Why did Hannibal Lecter kiss Clarice at the end of the film "Hannibal"? Was he in love with Clarice?
Hannibal is obsessed with Clarice - he points out that he has travelled half way around the world to watch her run, and wonders why she won’t now let him run. He finds her intriguing - how can she still be struggling to capture him for the FBI, who have betrayed her trust and ruined her career. In the film, he clearly loves her and hopes she will reciprocate - “would you ever say to me ‘stop - if you love me, stop!’” When she replies “never in a thousand years” he is disappointed and angry but still impressed - “that’s my girl” he says as he leans forward to bite her, then reconsiders and kisses her instead, which gives her the chance to slip handcuffs onto him.The book is quite different. Hollywood was not willing to countenance a romance between a law officer and (as they saw it) a psychopathic serial killer. But in the novel, the relationships are far more complex: Hannibal hopes Clarice could provide a position in the world for Mischa, his sister, who was eaten by Nazi collaborators in the war. Clarice suggests an alternative: Mischa can live through him, Hannibal, instead, and “she” and Clarice can be like sisters. Remembering Hannibal’s question to Senator Martin (in Silence of the lambs), she asks if he was breastfed, and if he ever felt that Mischa had made him give up the breast when she was born. Well, he won’t have to give up this one: she offers him her breast, with a warm drop of Chateau d’Yquem suspended from the nipple. He eats it, but not as a cannibal; as a child, or as a lover.Unlike the film, they presumably live happily ever after.My cannibal film blog is at www.thecannibalguy.com
Serious question for Kingdom Hearts fans(especially those who are familiar with Organization XIII)?
First, let me say, you are thinking way to much about this. It is just a video game after all. However, I agree with you on your theory. I believe it is residual memeories or feelings that are left over from the person before they became a heartless. Think of any other situation where a good person was taken over by bad. Darth Vader is a good example. In the end there was still some good buried deep inside him. Same with someoen who has become a heartless. Their personalities and there ability to care and feel have not been removed but simply buried by darkness. So, there are still able to peek out every now and then. hence the reason Org. 13 keeps such a tight grip on them once they have turned for fear that they could always go back the other way. A heartless' heart has not been physically removed. It is simply a metaphor for the fact that their good side has been buried by darkness.
What do military historians think of the tactical decisions made during Battle of the Bastards by Jon Snow and Ramsay Bolton?
It was so stupid it hurt.First they devise a plan to use an encirclement trap on the Boltons. Sansa even warns him that Ramsey's not that bloody stupid, that Rickon is as good as dead and that whatever he does he should not dance to Ramsey's tune....and then Jon goes and throws it all out the window.He falls for Ramsey's trap, hook, line and sinker.He fails to advance his bowmen to just outside the range of Ramsey's bowmen. They even had conveniently placed distance markers. (That's what the flayed and burning people were. Psychological warfare...and distance markers.) So Jon's archers were pretty much useless, as they could - at best - fire on their own people.He fails to give Wun-Wun a bow. You know. One of the big ones the giants used when they attacked the Wall. Basically a portable ballista. The thing that can manage to shoot all the way up the kilometer-high Wall and still manage to skewer multiple people. As soon as Rickon started running he could have just had gone "Yo, Wun-Wun! Would you please put one of those small trees through that asshole taking potshots at my brother?" *Meaty thump* "Thanks, buddy"And why the fuck doesn't he have a shield with him?But the most bloody stupid decision they made was to meet the Bolton's forces in open combat. If you have less then half the manpower of your enemy, and most of those skirmishers, to boot, you don't meet the enemy in open battle.So what to do instead? Why, Guerilla warfare, of course! You take your Wildlings (sorry, "Free Folk") who are supposed to be good at raiding, ambushes, living off the land in winter and generally being stealthy and have them pick at the enemy whenever they find him in the open.Holding Winterfell doesn't mean a bloody thing if you can't leave it without loosing men.Now, I admit it would be hard to out-Ramsey Ramsey, but you could listen to your damn sister and use his cruelty against him. Incite revolts. Make Ramsey look weak and afraid. Go after the traitor lords one by one, starting with Karstark. Show the people who really rules the north.Edit: I have an addendum on this. Everyone, myself included, was irritated at Ramsey's decision to shoot his own cavalry.But the thing is...they likely weren't his cavalry. They were Stannis' men. The ones that deserted him after he burned his daughter. Getting rid of them - or at least not caring about their lifes - is somewhat understandable.
Please help me answer some questions about elephants!?
please answer these questions1.Describe how and elephant moves (fast slow, what structures or features does it have to enable it to move?2.How does an elephant's movement help it survive? Explain3.What types of food does an elephant eat?4.How often does an elephant need to eat?5.Describe an elephants digestive system or organs. 6.Does an elephant expend a lot of energy each day? explain.7.How large is it as an adult?8.What stages does it go through from birth to adulthood9.What is the life span? 10.What is the average life expectancy?11.What attracts it? How does it respond?12.How does it protect itself from enemies who are its enemies?13.How does it find a mate, is there competition is ther courting14.describe birth process15.what is the climate like where it lives 16.what body structures or features does it have to survive in its environment17.what is unique about it that has allowed its species to survive over long periods of time 18.how does it interact w/ 2 other organisms thanx!
Star Trek fans: are you excited about Discovery?
Mixed feelings. I guess, as a lifelong Trekkie, I am happy and grateful to have any new Trek at all — including Voyager and Enterprise. This will be no exception.But the industry-pertinent news has been horrible. Truly horrible. They release a teaser trailer, using a 40-yr-old McQuarrie artistic concept, then hastily backpedal, saying the trailer was “premature” and that the starship concept “will be refined and redesigned” for its actual on-screen appearance. They announce Bryan Fuller as creative helmsman (which surely pleased longtime Fuller fans), suggesting a radically different look/feel/approach in the spirit of Hannibal or The Amazing Screw-On Head, then Fuller purportedly withdraws to a distant co-producer role, before (mostly) exiting the franchise. The series is projected for January 2017; this then slips to May 2017, and now some indeterminate period post-May 2017 “which is okay, because streaming services shouldn’t feel obligated by traditional release dates.” This doesn’t bespeak a consistent creative direction or amicable efforts behind the curtain.The cast is pleasingly diverse — maybe even to the point where it feels like they’re there mostly for the sake of ‘diversity,’ but let’s choose to view that as a good thing, rather than a token gesture — and the $6M-$7M episodic budget certainly seems like some awe-inspiring CGI and production values should be possible. If the worst case is a vaguely-soap-opera-esque ‘Sweet Valley High in Space’ project, with beautiful artistic visuals, cinematography, and score… well, we can live with that.