MSRP is $26.98. You should be able to find it for $16 or less on release.

THE SHINING is the exception that proves the rule.

May I use that for my signiture?

I really didn't like either Manhunter or Red Dragon (the Ratner film). I abhored Hannibal. But Silence of the Lambs is a great film.

However, I gotta say, the books of all three are really fantastic reads. They are endlessly fascinating and entertaining.

I might pick up this new DVD, but after years of buying DVD's that I still haven't watched, and even more extra features that I haven't touched, I may stick to the Criterion.

Really can't say, but you're welcome to use it for your signature. ;)

Ha! The bad part is, I had to stare at my post for a few seconds to figure out what I did wrong. :blush:

Thanks for your blessing! :flowers:

I will not upgrade on this.....
and Red Dragon is a better film then Manhunter.

Wow, Manhunter vs. Red Dragon is developing into an ongoing debate like "Kirk vs. Picard", "Star Trek vs. Star Wars", or "Joel vs. Mike"!

Personally, I like both movies a lot, although both have flaws. Manhunter's main flaws are leaving out too much from the novel, making mistakes with some things retained from the novel (for example, "Lecktor"? Making Reba too easy of a pickup, and even using the wrong "Red Dragon" painting by Blake), and making overall poor choices in set design (I mean, does everyone live in glass houses in that movie, or what?).

Red Dragon's main flaws are overexpanding Lecter's role in the story (in the novel, Graham refused to have any direct contact with him after he found out Lecter was trying to get his family killed) and watering down the dark ending of the novel (making Lecter's final letter, lifted word-for-word straight from the book, make virtually no sense when referencing Graham's scars).

Despite these flaws, I think both are still good movies (I rate them both about a B+ each), and so think that Manhunter tends to be overrated by the critics while Red Dragon is underrated. But neither can compare to the original novel, which is the best book of the entire "Lecter" series by Thomas Harris.

Cover is up now at DVDactive.com

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/3312/sotlrh8.jpg

It is also up on post 5 of this thread. :)

While it is a nice cover I'll be sticking to the current Special Edition. If I upgrade again it will be in HD whenever that may be.

Man, I have done this twice today! I am just going to stop posting....

Nawww, just check out the thread more thoroughly first. It happens. Just gotta cut down on you being "that guy" :D I've had to quickly delete a post or two when I've noticed I wasn't the first.

For me, it's not Manhunter vs. Red Dragon...it's <b>Michael Mann</b> vs. <b>Brett Ratner</b>, and there's no contest there.

Sorry, Rat...but you suck.

Mann rocks.

= J

Is anyone here actually talking about the DVD?

I hope it's the Hannibal 2-disc in the box, because then I can ditch my current copy and just get this new one. I would guess it would be the 2-disc since the single-disc may in fact be FS-only like their FS-only Silence non-SE DVD, since that's all that's been available from MGM for awhile now.

Hopefully the box set has nice cover art as well, especially if the Silence art looks this slick.

I read this blurb while trying to find any reviews of the about-to-be-released Sotl CE. Anyone know for certain whether these issues have been fixed for the R1 release?

"Two things (regarding the R2 UE):

1. Note about the transfer: There is a one pixelation error in the transfer, in the beginning of chapter 8 at the timecode 0:30:20.

2. There are also some missing opening credits. First credits what are shown are: -Brooke Smith/Diane Baker/Kasi Lemmons.

These credits are missing:
-A Strong Heart/Demme Productions/Jodie Foster/Anthony Hopkins/Scott Glenn/"The Silence Of The Lambs"/Ted Levine/Anthony Heald.

Source: http://www.dvdcompare.net/comparisons/film.php?fid=749 "

All those errors stemmed from the fact that many of the optical titles were removed so that they could be replaced with player-generated subtitles in different languages.

Since the previous R1 SE transfer had burned-in subs and MGM seems to have abandoned player-generated subs in favor of the superior method of dealing with alternate subtitles (alternate angles) I think we're pretty safe when it comes to MGM's new transfer.

Of course, you can never be too sure but I think it's really unlikely that any such problems exist on the new disc.

[QUOTE=lamphorn]I really didn't like either Manhunter or Red Dragon (the Ratner film). I abhored Hannibal. But Silence of the Lambs is a great film. [QUOTE=lamphorn]

I am right there with you. Silence of the Lambs is a thriller on par with the best ever, next to it all of these other Thomas Harris adaptations are little more than a red headed step child.

From all the descriptions I've seen from DVD Empire, Amazon, etc. the box set is only 3 discs.

I hope this is fixed as well. Are there any reviews for this set at all?

www.dvdbeaver.com

a very positive review

here's a more direct link:

http://www.dvdbeaver.com/FILM/dvdcompare/silence.htm

I doubt Rypro 525 will agree since neither the (perceived) picture nor sound problems have been "fixed".

The more I think about it the more I wonder if the "Hannibal Lecter Collection" is nothing more than those three full-frame barebones editions of "Manhunter", "Silence" and "Hannibal" MGM released a couple years ago.

I know the original info and online retailers list it as "widescreen" but the lack of concrete info has me really puzzled.

In any case, I don't work Tuesday so I'll probably hit up Wal-Mart at midnight. If the box set includes widescreen theatrical "Manhunter" and the 2-disc "Silence" I'll pick that up. If it includes widescreen theatrical "Manhunter" and 1-disc "Silence" I'll get both the box and the 2-disc, and if it's just the fullscreen releases I'll obviously pass and just get "Silence".

Would James Whale's "Frankenstein" vs. Kenneth Branagh's, Tod Browning's "Dracula" vs. Francis Coppola's, Stanley Kubrick's "Lolita" vs. Adrian Lyne's and the third "Harry Potter" vs. the first two be sufficient to disprove that ludicrous rule?