HANNIBAL (TV Series) - Page 4

Anyway, another stunningly shot episode; I agree on the slow-pacing which is pertinent to the nature of the show, those purposeful lingering shots whether they be of the 'food' being chopped, sliced, peeled to the drips of liquid, be it blood or even water that pulsates with a rhythm of its own, and makes you churn in the stomach- a good way to put you off eating for a while

Richard Armitage, (soon to be seen in Hannibal) the guy who makes me weak at the knees. also got an award but for the Hobbit

He's so gorge.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bo9xOxMU9LM[/YOUTUBE]

And thankfully Hugh won, I was also rooting for both Mads and his tie but something is better than nothing. Also Mads won previously, so it's okay.

I agree, it is unapologetically unhurried and permits space for things to manifest of their own accord; it is by far the most original and creative serials on tv. I really like how seamless some scenes are as they quite literally sometimes bleed into one another, its a clever way of conveying the cryptic, obscure like nature, and the sense of a line blurred between the real world and the imaginative world, which furthers the absurdity of it all although what is happening to Will, Hannibal and co is very much real.

NBC are insane to let slip such a gem of a serial; lets see which sensible enough tv network will pick it up again. We need more serials like this, Hannibal is so underrated for what it is.

So which more shows, you watching?

Indeed, its rich on many levels and hinges on the fantastical, I find many of the scenes breath-taking even the most grotesque, disturbing scenes manage to emanate beauty, albeit a peculiar kind of beauty Bryan Fuller is a visionary when it comes to tv directors, one of a kind by far, he is the real mastermind behind the show, and then you have such a strong set of actors who bring it alive.

I'm also a Game of Thrones fan if you haven't already guessed. Though with this show, much of it relies on the visceral response and often skims the surface to get there, whereas with Hannibal, they manage to transcend the superficial, delving into deeper stuff whilst at the same time inducing that visceral engagement from viewers.

I also watched Mad Men, it aired its last season about a month ago, the acting in there is top-notch and the authenticity of the 60s era is captured so well, you really feel like you've stepped back in time.

Going in the complete opposite direction I am currently watching a sci-fi tv British show called 'Humans'. Its based in a world where robots uncannily alike to humans in look are being sold to people in order to help with the mechanical/everyday aspects of life and work, and of these robots are a rare few, a new hybrid, with developed 'feelings' equating them to the level of a thinking, feeling human. Its incredibly interesting show that calls up so many ideas and questions of what consciousness is, what human-ness is, and gives rise to deep-seated fears that the human species is gradually moving into obliteration by these 'robotic' counterparts, that maybe human purpose will become extinguished altogether once these highly advanced robots have caught on, we may be the one turning into robots, empty of meaning because our roles are being filled by the new age of robot species.

And damn I am a John Slattery fan... Before opting Hannibal, I had Mad Men, Walking Dead and Bates Motel in mind. I am also Marvel fan, so currently watching there shows also. They have great ensemble cast.