Hannibal Delivers, So Dine In

Shows surrounded by weeks and months of hype rarely deliver as promised. Falling flat because some idiot thought that he knew better than the viewers who know what they want. I can think of two shows right off the top of my head. And while both The Bates Motel and The Followers are decent shows in their own right, the actual story behind them sort of falls flat. The Bates Motel with its already lush and insane backstory of how Norman and his Mother coexist in a world that would shun them if they found out about their love affair. A love affair that eventually goes awry when Norma finds that sweet, sweet love from another man. Forcing dear Norman to punish her and which leads him to do the same to  women here on out. Only now as in the form of his dearly departed better half. But the problem with The Bates Motel is that first off the producers say that it is not a prequel. If it is not a prequel then why the hell call it The Bates Motel? And then use the storyline that was mostly backstory in the original Psycho? Then on top of that use all the main characters? And when it comes to The Followers. A storyline about a serial killer in love with Poe, rabid “followers” that are willing to do his bidding the story at first came off as a retread of Thomas Harris’ Red Dragon. Right down to the FBI profiler that has, well, some major issues. Thankfully The Followers deviated from the Red Dragon story.

But then there came the third very hyped new show. To complete the trilogy so to say. And when it comes to Hollywood in any way shape or form they have to do everything in threes.

NBC promised to be what the last couple of movies that starred Hannibal Lector were not. To see inside that evil, twisted mind before he was carted off to the dungeon to rot out the rest of his life. And after the premiere episode last night, it did exactly that. Hannibal delivered on all fronts. Right down to Mads Mikkelsen as the title character. You might remember Mikkelsen as Bond baddie Le Chiffre in the Casino Royal. And I could not think of a better person to portray Hannibal “The Cannibal” Lector. Mikkelsen embodies the role with a savage clarity that makes you NOT want to see a psychiatrist. Then to pare him opposite Huge Dancy as Special Agent Will Graham who, like Mikkelsen, not only embodies the famed profiler but adds a whole new dimension to him. This time out, Graham is more of an introvert in the likes of where we should see Norman Bates (Bates comes off almost as a sex symbol in Bates). While he teaches other would-be profilers the tricks of the trade Graham isn’t what you call social human being. He would rather spend time with his dogs. Like him, Graham finds the dogs that don’t belong, who are left for strays, comforting. The rest of the cast for the new Hannibal is just as stellar. With likes of Laurence Fishburne (Crawford), Caroline Dhavernas (Dr. Alana Bloom), and I am really digging the fact that they made the sleazy, unlikable tabloid journalist, Freddy Lounds a woman. Lounds if you recall is the happy chap that gets set aflame and pushed down a parking garage ramp in a wheelchair in Red Dragon (and for those of you who seen the original, Manhunter). Lounds is played Camelot’s Lara Jean Chorostecki.

NBC has Hannibal in a 13 episode run the sees Lector and Graham paired up like a macabre odd couple chasing down the worst of the worst. A dynamic that works on every level as we actually feel a kinship of likability towards Hannibal as he seems to help Graham through his problems of the mind. However, some of the efforts are not in what you call normal in any sense of the world. Sometimes one has to leave a very bloody bread crumb for things to fall into place.

5 out of 5 severed head is the verdict.  I’m calling Hannibal a actual must see. You won’t be disappointed. FYI: for all you X-Files fans look for Gillian Anderson (Scully) to make her appearance on the show.

Until next time... stay bloody.

"Bates Motel" My Review

It had been staring me in the face for over a week. Just sitting on the screen telling me that me, that yes, I should come in and spend sometime at the “Bates Motel”. So, finally last night I did. I’m glad I did. But I am, at the sametime, also a tad bit disappointed as well.

When I first found out that A&E were bringing Norman Bates (NBC with Hannibal Lector as well) to the small screen I was overjoyed. (Although this isn’t the first time that Norman Bates has found his way television. In 1987 NBC ran a short lived spin-off of the same title) I have been saying for a long time now that if Hollywood wants to keep recycling the old nostalgic 70’s-90’s iconic horror characters then they should develop them for TV. It would allow creators to really explore the inner workings of the story, and revitalize the genre and franchise as a whole with a series that would last around 12-13 episodes. And basic cable -or that of regular cable (HBO, ShowTime and the like)- would be the perfect place for them to do it. First, I don’t think a horror television show centered around any of these characters could withstand a 22-26 episode season. It would grow stale fast. But with the short seasons I believe it would flourish... But I digress.

As I was saying: I was really looking forward to the “Bates Motel”. Then two things happened. First they brought the story to the modern era. Something I wasn’t crazy about. But what the hell. Then I saw that some of the guys behind “Lost” were part of this. And while I was a HUGE “Lost” fan the first 4 seasons, that show’s creators and network did everything possible to screw it up and in the end it was all what they said it was NEVER going to be... but, again, I digress. Those two facts had me wondering if “Bates Motel” was worth my time. And then when I saw that was an early preview for it, and I debated. That is, until last night.

Now I am a huge fan of “Psycho”. And when I say that I mean of the original Alfred Hitchcock movie. While I have sat through all the sequels I thought that they were all poorly done. While “Psycho 2” did try to develop the story a little further all of them just sort retreaded the same story over and over. And not very well. (I know. I know. The same goes for all the “Friday the 13th”’s and the “Halloween”’s and the Freddy movies ect. ect.) And when it comes to the re-make, Gus Van Sant really didn’t do anything different from the Hitchcock film except make it modern and then make it feel yet un-modern, if that makes any sense. Anyway. With “Bates Motel” we are definitely in the here and now, as the story opens up somewhere new (Arizona) and we find a teenage Norman (Freddie Highmore) lying in bed. Norman hears something odd and when he goes to investigate finds his father dead on the floor in laundry room. Where, after a rampant search for his mother, Norman finds her just coming out of the shower. (here, for those of us who know the story and the background, we start to think if Norma (Vera Farmiga) has had a hand in the death of her husband.) Flash to six months later and we find mom and son on a road trip to new digs. And as it turns out, Norma has bought what will become the stage for the entire story of the Bates Legacy.

As the story plays out we find that Norma has purchased the motel and the famed house on the hill in a foreclosure. This fact plays as a major plot device. As we come to learn from a visit of the former owner, Keith, played by W. Earl Brown (Deadwood). Who makes his intentions quite clear: pack up and go. That the town will never accept them and then alludes to things probably left unfound about the property. Although, with Keith, he acts as someone who just lost his house would. He’s angry and hurt. But when it comes to most of the teenagers of the story, well, they come off overly friendly. I don’t know about any of you, but when I was ever the new kid in school there wasn’t a lot of: Lets get to know the new kid. I mean there were some. But not from all corners. Especially from the cheerleader types. Norman comes off as this complete chick magnet. Even one of his teachers seems to act as if she is making a play for him. Now Norman has always been a very good looking character -on screen. The character of Norman Bates in the original 1959 novel by Robert Block he is anything but. But, Hollywood being Hollywood made Norman a very attractive young man. A fact that I think was pure genius on Hitchcock’s part. The sheep in wolf’s clothing can be one of the scariest things of all. But he was never a chick magnet. Norman Bates was introverted to say the least. And controlled by a domineering mother. Again, I am interested to see how far they take the dynamics of the relationship that Norman has with his mother. They have already sort of alluded to those facts. And it seems that insest in TV is the black.

Things go from tense to just plain bad when it comes to Keith, who turns up later in the night after Norman has snuck out of the house to meet up with the girls he met at the bus stop. Keith breaks into the house and attacks Norma. Even as going as far as raping her. Something I was surprised to see on A&E. But before anything worse can happen Norman finally shows up home and jumps Keith, knocking him out. After Norman leave the room, Norma kills the hand cuffed Keith where he sits on the floor. Now comes the problem of what to do with the body. While taking the body down to the motel to place him in one of the rooms tubs, Norman drops Keith’s body, staining the carpet with blood. Then in a quick decision Norma and her son start to not only rip out the carpet in that room but the ones that have similar carpets as well. So it looks uniformed. During their little impromptu renovations Norman finds a weird sketch book under the carpet he is pulling up. The writing inside appears Asian and all the drawings are of women tied up. The the cops for whatever reason decide to show up. Here we have another addition from the “Lost” series as one of the cops is played by Nestor Carbonell. After a few tense moments where one of cops has to use the bathroom, the same bathroom where Keith is lying in the tub, we learn that Keith and Carbonell’s character are friends. After the cops leave, Norman and his mother are in a rowboat with Keith’s body. Here we start to see the true dynamic that is their relationship.

The end of the pilot throws in this added curve of a “Dragon Tattoo”-esque room where we see a girl chained to the wall, referencing the sketch found by Norman earlier.

My overall view of the pilot episode of “Bates Motel” is that it was just okay. I mean there were parts that seemed a little rushed, then they made it a point to bring in parts to reference the original “Psycho”. And if they were making it a more modern entity, and it was just being the beginning, they didn’t have to. I know why they did. But it did not have to be episode one.  

I give “Bates Motel” 3 out of 5 severed heads.

Until next time...     

News From the World of “BATES MOTEL”

TV guide is reporting that A&E have finally found their Norman to play opposite Vera Farmiga’s Norma with honor going to Freddie Highmore.

British born Highmore is probably best known for his portrayal of the luckiest kid in the world who finds the last GOLDEN TICKET, Charlie Bucket, in Tim Burton’s version of “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.”

“BATES MOTEL” will delve into the inner young mind and workings of the godfather of Serial Killers (for the screen that is) and his sexxxy & twisted relationship with dear old Mommy.

A&E is  set to debut “BATES MOTEL” sometime in 2013.