Over 100 plot holes and mistakes in this film! Terrible!

[deleted]

i didn't care for the movie, but just by your first "plot hole" i can tell you did not watch the film closely

hannibal gave him a drug I think lsd, it was said in the film

so before you start rattling off plot holes it would help if you just paid attention

prevents a lot of people from calling you an idiot

- There was no sensible or explanation given for Mason to cut off his face. You can't just give a person a knife and tell him to cut off his face. It doesn't work that way. Thus there is no explanation for it. Also, why was he paralyzed in a wheelchair? That wasn't explained either.
Mason was stoned out of his mind and it has been made clear in the Hannibal films that Lecter has the capability of convincing people to do what they normally wouldn't. He also made Miggs kill himself by swallowing his own tongue.

- That detective in Italy made a long list of errors that no one in law enforcement would make, nor anyone with any common sense.
Firstly, he didn't have much common sense. Why would you expect a drowsy-looking inspector operating in Florence to be a super-bright detective?

- Third, after finding out that Hannibal was a serial killer, why would he be alone in a room with him, and with his back turned? He showed no defensiveness at all. No one with a survival instinct would do that.
- Fourth, at the end, why does he turn his back toward Hannibal as he comes up behind him during the slide show? Totally stupid. No one would turn his back on a serial killer.
He didn't have much of a choice and he probably felt safe because he knew Mason's people were outside, ready to roll, and also assumed that Hannibal didn't know he was onto him anyway.

- And his ambush plan was stupid and unnecessary. Why couldn't he just arrest him any time anywhere? Why did he need to call someone in front of Hannibal to give himself away? That was a suicidal move. He was not a professional at all, like he called himself. He was a man with no common sense. Even a child would know better than to be that dumb around a serial killer.
He couldn't have arrested him because he wanted Mason to get Hannibal and claim the reward, which would not have happened had he just cuffed him.

- And after Lecter took out that stupid detective with zero common sense, how did he get away? Any cop or gangster could easily have taken Lecter out. He had no chance. Yet he hung the detective in public view and simply walked away unscathed? WTF?
Completely plausible.

How did Mason's men find Lecter? And how did Clarice find the barn that they were going to feed Lecter to the boars at? That was never explained. And how did the FBI know where Lecter and Clarice were at the end during the dinner scene? Is everyone omniscent in this film? Geez.
Krendler led Mason's men to Lecter, didn't he?
And Clarice knew where Mason lived. She also followed his goons.

I don't mean to impose, but I am the Ocean.

I agree, that Pazzi had so many opportunities to get Hannibal's fingerprints, he was handling so many things. ugh

Two things that bothered me, when Pazzi hired that pick pocket to get Hannibal's fingerprint on the bangle, Hannibal bought a newspaper which would have his fingerprints all over it, and he discards it, why not just pick it up of the ground instead of the elaborate plan of bumping into him?

I was annoyed with Starling hurrying to save Hannibal? What the ??!! She had no qualms in shooting in the head the HIV lady holding the baby, but oh no, Hannibal the cannibal, she HAS to save. Stupid movie!!

Its an uneven bipolar film at best (but I still love it!): esp. loved the first half in Italy but once Hannibal returned to the States the movie just unraveled in such a haphazard fashion (the ending was great though and ultimately saved the day!). Julianne proved her mettle in that final scene, and I agree with the original poster's views on why Commandatore Pazzi didn't bring backup or a freaking gun when lying in wait with Hannibal at the museum! He knew Lecter's background, but was so blinded by greed that he forgot to bring some form of protection to the would-be capture! Giancarlo was excellent as Pazzi though! Loved the opera scene (the score is haunting!) probably the best in the entire film. 12 years later I only watch the parts I like & F-FWD thru the rest!

[deleted]

I thought that if you slice off your FACE, it does permanent physiological damage to the rest of the body too, as there are vital nerves there that lead to the brain. Or at least that's what I thought. I vaguely recall another instance in which someone's face was severely damaged and that was the cause of them being wheelchair-bound

How many times did you even bother to watch the movie??

- Mason Verger was drugged out of his mind when he cut off his face. The "popper" Hannibal gave him was without a doubt extremely powerful.

- What "errors" did the detective in Italy make? Thanks for specifics.

- He did not initially ever intend to take Hannibal by himself. He was in direct contact with the thugs that worked for Verger and all Inspector Pazzi intended to do was to wait for people to leave Hannibal's presentation and then ask him out for coffee by which he would really escort him down to a place where Verger's men would be waiting.

- Your comments about the finger prints again shows your lack of intellect or inability to pay attention to a movie. Inspector Pazzi tried to get Hannibal's finger prints many times. After noticing that Hannibal wipes his own glass down after drinking at the café, he realized Hannibal took precautions. SO, then you see when Pazzi came alone (despite him saying he would send people to pick the belongings of the previous librarian) to pick up those items, first Pazzi asked if the list laying on top of the suitcases was the inventory and Hannibal responded that it was. They both were standing on either sides but when Pazzi asked if he could see it, Hannibal did not take it and hand it to him, he just said yes and made Pazzi pick it up himself.

THEN Pazzi asked if he could have help carrying the suitcases outside and Hannibal said yes but then excused himself for a second to go put on gloves. While Hannibal was doing it, Pazzi was looking around for something that might have his finger prints and saw the knife and I believe glass on the table from where Hannibal had eaten but Hannibal did not give him really any time or opening to just grab one of them and leave. He had to be subtle so as not to arouse any paranoid in Hannibal (even though Hannibal was already onto him). So you are way off on that.

The inspector turned his back to him because of what Hannibal put up on the slide that was a picture of his ancestor who had hung himself from that very balcony outside. Hannibal had already mocked Pazzi a little bit about it not being easy to be a "Pazzi" even over 100 years later and his comments about how because of who he was he was being held back in his profession...Hannibal had already started working on Pazzi psychologically from the first scene where he mentioned the fact that he had gotten taken off an important assignment for a much less prestigious one, working on Pazzi's issues on what were most definitely insecurities about his ancestors. I mean, its not like he turned his back on him for something simple, but something that psychologically affected Inspector Pazzi.

- God did you even watch this movie? Why wouldn't Pazzi just arrest him? Clarice Starling tried to talk to him about that...you see, Verger WANTED Hannibal alive. That is where the reward money was coming from you dolt. Arresting him would not have gotten him that money he so desperately wanted (they show how he had a young beautiful wife and her high maintenance as it pertained to money).

- Exactly how fast do you think cops can respond to something like that? Once he hung Pazzi out the window, he gave a quick wave to a surveillance camera and then was on his way out, only stopping to very quickly to kill one of the people after him with a quick swipe of his harpy and then was off.

- Then, how did Mason's men find Lecter? Lecter WANTED TO BE FOUND. The whole scene where Verger's men were watching Clarice in order to find Lecter was on purpose, giving her hints in their conversation about Mason Verger and how he knew Verger's men were following her. He needed to let Clarice know it so that she could rescue him. If you don't think he was trying to get caught, why in the hell do you think he would, while knowing Verger's men were trying to get him, jump up on a carousel and ride around on it for Verger's men to see exactly where he was.

Finding the right barn? It was on Verger's property. Duh.

Then you ask how did the FBI know where they were at? Clarice CALLED THEM when she woke up before going downstairs to Lecter's meal. Double Duh.

You are pretty clueless about almost every aspect of this film. Yep yep. I would stick with movies that don't require thought from now on if I were you.