Hannibal

Continuity mistake: When Clarice is opening the letter written to her by Hannibal, it is sealed with wax, and not glued down in any way. While she's reading it, Hannibal is shown licking an envelope. (00:32:05)

Factual error: At the end of the film, Ray Liotta wouldn't be able to raise his eyebrows as the frontalis muscle had been divided. (01:57:10)

Other mistake: When Clarice is reading the letter from Hannibal, we hear a voice over, however what he says differs from what the letter says, specifically the "your good friend" before the signature, which Hannibal says, but which isn't in the letter. (00:35:35)

More mistakes in Hannibal

Trivia: At the end of the opening credits, just after "Screenplay by David Mamet" and before "directed by Ridley Scott", look at the right hand side of the screen - you can see Hannibal's face drawn by pigeons. (00:04:25)

Trivia: In the scene where the pickpocket is trying to get Hannibal's fingerprint on his bracelet, the cinema in the background has a poster for Gladiator - also directed by Ridley Scott.

More trivia for Hannibal

Mason Verger: I guess you wish now that you fed the rest of me to the dogs.
Hannibal Lecter: No Mason. No I much prefer you the way you are.

Hannibal Lecter: On a related note I must confess to you, I'm giving very serious thought... to eating your wife.

More quotes from Hannibal

Answer: Starling says to Krendler "Paul, what is it with you? I told you to go home to your wife, that was wrong?", implying that he had made a pass at her and she had rejected him. He replies that it was a long time ago, and that he didn't hold it against her, but combined with Mason Verger's bribe this was most likely the cause of his antagonism towards Starling.

Sierra1 Premium member

Answer: In the book it says that Clarice had caught Buffalo Bill before he could. It said also that is why he hated her early in the book.

Question: How did Hannibal manage to make it onto a commercial airplane at the end of the movie? Even if he had a fake ID, wouldn't being on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted list make it virtually impossible for him to get through a high security place like an airport, where the feds would likely instruct security staff to stop anyone that even remotely resembles him? The fact that he cut off his own hand at the end of the film would make him easier to spot, as the FBI would definitely share that new detail about him.

Phaneron Premium member

Answer: As seen in the first film and in this one, Lecter demonstrates an almost supernatural ability for eluding the law and seemingly being in two places at once. This film was made in the year 2000, before airport security became extremely tight in late 2001. At that time (before 9/11), it was still possible to enter an airport's main concourse through the baggage claim or even from the tarmac without passing through rigorous security. As ingenious as Lecter was, he could have accessed the airport in a number of ways back then. Relieving another passenger of his boarding pass and identification would be no problem for Lecter, either (simply leave the passenger's body in an airport toilet and assume his identity). For the most part, it was Lecter's calm, self-confident charm that allowed him to slither through society always ten steps ahead of the law.

Charles Austin Miller

Answer: Perhaps he bribed his way through security onto the plane. Or maybe he murdered anyone who even remotely challenged him. He was probably wearing a disguise. It's possible that he had been planning this whole thing for an unspecified amount of time. And don't forget: he is a genius. And determined. He wouldn't let a little thing like protocol get in the way of his escape.

Alan Keddie

Answer: There is an assumption that he cut his hand off in the end. Ask yourself this for a very graphic movie why did they not show the chopped of hand. You just hear the chop but no sound from Lecter and only an emotional reaction from Starling. It is only alluded to and even if he did happen to chop it off he would be in so much pain as he acknowledged this was going to hurt he would not have been able to escape without help from Starling.

Question: Why did the pigs not attack Lecter when he picked up Clarice? They went straight for the fat guy handcuffed to his accomplice and also to Verger but by passed Lecter. I thought it might be a blood thing which is why Lecter picked Clarice up after she was shot but A - Lecter doesn't know anything about the pigs and B - Mason wasn't bleeding before he got eaten.

The_Iceman

Answer: The implication is that the boars are afraid of Lecter, which is why they don't attack him - he shows no fear and exudes dominance.

Sierra1 Premium member

Next to that the pigs are trained to attack anything that screams. Hannibal stayed calm and thus was ignored.

lionhead

I'm inclined to agree here. The boars could sense that Lecter was the most savage predator in the pit, and the animals steered clear of him for that reason. Call it "professional courtesy."

Charles Austin Miller

Didn't Verger describe the pigs (by mentioning their molars and incisors) to Lecter when he was first brought to Verger strapped to the dolly?

He also didn't scream or make noise to get their attention.

Answer: The implication is that savage animals recognize Lecter as another, even more savage animal. Call it kinship. Lecter has the same effect on attack dogs.

Charles Austin Miller

Answer: Probably the same reason the Alsatian dog of Krendler didn't attack him either.

More questions & answers from Hannibal

Trailer not working?

Join the mailing list

Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.