MovieChat Forums > Hannibal (2001) Discussion > Moore did a much better job than Foster.

Moore did a much better job than Foster.

posted 8 years ago by joshdestardi
8 replies | jump to latest

Foster was stiff...and gave a rote performance.

Not very original, but 'We accept the love we think we deserve.' Brilliant.

[–] KazLuigi 8 years ago

I disagree. Foster was great, Moore not so much. Moore is a very fine actress but is miscast and her film was nowhere near as good.

[–] dominicd 8 years ago

Foster was stiff...and gave a rote performance.

Come to think of it both were stiff, but IMO Moore was more stiff and appeared a bit over contrived in the character of Clarice Starling. Also, and for continuity sake there was nary a hint, at least to me, in and of Clarice's W. Virginia(?) drawl in Moore's performance. The accounts, and or reasons as to why Foster emphatically turned down Hannibal is debatable, if not speculative but whatever the reason I'll hold it against her for not doing it. I think the fame and acclaim received from Silence of the Lambs went to her head?

- DominicD

"Always make the audience suffer as much as possible." - A. Hitchcock

[–] Hannibal_Manhunter89 8 years ago

I admit I'm more partial to Moore's portrayal, but Foster did a great job as well in Silence. Both actresses did a very commendable job.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MsMelbaToast 8 years ago

Completely disagree. I LOVE Julianne Moore, but Jodie Foster IS Clarice Starling to me. Impeccable performance. Julianne was good, but she was no Jodie Foster in this.

[–] Myy2free2 (97) 6 years ago

I thought Moore was surprisingly emotionless in this. Luke warm so I spew her from my mouth

[–] Myy2free2 (97) 6 years ago

But I love this movie

[–] kellycallie (728) 6 years ago

Oh I agree. She some how made the role more of her own, she was much more natural in it. Foster was horrendous in the role.