I’ll admit: my knowledge behind the series of Hannibal is very limited. Like most people in the general public, most of knowledge stems from the 1991 film The Silence of the Lambs, directed by Jonathan Demme. In fact, The Silence of the Lambs is a landmark Oscar winning film—it’s in such rare territory that it’s only 1 of 3 films to win the Big 5: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Actress, and Best Screenplay. It’s also the only classified horror film to ever win Best Picture. A feat that’s stood for nearly 25 years, and one that I don’t imagine will be broken any time soon.

Keeping this in mind, it’s easy to see the massive interest around the Hannibal series. While I never got around to seeing any other movie in the series (Manhunter, Hannibal, Red Dragon), the television series in crucial in portraying one character in particular: Will Graham. Graham never appears in The Silence of the Lambs, as Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster) was the leading protagonist in that film.

Short history lesson aside: the television show aims to cover the entire history of Hannibal. But where does the beginning occur? Season 1 explores the events before the first film Manhunter, when Hannibal Lecter is a respected psychiatrist who works along with Will Graham in the FBI. The show aims to look at the early years of Graham and Lecter’s relationship before the FBI discovers that Lecter is a serial killer.

Graham is unique (and I feel like I’m seriously underselling that statement) in that he can mentally trace how a crime occurred while he’s at the crime scene. It makes him a valuable asset to the FBI, but it comes with consequences as (suprise) Graham can mentally unstable.

It’s also right here that I should mention that I’m absolutely flabbergasted and amazed that this show airs on NBC with the graphic nature it portrays. Granted, I don’t sit around and watch CSI or any other network detective show, but I’ll be damned if they rival in dark nature or in explicit nature. The only other show that I know that really compares it terms of gore and violence is The Walking Dead. And we all sure as hell know that isn’t going to air on ABC anytime soon. Let me state that I in no way dislike violent shows that have a lot of gore or dark subject matter—I’m just very surprised.

The plot structure in Hannibal does strike me as odd, though. Yes, there are overall plot arcs that take several episodes to cover (and I’ll definitely cover more of this below) but there’s also a case in each episode that’s discovered and ultimately solved by the end. It seems clear to me that the writers were still trying to solve their own show out, and it definitely shows up in a few key areas.

There are critical characters that are introduced and covered throughout the season—yet it’s wildly inconsistent. The most centric plot in season 1 is covered in the first episode, when Will Graham and Hannibal Lecter track down a serial killer that commits a copycat crime to a notorious serial killer in The Chesapeake Ripper. Their investigation leads them to the house of Garret Jacob Hobbs. I won’t spoil what happens when they arrive, but Hobbs’ daughter plays a central role the rest of the season. Yet, at the same time she completely disappears for about 3–4 episodes midseason and you almost assume that she’ll never be revisited. This happens several instances throughout the season with characters and plot arcs, and it’s fairly aggravating. I feel that the show would have been better off with a little more focus and tightened narrative. The biggest offender is a plot point with Jack Crawford’s wife, who suddenly disappears after the 5th episode and is never once brought up again—making an emotional plot point ultimately hollow and forgotten.

At first, I was a little unsure how the “introduce a crime and have it solved by the end of show” would pan out, but I will give the writers credit where it’s due: some of the stories and murderer’s are pretty damn fascinating. My personal favorite comes from episode 5 “Coquilles”. A mentally unstable man kills other people when he hallucinates and sees their skulls bursting into flames. These people become his target, and murders them and peels flesh off their shoulder blades to make them look like angels. Yet his reasoning for killing this people is what I liked the most (once again, I’ll avoid revealing it).

While Hugh Dancy does a fine job playing Will Graham, I feel that Mads Mikkelson and Laurence Fishburne steal the show. If you are unaware of Mads Mikkelson, you need to do yourself a favor and watch the best foreign film of 2013 in The Hunt. Mikkelson is methodic and sadistic, yet coherently calm and lucid to the people around him. What makes him frightening isn’t what you find summarized with Anton Chigurh in No Country for Old Men or The Joker in The Dark Knight. There’s nothing flashy with how Hannibal operates, and to be completely honest—we don’t really see in front of the camera committing his deeds, but through flashbacks we begin to see the monster he really is.

I’d also be lying if I could name five shows that have better cinematography than Hannibal. While we are in the Golden Age of Television, most shows haven’t really made themselves notorious or notable with a certain style. In fact, I can only think of Breaking Bad at the moment when it comes to that criteria. Nevertheless, Hannibal definitely belongs up there. Colors are muted, and the general landscape looks completely lifeless. Which makes the red blood stand out even more. Graham’s hallucinations beckon True Detective to a certain extent, though it may lack that grandiose.

Overall I’m not going to go around and trumpet as Hannibal being a terrific television show. The first season simply had too many flaws, yet I’m pretty excited to see where season two leads. The acting and cinematography are top notch, and even some of the crimes and cases truly stand out. Yet the fairly loose narrative and plot structure often lead you wondering if there’s zero consequences to any actions. Season 1 almost feels like a barking dog that doesn’t bite.

3.0/5.0