MovieChat Forums > The Silence of the Lambs (1991) Discussion > Why did the sequel take so long?

Why did the sequel take so long?


After all the success that this movie had (Oscars), why did they wait a decade to shoot Hannibal and Red Dragon? By the time those movies came out, Hopkins was too aged to play Lector, especially in Red Dragon (which preceded Silence of the Lambs in the storyline).

reply

Well, the novel "Hannibal" didn't come out until 1999. Did you want them to time travel?

Can't stop the signal.

reply

Hannibal takes place 10 years after the end of The Silence of the Lambs just like it played out in the movies.

reply

The movie Manhunter in 1986 was actually the movie Red Dragon. Brian Cox played the role of Lector. After the success of Silence they remade the movie.

reply

It took a decade because Thomas Harris, who owned the rights to the name, the franchise, everything about Hannibal, hadn't written a sequel. the man is 75 years old, and has published 5 novels.

His first novel, in 1975, called Black Sunday is the ONLY book he's written that isn't Hannibal related.

He then wrote Red Dragon (1981); Silence of the Lambs (1988); Hannibal (1999) Hannibal Rising (2006).

So, the movie couldn't happen without the sequel being written.

Hope this helps.

###

reply

Agreed. Harris only wrote Hannibal and Hannibal Rising because the publisher threatened to hire someone else to write them. He apparently only intended to write Red Dragon and Silence.

reply

and as far as I'm concerned, he ruined the character in Hannibal. The book (that I did read) was even more grotesque than the movie, that itself could easily have been "modified" from its sheer grossness to something that would have translated on the screen as vile, but not 'as' vile. too many scenes were unnecessary and gratuitously disgusting.

###

reply

As far as Thomas Harris was concerned the movie version of Silence ruined the character of Hannibal. That's why he wrote the next one

reply

And the book, Hannibal, and the movie destroyed the character completely. It was vile.

reply

Everyone gets to have their own opinion on here for another couple of weeks anyway

reply

I enjoyed Silence of the Lambs.. and MAYBE parts of Red Dragon.

Hannibal movie was shit at best...
haven't read the books.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Harris only wrote Hannibal and Hannibal Rising because the publisher threatened to hire someone else to write them


Only tue for rising...De Laurentiis Was willing to allow Harris all the time needed to follow up the sequel to the source material that won him the academy award for best picture.

reply

His first novel, in 1975, called Black Sunday is the ONLY book he's written that isn't Hannibal related.

I've read that and seen the movie as well. Both are great.

reply

Maybe because of fear that the sequel would pale by comparison with the predecessor... as it actually did.

reply

Yep. Similarly, I like to pretend that The Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions never happened... and every Terminator movie after Judgment Day...

reply

I think both posters are a little off. Harris owns the LITERARY rights to the Lecter franchise, so no more books can be written without his approval. The FILM rights are a different story, and the owner of those (not the publisher of the books) went to Harris and told him they were going to make another Lecter movie with or without his involvement. That's how Hannibal Rising came about. Not sure about Hannibal.

reply

[deleted]