More cons than pros, ultimately weak! First the pros, the production design, cinematography is solid but if starting with that as your opening pro and not with the actors or performances it's a good indication that something went wrong. The book is possibly the weakest entry in the series with a feeling that Harris was acutely aware of how ridiculous the ending of Hannibal was, tries to being a sense of thrill to the story. Following rather loosely from the book the film's cast try with what they have but the most notable issue is Gaspard's performance. He comes across as more of a creep than sinister with his interactions with Lady Murasaki, and I feel he overacts scenes as a caricature of what Hopkins achieved in Lambs. Another reviewer I read on here points out that at no point do you feel that this is what Hannibal evolved from despite it being an original story. With a better script, tighter direction and lead actor this would have been a good addition but it misses its mark too wide. There is a period between the ending of this film and the beginning of red dragon that Harris has not covered, of around thirty years, wonder if he will ever cover it...A good question would be who else could have played Lector in this film, thoughts?