Sign In Now ► or Create A New Account ►
4 comments
2 comments
Rank This Matchup or Comment/Reply Below
on 12/11/2009
hee hee this is kinda funny. and as much as I love Edward Norton, I'm going with Lambs
on 4/8/2010
Not easy, I like both
on 6/16/2012
As much as i like Lambs, i'm going with the underrated Red Dragon. Which is weird because i usually hate Brett Ratner with a passion.
on 6/17/2012
I really enjoyed Red Dragon but Silence of the Lambs is one of the only few films that is better than the source material that it's based on.
on 6/29/2012
I agree with Reelz. Both films are good, and the books are very good too, but Silence of the Lambs is a classic film. I wouldn't say it was much better than the book though, I still found the book enjoyable, and I'm not much of a reader. The best case of a film being better than it's source material I can think of is Jaws.
on 7/18/2012
Gotta pick Red Dragon. I could sense a greater amount of tension in the conversations between Norton and Hopkins. I didn't like Foster's performance at all. She was obviously having a hard time coping with Anthony Hopkins who was sublime as Hannibal Lecter. I also found Red Dragon more thrilling and entertaining than Silence. Silence seemed to be trying too hard to look grim and serious while Red Dragon achieved that quite effortlessly. I was, however, impressed by Ted Levine's portrayal of Buffalo Bill. He gave the character that unpredictability and eccentricity without losing a menacing body language. Neither of the two can hold a candle to Se7en which reigns supreme in the serial killer genre.
on 8/24/2012
I disagree with Reelz. No way is Demme's adaptation better than Thomas Harris' brilliant novel.
Silence of the Lambs. Dragon was good, but not particularly memorable.
on 11/14/2015
Fiennes was fine, and Red Dragon was thrilling, but no prequel was better than the original...
