cruise), but neither really had the potential to set a new bar for the craft in the way that De Niro’s or Pacino’s early performances once signalled. To bring it full circle, I still maintain that neither De Niro nor Pacino has the capacity for subtlety and detail that Hopkins has. This may partly be due to their potential as leading men, physical, heroic or romantic leads, whereas Hopkins never really had that appeal or potential. De Niro’s and Pacino’s performances are invariably more physical, using their whole body or their whole face, communicating their thoughts and emotional state through a megaphone, rather than with a pause or the mere inflection of the mouth in a close-up.
I would love to see your analysis of a performance of the Hunter in "The Tenth Kingdom", it doesn't have a lot of screen time, but it does stick with the viewer for years after
Funny story. I was in law enforcement for many years, did alot of investigative work and in turn trained many new investigators. I would often cite the character of hannibal lecter as a person to try and emulate when doing an interview with someone you absolutely needed to get information out of. Not so much to intimidate as to never quite tip your hand as to what you're actually after. I did the whole good cop / bad cop routine and to be honest people who are being interviewed tend to really believe thats whats going to happen. It helped immensely to not be a good or bad cop, but to be a robotic one. There is of course far more too it, you can't just try to emulate the character and have it be successful, but if you combine it with a plethora of other training such as reading body movements, inflections in speech and just having good investigative skills in general you can really learn a lot from just having someone in a chair in a slightly uncomfortable situation. Everything is a power play in a situation like that, the goal is to get what you need without resorting to threats. If threats come out it means you've failed. The best investigator in the world will conduct his interview with you and obtain everything he needs from you and you have no idea that there was even a point to the conversation.
So striking to hear him talk in his native Welsh accent I knew he was welsh, but I guess I always assumed he had lost his accent in the London theatre and had a generic, lightly posh London accent Shame he doesn’t use his real accent in his more famous films - although it wouldn’t fit any I can think of off the top of my head
Mikkelson did well, but Hopkins gave him so much to work with. And maybe that would have been a lot of pressure, but it had to be a tremendous gift too.
The idea of Less is More, especially for bad guys, can be seen in this performance, Darth Vader (12 mins in Star Wars, 36 across the original trilogy) Michael Keaton in Beetlejuice (17 mins) just off the top of my head. Sure there are many more examples. Let people fill in the blanks themselves!
Anthony Hopkins,ist unvergleichlich in allen seinen Charakter Rollen. Er hat eine mentale Stärke die gerade zu herausragend hervorkommt. Ihm wünsche ich ein gesundes, langes , zufriedenes Leben . Dankeschön für ihre Arbeit für ihre Bewunderer, sie haben sich alle Sterne am Himmel verdient!✨🌟💫 Ein hervorragendes Talent.
I've always thought that Corky, Sir Anthony's lead role in 1978's Magic, played a big part in his selection for Dr Lecter. He played the likable but tragically insane character with such style it's gut wrenching when he loses control of himself. Magic was very popular in its time and deserves more attention than it receives. Likewise his role in 1968's The Lion in Winter as Richard the Lionhearted was elevated beyond just a supporting role. Even when he's not speaking you feel Richard's relevance as a force to be reckoned with.
My dad was a police officer… in forensics… he took me to this in theatre. He said he was blown away at accuracy. His last crime scene was Willy Pickton, btw.
Fascinating. There are a few performers who, through time, deserve the epithet of "Once in a lifetime" performers. 20th and 21st century names that spring to mind are Frank Zappa, Robert Fripp, Sir John Gielgud... I once had the privilage of watching Sir Anthony Hopkins perform in Pravda at the National Theatre in London in around 1985. I remember very little of that play, but such was Sir Anthony's performance that my Swiss cheese memory of it is of a play performaed by one man without scenery on a stationary revolvable floor. Brilliant.
Whether you do it for next fall or at any point in time, it would be fantastic if you did an episode analyzing Anthony Perkins performance in Psycho. There’s so much to pick apart in his deeply disturbed and layered performance. Without that character/performance I don’t know if we would even have a Hannibal Lecter today. It had such a major influence on how psychopathic or insane villains are portrayed as we know today.
I love the man but Anthony Hopkins is so full of it. I've seen in a making of which shows the number of different shots of lecter's introduction. They tried all different positions in the cell for him to sit and stand before deciding the spookiest one. And as you show, he absolutely blinks no matter how many times he says he didn't.
I think you should watch Normal People, it's only 1 season so far and the writing and the characters are well done. I also think it would make great content, probably multiple videos. I enjoy your videos a lot btw and if I see that you have a video on a series of a movie that I haven't watched I fist watch them and come right back here to see the video.
Highly intelligent, cultured, urbane, and a perfect predator. Hopkins was FAR more frightening than Michael Meyers, et al. Tedious, very tedious. The fact that Hopkins emulated HAL 9000 never occurred to me, but it makes perfect sense. HAL caused me to never trust a computer again. I still don't.
Tony Hopkins is an actor's actor. Jody Foster avoided him because she was afraid of him. Most of the single shots, for both actors, were done when the other was not in the room.
I consider myself fortunate, that I read the book for this movie first. It really helps to fill the voids of all the main characters pasts and circumstances. It was also very helpful with Jurassic Park.
3:55 so something just clicked in my head Elum Garrick from star treck DS9 i sadly dont know the actors name as i suck at remebering names but he plays the character of Garrick in almost the same way as Hopkins Plays Lecter, DS9 was made after this im pritty sure so it makes you wonder did he watch this film and it got imbeded in his mind when he made the manarisams for Garick or did both actors separately come up with this idea of a sociopath and how they behave.
Can't disagree, Brian Cox though...... The way his Lecktor dismantles Will Graham is masterful. You want the scent? Smell yourself! I wouldn't be surprised if Hopkins took that on board too.
i believe i remember reading hopkins say that part of why he agreed to do red dragon is bc he felt a slight regret over how cartoony he went with the performance in hannibal, and he wanted to exit the franchise on a more menacing, understated note, more in tune with sotl
This movie was so good I paid to go see it again the next day. Pretty much thought about the movie the whole time in between too. It's rare that a movie has that kind of impact. If I'd seen Goodfellas in the theater it would have been the same. Saw that on cable though so it was a matter of getting the TV Guide and finding out when HBO was gonna show it again.
When Anthony Hopkins first received the script for Silence of the Lambs. He initially thought it was a children's story. Such an incredible performance.
What? A children's story? How is that possible? You mean after he read just the title?
@@kit2770 Yes! He said "first received" not "first read"! LOL 😂😂😂
I can see he go "Aww, what a cute title. Let's see how the story....WTF?"
Anthony Hopkins would never play a horrible role like that
Great content 👌
One of the best performances of all time. Anthony Hopkins deserved the Academy Award and praise he has gotten from this performance. Great video man, hope you’re doing well. Take care!
This was an eye opening movie, with a brilliant actor at his prime.
I recall watching this movie in the theater and being mesmerized by his performance. Just brilliant
Excellent analysis, I’m going to rewatch this movie this weekend.
He's still got it. His role in The Father, for example, is amazingly heartbreaking.
Silence of the Lambs is a flawless movie. No notes.
100%
Thats why its the only Horror movie to not only win best picture buy virtually sweep the Oscars at that
Flawless book too.
Real talk 💯 writing , aesthetic, the performances
I'll never forget Jodie's delivery of the line in response to "Is he some kinda vampire?" and she says "They don't have a name for what he is". And there really isn't!
N.b. 16 minutes of screen time to win the Oscar.
This video 16:55 long.
I hope that was deliberate.
His performance is more like 23 mins
@@craigmmcgill Including the deleted scenes.
@@leechapman-ri9rb nope. 16 is often floated around, but it's inaccurate. His screentime is 24:52.
This is one of my absolute favourite movies, ever. The book is fantastic, but the movie brings it to PERFECTION.
I love that. Cinema is the pinnacle of art combining many different art forms. It always saddens me when someone says “the book was better” bcuz they don’t understand the amount of work and collaboration that goes into making a movie. The fact any movies get made is a miracle
We knew we were watching a scary, unpredictable performance from a top actor - we were entertained, but the analysis of Hopkins' creative input is great. Helps to highlight just how much he deserved his statuette.
At 13:16 the tune he's whistling is the nursery rhyme "Rock a bye baby". That gives the scene an additional ominous twist given what he's doing as that song contains the lyrics "When the bough breaks the cradle will fall / And down will come baby, cradle and all."
H'ha!... I thought so.
Exactly! He is very meta in this one.
Yes, it's a very overused trope, even back in the day.
Bowels in or bowels out? 😮
Awesome stuff- Hopkins changed the game with this
i did notice the robotic inflection from the get-go, but the specific tonality oHepburn was a revelation, something brash and posh about it simultaniously
elitisms
I also think he channeled a bit of Richard Burton too? Check out Burton in Absolution, sounds like Lector.
Another absolutely incredibly in depth breakdown and study of cinemas finest. Excellent video as always sir
Love seeing the script compared to the end product! Beautiful analysis
Read the book, it's fantastic!
It's a perfect performance. From the first moment you see him, the way he's standing perfectly still right in the centre of his cell really is creepy. At the time the film came out, my mum had just been working at the theatre with Tony and had been telling us how lovely he was to work with, and how friendly and generally nice he was, which meant that I couldn't quite absorb the character knowing what the actor was like for real.
Two classics covered back to back, love the vids!
The asylum cell also works as a stage allowing Hopkins to really play with his delivery without ever coming off as ridiculously over the top. Try repeating some of those lines IRL. It only works for him in that context.
Sharp observation - very true
You know it’s insane I never considered it, but the idea Hannibal lector is based of off Dracula is actually great and makes perfect sense.
Kudos to this video analysis and presentation. This is.. in a way, a great paper/report on the subject. Great points followed by wonderful anecdotes.
Much as I love Brian Cox in Manhunter, Hopkins' reading of Lecter is from another dimension. One of the greatest screen performances of the 20th century.
I mean he was the movie. Stile every scene with help from Jodie Foster bcuz she played the straight man perfectly adding extra depth to the character
Hopkins changed "The serial killer" villain when all we had was slashers. We have so many nonfiction characters like Dexter and NBC's Hannibal Lecter to credit to him
excellent point
Both are fiction
Apparently also he was so intimidated by Jodie and her by him they didn’t let each other know at the time how highly they thought of each other 😸
Great video! I would like to hear a deeper look at Mads Mikkelsen's performance as Hannibal Lector, he was great at that role.
Oh, great! I love Mads as Hannibal, I think is monstrous too 😮
Anthony Hopkins set the standard but Brian Cox was the original Hannibal lector in manhunter
@@josefsterling5462 And the least scary Hannibal.
@Hilz28 I thought brian Cox was the scarier Hannibal tbh, anthony Hopkins is more like grandad Hannibal 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@Hilz28 He doesn't get to do a lot (the writer was probably unsure of how good the character was), but his performance is eerie in the same way real-life psychopaths are, but that's not exactly what Hopkins nor Mikkelsen were going for. They go for a more stylized take in line with the books, where he is described as something that transcends definitions.
There's something about his eyes -- hypnotic...
Great video. Thankyou for pointing out the improvisations it was really interesting.
I’d like to see you do a video on javier bardems potrayal of anton chigurh that would be interesting
this right here 🙌
My man is pumping great videos, loving it man
Great video as always
Excellent, great work as always
Thank you, I’ve never noticed all those details in his acting, I was just captivated with his performance.
Thanks for this! One of the scariest and most powerful performances of our generation.
Great video! Keep em coming!
Great commentary. The blinks. Great acting. Loved this movie! Only 16 minutes of screen time! What performance!
What a great video this is, not too long, not too short - this performance by Anthony Hopkins is so incredible that I can’t put it into words - thanks “Just an observation” for doing just that!! There can never be too much praise for Sir Anthony Hopkins!
You're videos are amazing. Really love your analysis and insights. Keep up the outstanding work.
Anthony Hopkins has the Midas's touch, he adds so much nuance to his characters, simply one of a kind. Other 2 of my favourite roles he played where you can see the same refined subtlety he used in Hannibal Lecter, are Captain Bligh from The Bounty (1984) and Stevens in The Remains of the Day (1993).
He's able to convey a lot just with his eyes, in fact there are 2 scenes that immediately came to mind as you were highlighting how he usually expresses himself with understated intensity:
- in The Bounty, the scene at the table when Fletcher Christian rejects Captain Bligh's offer of friendship following Christian's insubordination, his eyes go from warm to icy in such a smooth transition it's incredibly expressive.
- the other are the scenes from The Remains of the Day when Steven (a butler) is mistaken for gentry at a pub and struggles to keep the façade of one who knows about politics, and then the film cuts to a scene where he remembers an occasion when the upper class mocked him and used him as an example of how the lower classes are ignorant and uniformed and shouldn't govern themselves...
As far as extraordinary performances go, I think Stevens from The Remains of the Day is right there on par with Hannibal Lecter in depth.
This was really enjoyable, with a lot I hadn't considered before, like for example the sibilance in how he says "he covetsss" meant to evoke the serpent of Eden, brilliant analysis.
Another of my favorites is The Wolfman with Tony, Benicio del Toro and Emily Blunt.
Absolutely superb analysis, thank you!
Sir Anthony Hopkins is an underrated theatrical genius. He's often one of the best parts of anything he's in even if said movie is already good.
I saw a interview,where he stated he hates dong theatre
He also prefers to not be called Sir and simply Tony. One of the GOAT!
A starling is also a bird. By saying "little starling, fly, fly, fly". He is undermining her, calling her little bird, as if she were delicate and powerless
Good take, but I always thought he was referring to the moths. Since he knew a lot about Buffalo Bill and didn't really need Clarice's case files (correct me if I'm wrong here), then he was just toying with Clarice all along, manipulating his way out of Dr Chilton's Institution by all the quid pro quo and making deals with government people stuff.
Which means, the fly, fly, fly would be one important piece of information that he knows Clarice would discover eventually, and for him it's just his way of excercising a show of intellectual superiority.
If the fly, fly, fly was indeed the reference to the moths, then I must say it's clever writing. (Edit: Dang, it was added by Hopkins himself!)
Right he is simultaneously complimenting and insulting her. He is "so much smarter", and yet "so damaged.," We see the real hurt",
The starling was in the original script... so not the improvisational part this video is discussing. It's the fly,fly,fly that's important.
And his roller pigeon talks with Barney in Hannibal about inherited hardwired behaviour, that reminds me of Starling's name being a bird
Starling birds are ruthless killers / robbers of other birds nests , eggs & offspring .
Think about this . Do your research .
This film is beyond brilliant !
I have said SO many times , when something is heavy weight wise that it is , " Heavy as bodies " .
This statement is sadly lost upon most .
Great analogy of him.. best I have seen to this day.
Fly, fly, fly… is a Macbeth reference :)
Excellent. Entertaining, Well made. Well edited and all that. SMILEY FACE!
0:33
"Can you hear the shcreaming of the lambsh, Clarishe...."
I’ve always felt so conflicted about how much I like this character. Watching this breakdown of Hopkins acting makes me feel a bit better about empathizing with and rooting for Hannibal throughout the film series. I truly is one of the greatest cinematic performances of all time, villain or otherwise.
There are so many studio-fabricated myths about improvised lines in movies, but it’s completely credible that Hopkins brings this level of talent and elevates everything he works in. He’s a modest actor and incredibly attentive to detail, unlike the De Niro and Pacino types, who rarely try, and even more rarely manage, to escape their persona types in service of their craft. (It’s also why I consider both De Niro and Pacino to be overrated.)
It’s why I consider Hopkins one of the very best actors of his or any other generation, and certainly one of my very favourites. A great actor to study.
There’s also a great Nerdwriter video from some years back studying an unassuming scene with Hopkins from season one of Westworld. Again, it’s a subtle, but detailed performance from Hopkins, and the breakdown in the video does a great job of bringing attention to Hopkins’ genius as an actor.
Pacino in The Godfather, and de Niro in Taxi Driver -- every bit worth their praise. But if you live long enough you live to become the villain, and where Hopkins has been (relatively) more selective in his film choices recently (The Father being a great example), de Niro and Pacino have settled more into payday movies. But that's ok too, they've nothing much left to prove.
@ The De Niro and Pacino performances you mention are both fantastic, era-defining for the industry. But that’s partly the problem. Despite generational performances from both early in their careers, they failed to evolve as craftspeople, spending the rest of their careers largely playing to type and showing a distinct lack of range, creativity and depth. It feels like safe - and lazy - choices to mask their possible limitations as actors or simply a lack of creative ambition that resulted in them never really stretching themselves.
They’ve shown little growth and have seemingly been drawing from the same internal resources and references that they started their careers with, never having developed any new ones.
(De Niro should have stopped saying Yes to Martin Scorsese projects after The King of Comedy. Not because they were bad projects and certainly not because they were bad films, but because KoC was a great departure opportunity, and their future collaborations would only be safe and lazy choices for both of them.
And, yes, I’m aware that means no De Niro in Goodfellas, Casino, and The Irishman. IMO, Goodfellas was a mistake for De Niro, even though it’s unclear if the film would have been made or been as good without De Niro onboard. It was the last point in his career where he had the chance to make new creative choices, but he took the safe choice, opting instead to build a home within the walls of his own comfort zone.)
I should also add that while I love Hopkins, and consider him a superior craftsman to both De Niro and Pacino, and capable of subtle, restrained, yet sophisticated performances that neither De Niro nor Pacino have in their palette, no actor is free from having a stinker or two on their resume. *cough* The Mask of Zorro (1998) *cough* 😉
Still, in his defence, at least he wasn’t playing to his comfort zone.
Brother… Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino are none of those things you said. Both of them are extremely attentive to detail. Its wild to me that you would make such a statement without researching how they’re both known for their intense preparation for roles. Also, watch a movie called “Cape Fear” and tell me the main villain is just another “persona” smh.
The “not trying” you describe are closer to Tom Cruise and Matthew McConaughey movies
@@akastewartBro DeNiro is 81 and Pacino is 84. I think you might be placing unrealistic expectations on them 😂 Again, watch Carlito’s Way and tell me Pacino is just playing a persona
@ If they do “intensive preparation” then, tbh, I’m not sure what that preparation could be, given their choice of roles and how many of their defining performances are, to too great an extent, interchangeable. (Perhaps less so with De Niro than with Pacino, though not by much.)
I watched Cape Fear (1991) at the cinema back when it was released. (Not a great date movie as it turned out 😉).
It was a chilling and psychotic role, but sits comfortably on a continuum between Travis Bickle and Louisssss Gara (Jackie Brown).
Compare the characterisation of that role in the 1991 De Niro/Nolte remake and that from the earlier 1962 Mitchum/Peck version, and tell me if there’s more or less sophistication and subtlety in De Niro’s rendition.
(It’s a strange reference to offer up as evidence that De Niro can create distance from personas characterised by vendetta-driven menace, prone to psychotic outbursts of violence.)
As for ‘not trying’… Yes, there are absolutely more obvious examples of actors ‘not trying’. The reason that I focus on actors like De Niro and Pacino is because we saw early in their careers what they were capable of. It’s the distance between what they appeared capable of, the sheer promise and freshness of their voice, and what relatively little they ended up doing with their craft that, imo, marks them out as more disappointing than, say, the Cruises or McConaugheys of the industry. Both Cruise and McConaughey are talented actors (though I’d probably consider McConaughey a ‘braver’ actor than Cruise), but neither really had the potential to set a new bar for the craft in the way that De Niro’s or Pacino’s early performances once signalled.
To bring it full circle, I still maintain that neither De Niro nor Pacino has the capacity for subtlety and detail that Hopkins has. This may partly be due to their potential as leading men, physical, heroic or romantic leads, whereas Hopkins never really had that appeal or potential. De Niro’s and Pacino’s performances are invariably more physical, using their whole body or their whole face, communicating their thoughts and emotional state through a megaphone, rather than with a pause or the mere inflection of the mouth in a close-up.
Great analysis.
Well done!
love these videos, your work definitely shows
The off key plaintiff piano lament is perfect for the subject! V good analysis.
great video, I'm going to rewatch it soon.
I would love to see your analysis of a performance of the Hunter in "The Tenth Kingdom", it doesn't have a lot of screen time, but it does stick with the viewer for years after
I can’t see anyone else playing Hannibal but Anthony Hopkins. He was perfect.
He could even do the “crazy eyes”.
Funny story. I was in law enforcement for many years, did alot of investigative work and in turn trained many new investigators. I would often cite the character of hannibal lecter as a person to try and emulate when doing an interview with someone you absolutely needed to get information out of. Not so much to intimidate as to never quite tip your hand as to what you're actually after. I did the whole good cop / bad cop routine and to be honest people who are being interviewed tend to really believe thats whats going to happen. It helped immensely to not be a good or bad cop, but to be a robotic one.
There is of course far more too it, you can't just try to emulate the character and have it be successful, but if you combine it with a plethora of other training such as reading body movements, inflections in speech and just having good investigative skills in general you can really learn a lot from just having someone in a chair in a slightly uncomfortable situation. Everything is a power play in a situation like that, the goal is to get what you need without resorting to threats. If threats come out it means you've failed. The best investigator in the world will conduct his interview with you and obtain everything he needs from you and you have no idea that there was even a point to the conversation.
A great actor and Welsh man.
So striking to hear him talk in his native Welsh accent
I knew he was welsh, but I guess I always assumed he had lost his accent in the London theatre and had a generic, lightly posh London accent
Shame he doesn’t use his real accent in his more famous films - although it wouldn’t fit any I can think of off the top of my head
Excellent study of the acting. Thank you.
I never thought anyone could match Hopkins' performace, but Mads Mikkelsen did it
Mikkelson did well, but Hopkins gave him so much to work with. And maybe that would have been a lot of pressure, but it had to be a tremendous gift too.
Nope.
Mikkelsen can't hold a stearinlys to Tony Hopkins 😉
@@philipusher4282 What the hell is a "stearinlys"?
The idea of Less is More, especially for bad guys, can be seen in this performance, Darth Vader (12 mins in Star Wars, 36 across the original trilogy) Michael Keaton in Beetlejuice (17 mins) just off the top of my head. Sure there are many more examples. Let people fill in the blanks themselves!
Anthony Hopkins,ist unvergleichlich in allen seinen Charakter Rollen. Er hat eine mentale Stärke die gerade zu herausragend hervorkommt. Ihm wünsche ich ein gesundes, langes , zufriedenes Leben . Dankeschön für ihre Arbeit für ihre Bewunderer, sie haben sich alle Sterne am Himmel verdient!✨🌟💫 Ein hervorragendes Talent.
An excellent analysis!
I've always thought that Corky, Sir Anthony's lead role in 1978's Magic, played a big part in his selection for Dr Lecter. He played the likable but tragically insane character with such style it's gut wrenching when he loses control of himself.
Magic was very popular in its time and deserves more attention than it receives. Likewise his role in 1968's The Lion in Winter as Richard the Lionhearted was elevated beyond just a supporting role. Even when he's not speaking you feel Richard's relevance as a force to be reckoned with.
My dad was a police officer… in forensics… he took me to this in theatre. He said he was blown away at accuracy. His last crime scene was Willy Pickton, btw.
This Tony fella is pretty good at acting.
Fascinating.
There are a few performers who, through time, deserve the epithet of "Once in a lifetime" performers.
20th and 21st century names that spring to mind are Frank Zappa, Robert Fripp, Sir John Gielgud...
I once had the privilage of watching Sir Anthony Hopkins perform in Pravda at the National Theatre in London in around 1985.
I remember very little of that play, but such was Sir Anthony's performance that my Swiss cheese memory of it is of a play performaed by one man without scenery on a stationary revolvable floor.
Brilliant.
Brilliant essay. Thank you!
Amazing video man, thanks.
One of the best performances ever by anyone!
I always feel like him standing looks like he stands up as a lady enters the door.
Wonderful. Thank you.
He was electric & Jodie worked off of him perfectly
Do Steve Carell in Little Miss Sunshine, how a comedy actor absolutely killed it at a serious role.
New sub after the first video!!!!
Whether you do it for next fall or at any point in time, it would be fantastic if you did an episode analyzing Anthony Perkins performance in Psycho. There’s so much to pick apart in his deeply disturbed and layered performance. Without that character/performance I don’t know if we would even have a Hannibal Lecter today. It had such a major influence on how psychopathic or insane villains are portrayed as we know today.
I love the fact that he said it was too distasteful researching these serial killers.
"staring down the barrel of the lens" got me rolling
Wow. Great video.
Sixteen minutes of screen time for a best actor award has to be a record!
An added testimony to his acting skill is that he actually terrified his supporting actress.
I love the man but Anthony Hopkins is so full of it. I've seen in a making of which shows the number of different shots of lecter's introduction. They tried all different positions in the cell for him to sit and stand before deciding the spookiest one. And as you show, he absolutely blinks no matter how many times he says he didn't.
He doesn’t blink *often*. You are taking him too literally.
well done
I think you should watch Normal People, it's only 1 season so far and the writing and the characters are well done. I also think it would make great content, probably multiple videos. I enjoy your videos a lot btw and if I see that you have a video on a series of a movie that I haven't watched I fist watch them and come right back here to see the video.
🔥🔥🔥
Highly intelligent, cultured, urbane, and a perfect predator. Hopkins was FAR more frightening than Michael Meyers, et al. Tedious, very tedious.
The fact that Hopkins emulated HAL 9000 never occurred to me, but it makes perfect sense. HAL caused me to never trust a computer again. I still don't.
Elite stuff
Tony Hopkins is an actor's actor. Jody Foster avoided him because she was afraid of him. Most of the single shots, for both actors, were done when the other was not in the room.
I wonder if you'll ever do a video on Kiefer Sutherland's Jack Bauer.
I consider myself fortunate, that I read the book for this movie first. It really helps to fill the voids of all the main characters pasts and circumstances.
It was also very helpful with Jurassic Park.
Damn good video
3:55 so something just clicked in my head Elum Garrick from star treck DS9 i sadly dont know the actors name as i suck at remebering names but he plays the character of Garrick in almost the same way as Hopkins Plays Lecter, DS9 was made after this im pritty sure so it makes you wonder did he watch this film and it got imbeded in his mind when he made the manarisams for Garick or did both actors separately come up with this idea of a sociopath and how they behave.
Excellent analysis 👏👏 can you please do an analysis of Colin as The Penguin/Oz thank you🙏
Omg I so hear Katherine Hepburn
that’s wild
I’ll never be able to unhear it now
He partially based his voice on hers as well as HAL from 2001.
Jodie Foster was such a beauty.
Her character here is my favorite female lead ever
"I'll help you catch him, Clarice," was probably the most Katherine Hepburn line Hopkins delivered as Lecter.
Anthony hopskins is my top 3 favorite male actors . Anything he’s in is gold .
9:30 The will to overpower, the sense of superiority, and the insensibility to achieve the goal
Can't disagree, Brian Cox though...... The way his Lecktor dismantles Will Graham is masterful.
You want the scent? Smell yourself!
I wouldn't be surprised if Hopkins took that on board too.
Cox Lector acts like a betrayed friend to Will. Hopkins acts like a father figure to Clarice.
“I do wish we could chat longer, but I’m having an old friend for dinner.”
i have a hard time believing he was only on screen for 16 minutes 😮 wow
Iconic Performance ❤
i believe i remember reading hopkins say that part of why he agreed to do red dragon is bc he felt a slight regret over how cartoony he went with the performance in hannibal, and he wanted to exit the franchise on a more menacing, understated note, more in tune with sotl
This movie was so good I paid to go see it again the next day. Pretty much thought about the movie the whole time in between too. It's rare that a movie has that kind of impact. If I'd seen Goodfellas in the theater it would have been the same. Saw that on cable though so it was a matter of getting the TV Guide and finding out when HBO was gonna show it again.
Hopkins é realmente incrível. Mas não podemos deixar de considerar que sua atuação tambem se beneficiou de um excelente trabalho do diretor.