I just saw Hannibal. The thing about this movie is, most of the people who see it will go in with pre-set expectations and biases. Comparisons to Silence of the Lambs, as well as to the novel Hannibal, are inevitable. It's almost impossible to judge this movie on it's on merit. Which is a shame, because by it's own merit, it's a good movie. It's beautiful and disturbing, well paced, well directed, stunningly performed, and it's a damn good story. Anthony Hopkins is every bit as brilliant and scary as you'd expect, and Julianne Moore did a great job filling Jody Foster's shoes. But, it's not as good a film as it's predecessor. As for whether or not it does justice to the novel, it kind of depends on whether or not you liked the novel's ending, because it was very different from that of the movie. A lot of people who read the book hated the ending. These people will probably love the way this movie ends. I, however, am among those who loved the book because of the ending, so I felt a little let down. I still liked the movie's ending, but the book was better. Aside from the ending, the movie also left out what I thought were some of the best and most important parts of the book, most notably Hannibal Lecter's life story. I mean, that was kind of the point of the book, to tell how he got to be such a freak; but this film doesn't even touch on any of that. Instead it focuses on the relationship between Lecter and Clarice, but it doesn't imbue it with quite the same intensity as in the novel. That said, if you avoid comparisons, it's a good flick. Just don't let that stop you from reading the book.