Stuff and nonsense, made me laugh though regards curly/straight hair, incest themes et al. Some people imagine themselves very clever by seeing and reading things in films that simply aren't there. What shortcomings are they making up for??? It's a great film, enjoy it for what it is, one of the most underated films of the 80's.
@celticdaze How do you know it's not there - did you ask Michael Mann or Thomas Harris? The people who crack *me* up are the ones who are so confident when blowing off something that they don't understand, or who are too unsophisticated to recognize underlying themes in movies.
By the way, isn't Jupiter normally symbolised as blue? Certainly in kabbalah and astrology it's normmally blue: the colour you point out is normally representative of Mars I think: a decidedly un-lecter colour. I'm going to read your blog when I get time in a few days and see your complete argumment, so I may be taking all thiis back in the near future, or maybe not. We shall see.
Well, the kid's hair is pretty short, so by the example you give of your own hair and probably mine you don't know his is definitely straight, do you? My dad's hair was tightly curled, by the way. My interpretation of the red in the film is that it represents the dysfuntional in both Graham and Dollarhyde but lecter gets white because he is so impplacably insane so I can't agree with you. Why don't you run your idea past Michael Mann and see what he thinks? He might very well agree with you.
@spigoty It seems Kevin's hair is medium length, but the point is its shown as straight. Putting the whole thing together carefully, with all the shots of Molly's hair, the incest theme etc. leads me to believe she's hiding from Will that she's Kevin's natural mom. You'll see when you look at the blog. Normally red symbolizes Mars (Dollarhyde). In religion, it symbolizes the blood of Christ and also the blood of Christ's enemies. To get the thing about violet you really need to check the blog.
I think implicit in the idea of knowing about the teeth is knowing about the cast: how else could anyone know about the teeth but by a cast of them? Also, sorry, but my dad did have curly hair, and while mine is wavy now, it was straight as a kid. You show an interesting tendency to privilege theoretical science over observer testimony to defend a hypothesis-usually a sign of a weak hypothesis: were genetics a complete and fully understood branch of science, there would be no ongoing research.
@spigoty I didn't say genetics was a completely understood field, I said I used the Stanford school of genetics page for my analysis. The genetics is not that hard to understand: A child receives one gene from each parent. Now, if 'C' is a gene for curliness and 's' a gene for straight hair, then curly hair requires 'CC', wavy 'Cs', and straight 'ss'. If one parent (e.g. Molly) is a 'CC', there's no way for a child to get the two s's. ...continued
@spigoty Perhaps your father technically has wavy hair, or perhaps yours was wavy as a child. I'm only going on what you're telling me, I haven't seen any photos...whereas we CAN see the characters in Manhunter. Why do you think Mann has a such a prolonged shot of Molly's hair in the beginning, then later it keeps changing? He's obviously hinting at something. Like I said there's a fuller explanation on the blog. As far as the teeth, I'm still not sure what your point is...continued
@spigoty What Mann is doing with the teeth is hinting to us that it was not Dollarhyde who wrote the entire tissue note. The lecturer says the killer has pegged lateral incisors, which is true based on the cast, but he's pointing at the canines, not the lateral incisors. Then later, in a close-up of the tissue note, the indentations from the lateral incisors are NOt pegged. It turns out that Dollarhyde was using two different sets of teeth, but uncertainty has been introduced.
I've seen this movie many times and I think your interpretation of things is way overblown. It's pretty much definite that Graham already knew about the teeth as he is in the FBI and is getting all evidence first hand (like the home movies). Just watch the movie with an eye for colour (blue/red) and you'll get a much better appreciation of what's going on. ps. my dad has curly hair and my hair was poker straight when I was that kid's age. Also in the book, Kevin was not Will's child: solved.
@spigoty "Graham already knew about the teeth..." - I'm not sure what your point is - I'm saying he didn't know about the cast from the Atlanta lecture, since he's not paying attention during the lecture. "watch the movie with an eye for colour" - the blog analyzes color in the movie, and would help clear up some of your other issues as well, such as: "my dad has curly hair..." - I'm going by the Stanford University school of genetics page. Sorry, that trumps someone commenting on YouTube...
@spigoty ...(continued) "in the book, Kevin was not Will's child..." If you watch the director's cut, you'll see that Mann changed things from the book. This also is explained on the blog. Besides, a movie and a book are two separate productions - each must stand on its own. You can't make assumptions about the movie based on what's in the book.
@spigoty As indicated in the director's cut of the movie, Mann changed things from the book so that Kevin is his natural child. Besides, you can't use the book to 'prove' something about the movie - book and movie must each stand on their own.
I think you're reading way too much into this, and seeing things that aren't there. Her hair being curly is irrelevant, even in the context of genes, as the tech exists to str8en, waven, or curl hair. As for not paying attention at the lecture, just cause he's not lookign doesn't mean he's not paying attention. I see the violet glow you speak of, but sometimes it's just how things are shot (or perhaps clothes of the camera man) or the particular transfer you're watching and means nothing.
@frostedflame You really have to check out the analysis on the blog to get the full picture - the video really just consists of 'snippets' from the blog. I will say here that if you watch Molly's hair throughout the movie, it's really quite apparent that she's doing things with it. For example, she has it pinned in the back when she and Kevin are first relocated from Captiva, because she hasn't had time to curl it and she's still trying to fool Will.
@frostedflame The man lecturing about the teeth cast says the killer has pegged lateral incisors, which is true of the cast, but he's pointing at the canines, not the incisors. Later, the indentations we are shown in the tissue note do NOT indicate pegged lateral incisors. The point is that there's uncertainty about who wrote the note. If Graham had been paying attention, or had Crawford been listening to Chilton, the discrepancy between the cast and the note would likely have been discovered.
Bloom is working with Lecktor? That's a pretty hard accusation...
razbigranicu 1 month ago
@razbigranicu The details are in certain parts of the analysis on the blog.
Note the 'diabolical'-sounding music playing while Graham is talking with Bloom in the corridor.
MrMovieAnalyst 1 month ago
Stuff and nonsense, made me laugh though regards curly/straight hair, incest themes et al. Some people imagine themselves very clever by seeing and reading things in films that simply aren't there. What shortcomings are they making up for??? It's a great film, enjoy it for what it is, one of the most underated films of the 80's.
celticdaze 1 month ago
@celticdaze How do you know it's not there - did you ask Michael Mann or Thomas Harris? The people who crack *me* up are the ones who are so confident when blowing off something that they don't understand, or who are too unsophisticated to recognize underlying themes in movies.
MrMovieAnalyst 1 month ago
Wow, so weak
clearlogicify 2 months ago
@clearlogicify You have to read the blog to get the full story.
MrMovieAnalyst 2 months ago
what blog are you guys talking about
lynns0802 6 months ago
@lynns0802 The "Can Analyze" blog.
MrMovieAnalyst 6 months ago
By the way, isn't Jupiter normally symbolised as blue? Certainly in kabbalah and astrology it's normmally blue: the colour you point out is normally representative of Mars I think: a decidedly un-lecter colour. I'm going to read your blog when I get time in a few days and see your complete argumment, so I may be taking all thiis back in the near future, or maybe not. We shall see.
spigoty 6 months ago
Well, the kid's hair is pretty short, so by the example you give of your own hair and probably mine you don't know his is definitely straight, do you? My dad's hair was tightly curled, by the way. My interpretation of the red in the film is that it represents the dysfuntional in both Graham and Dollarhyde but lecter gets white because he is so impplacably insane so I can't agree with you. Why don't you run your idea past Michael Mann and see what he thinks? He might very well agree with you.
spigoty 6 months ago
@spigoty It seems Kevin's hair is medium length, but the point is its shown as straight. Putting the whole thing together carefully, with all the shots of Molly's hair, the incest theme etc. leads me to believe she's hiding from Will that she's Kevin's natural mom. You'll see when you look at the blog. Normally red symbolizes Mars (Dollarhyde). In religion, it symbolizes the blood of Christ and also the blood of Christ's enemies. To get the thing about violet you really need to check the blog.
MrMovieAnalyst 6 months ago
I think implicit in the idea of knowing about the teeth is knowing about the cast: how else could anyone know about the teeth but by a cast of them? Also, sorry, but my dad did have curly hair, and while mine is wavy now, it was straight as a kid. You show an interesting tendency to privilege theoretical science over observer testimony to defend a hypothesis-usually a sign of a weak hypothesis: were genetics a complete and fully understood branch of science, there would be no ongoing research.
spigoty 6 months ago
@spigoty I didn't say genetics was a completely understood field, I said I used the Stanford school of genetics page for my analysis. The genetics is not that hard to understand: A child receives one gene from each parent. Now, if 'C' is a gene for curliness and 's' a gene for straight hair, then curly hair requires 'CC', wavy 'Cs', and straight 'ss'. If one parent (e.g. Molly) is a 'CC', there's no way for a child to get the two s's. ...continued
MrMovieAnalyst 6 months ago
@spigoty Perhaps your father technically has wavy hair, or perhaps yours was wavy as a child. I'm only going on what you're telling me, I haven't seen any photos...whereas we CAN see the characters in Manhunter. Why do you think Mann has a such a prolonged shot of Molly's hair in the beginning, then later it keeps changing? He's obviously hinting at something. Like I said there's a fuller explanation on the blog. As far as the teeth, I'm still not sure what your point is...continued
MrMovieAnalyst 6 months ago
@spigoty What Mann is doing with the teeth is hinting to us that it was not Dollarhyde who wrote the entire tissue note. The lecturer says the killer has pegged lateral incisors, which is true based on the cast, but he's pointing at the canines, not the lateral incisors. Then later, in a close-up of the tissue note, the indentations from the lateral incisors are NOt pegged. It turns out that Dollarhyde was using two different sets of teeth, but uncertainty has been introduced.
MrMovieAnalyst 6 months ago
I've seen this movie many times and I think your interpretation of things is way overblown. It's pretty much definite that Graham already knew about the teeth as he is in the FBI and is getting all evidence first hand (like the home movies). Just watch the movie with an eye for colour (blue/red) and you'll get a much better appreciation of what's going on. ps. my dad has curly hair and my hair was poker straight when I was that kid's age. Also in the book, Kevin was not Will's child: solved.
spigoty 6 months ago
@spigoty "Graham already knew about the teeth..." - I'm not sure what your point is - I'm saying he didn't know about the cast from the Atlanta lecture, since he's not paying attention during the lecture. "watch the movie with an eye for colour" - the blog analyzes color in the movie, and would help clear up some of your other issues as well, such as: "my dad has curly hair..." - I'm going by the Stanford University school of genetics page. Sorry, that trumps someone commenting on YouTube...
MrMovieAnalyst 6 months ago
@spigoty ...(continued) "in the book, Kevin was not Will's child..." If you watch the director's cut, you'll see that Mann changed things from the book. This also is explained on the blog. Besides, a movie and a book are two separate productions - each must stand on its own. You can't make assumptions about the movie based on what's in the book.
MrMovieAnalyst 6 months ago
@spigoty As indicated in the director's cut of the movie, Mann changed things from the book so that Kevin is his natural child. Besides, you can't use the book to 'prove' something about the movie - book and movie must each stand on their own.
MrMovieAnalyst 2 months ago
I think you're reading way too much into this, and seeing things that aren't there. Her hair being curly is irrelevant, even in the context of genes, as the tech exists to str8en, waven, or curl hair. As for not paying attention at the lecture, just cause he's not lookign doesn't mean he's not paying attention. I see the violet glow you speak of, but sometimes it's just how things are shot (or perhaps clothes of the camera man) or the particular transfer you're watching and means nothing.
frostedflame 6 months ago
@frostedflame You really have to check out the analysis on the blog to get the full picture - the video really just consists of 'snippets' from the blog. I will say here that if you watch Molly's hair throughout the movie, it's really quite apparent that she's doing things with it. For example, she has it pinned in the back when she and Kevin are first relocated from Captiva, because she hasn't had time to curl it and she's still trying to fool Will.
MrMovieAnalyst 6 months ago
@frostedflame The man lecturing about the teeth cast says the killer has pegged lateral incisors, which is true of the cast, but he's pointing at the canines, not the incisors. Later, the indentations we are shown in the tissue note do NOT indicate pegged lateral incisors. The point is that there's uncertainty about who wrote the note. If Graham had been paying attention, or had Crawford been listening to Chilton, the discrepancy between the cast and the note would likely have been discovered.
MrMovieAnalyst 6 months ago
Is this a joke?
mrdisco 8 months ago
@mrdisco No.
MrMovieAnalyst 8 months ago