Hannibal Lecter is one of the most celebrated characters in contemporary crime fiction. The creation of author Thomas Harris was featured in four best-selling novels that were, believe it or not, adapted into five movies. I was about eleven or twelve years old when I first came across Dr. Lecter in THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS' movie adaptation and I have since then read every novel but HANNIBAL RISING and seen every movie except for MANHUNTER. Needless to say, I am extremely bored with Hannibal Lecter's legacy and feel I have experienced whatever I needed to experienced with the character. In 2012, NBC launched HANNIBAL, the television series, which I expected nothing out of, except maybe a Thomas Harris lovefest and boy, was I ever wrong about that? It's an extremely clever rewriting of the original material that turns every of its weaknesses into strengths. If you ever have to watch a reboot in this age of reboots, watch this one. Here is a couple ways creator Bryan Fuller improved Thomas Harris' original material.
Creating contrast is an old storytelling technique. There is nothing that jumps out of a page like a good, clever use of contrasting information. HANNIBAL should be enjoyable to everybody, yet best enjoyed by those familiar with the works of Thomas Harris because of Bryan Fuller's 180 degrees approach to the iconic characters. For example, in RED DRAGON, Will Graham is this character with a convenient gift of total empathy which allows him to profile killers super efficiently, and he's reluctant to help his own boss Jack Crawford, because he almost got killed by Lecter when they caught him. That's what normal people do, they deliberately walk away from life of death situations. In RED DRAGON, Will Graham is normal.
In HANNIBAL, he is the farthest thing from normal. Graham's gift is a crippling curse he cannot help but use because it saves lives. He sees himself as a grotesque anomaly, loathes himself for being able to relive violent endings and yet struggles with his crystal clear understanding of serial killers. Graham kind of ''gets'' the thrill of the hunt and it's another reason why he hates himself. Hannibal Lecter himself is much different. Anthony Hopkins intepreted him as a theatrical madman, as Mads Mikkelsen turned him into a more traditional emotionless psychopath, letting theatricality transpire in his killing only. Series creator Bryan Fuller also goes A LOT further into Hannibal Lecter's cannibalism, making it something way beyond a simple act of savagery. There is profound meaning to his actions.
Symbolism
The Hannibal Lecter movies were all about stark realism and gory, shocking murders. It's efficient in its own way, but it's not transcendant. You cannot do it over and over again and keep shocking your audience. The viewers will become desensitized at some point. HANNIBAL added a layer of symbolism to Dr. Lecter's actions. His victims are often changed into pieces of art, concealing their own inherent meaning. They become grotesque objects, yet there has been actual art that's uglier than this. The good psychiatrist efficiently dehumanizes corpses. Another dimension of symbolism in HANNIBAL is seen through Will Graham's eyes. His mind is so powerful, he actually sees things. In season 1, a gigantic black stag symbolizing evil is pursuing him. In season 2, it's a Wendigo-like creature. In HANNIBAL, killing is not only done for killing's sake. Not even for Hannibal Lecter for whom killing is a celebration of his own power over his fellow men. The weight of death is present. Bodies don't just pile up for pure shock value.
Alternate Universes
Another aspect that people knowledgeable in Thomas Harris will appreciate is the alternate-reality feeling of HANNIBAL. It's not quite a rewriting as it walks a fine line between the original material and being its own thing. The cast from the novels is absolutely fantastic and will keep you guessing as whether it's going to respect the original timeline or throw it away to create something new. It's a source of tension that has nothing to do with the story, yet that's riveting in its own way.
Rewriting is a powerful tool that allows exhausted characters to live a second life. A couple weeks ago, I contemplated a Philip Marlowe novel written by a contemporary author and asked myself how could it ever be successful and live up to the original material? Bryan Fuller comes up with a compelling answer with HANNIBAL: address the weaknesses of the original material and create something new from them. New and improved characters that turned flaws into strengths and plots that go in the opposite direction that what you might've expected. Rewriting is a dangerous game to play but it satisfies our oh-so-human need for sequels that drives so much iconic fiction into the ground. HANNIBAL should be used as a benchmark on how to rewrite properly.