icarus-daedelus said:

You're joking, right? I'm narrowing my eyes at this post just in case.

Click to expand...

NotTheGuyYouKill said:

And I think that the gun that Mason had was empty. Didn't he try to pull the trigger and nothing happened, and then Margot and Alana killed him.

Click to expand...

Opto said:

I think Mason went the wrong direction. He clearly wanted to out do Hannibal, but to really get at Hannibal, you gotta play the opposite of Hannibal's game.

Like, force feed him McDonald's and frozen dinners. He'd be so broken.

Click to expand...

EmiPrime said:

While forcing him to listen to Phil Collins' greatest hits on loop.

Click to expand...

metalslimer said:

Can we declare now this recast was actually a net positive?

Click to expand...

Kuroyume said:

The shot of Hannibal with the Hammer.... Oh yeah

That pig surrogate... HOLY FUCK

Click to expand...

earvcunanan said:

Agreed.

I actually like Chiyoh-san as well.

Click to expand...

NotTheGuyYouKill said:

The conclusion of Chiyoh's arc was fantastic.

Click to expand...

DarkJediKnight said:

As I said, easily the best episode of this season and quite possibly the best episode of the series.

Click to expand...

Monocle said:

This episode is a practically flawless culmination of every earlier development. It's great enough to be the series finale. I'm so glad it wasn't.

Click to expand...

icarus-daedelus said:

You're joking, right? I'm narrowing my eyes at this post just in case.

Click to expand...

BobbyRoberts said:

Hey now. I bet Hannibal would appreciate In the Air Tonight.

Maybe even Sussudio.

edit: Hell, I can see him in his pen, late at night, listening to Against All Odds, a single tear rolling down his cheek as he realizes it's the story of him and Will...

Click to expand...

EmiPrime said:

No. Please stop.

Click to expand...

Leeness said:

That break up and subsequent stalking-ex behavior. <3

Click to expand...

Anton Sugar said:

Hannibal/Mads had so many great "hero" shots but the hammer, and him cutting himself free (to Reitzell's AMAZING score) gave me chills AND a huge smile.

Sorry for the tumblr gifs:

[/IMG]

Click to expand...

The One Who Knocks said:

My interpretation of the line is that it is very much literal, but almost certainly not suggestive of what you've suggested.

(spoilers for up to this episode)

Spoiler

First, there is the very clear "literal" aspect of the line. Hannibal is directly commenting upon the reliability of Chiyoh, and her consistency. We know that for an exceptionally long time, Chiyoh was the guardian to Mischa's alleged killer. She was bound to this man not out of necessity, but out of her own morality which forbade her killing him. While ultimately she did kill Mischa's killer, this was largely as a result of Will Graham's interference, and was not her intended outcome. We also know that she had a degree of friendship with Hannibal. Throughout the season, we got a variety of suggestions as to what her motivations were; was she here to kill Hannibal after Will Graham suggested Hannibal killed Mischa as all sorrows can be borne through a fairytale (not the exact quote, I know), was she indebted to Will for 'freeing' her, was she going to kill Hannibal, would she assist in his arrest, would she help Hannibal, why was she doing what she was doing, etc. It is in this episode that we discover it very simply; she is (as Hannibal mentions) obsessively and successfully driven by a debt to Mischa and little else. She watches over Hannibal and will serve as his protector so that she can get an answer to the doubts that Will Graham implanted within her, and so that she is able to 'honour' Mischa. DuMaurier comments in the previous episode that she worries that Chiyoh is Hannibal's greatest mistake, and the reason is not because of how damaged she is, or how clever she is, but in how obsessively she will patiently hunt down what it is she seeks with a reckless disregard for her own personal safety (note how she carries around a sniper, how she waltzes with a drive, how she takes action even in public places or against connected individuals, yet doesn't intervene when Jack Crawford appears in Florence despite it being a good moment to catch Hannibal, she doesn't cause collateral damage unnecessarily, and doesn't kill when unnecessary). The name "Chiyoh" means eternal, and her focused, driven nature is something "stable" that Hannibal can always rely on.

Then there is the clearly metaphorical meaning. It doesn't, as you've suggested, imply behind bars, as at this stage, Hannibal has not turned himself in, nor does he have any intention of doing so. "Iron" and "Silver" are the key words in this statement, so it's important to consider what these could represent. Let's look at the word "iron". It has connotations of strength, endurity, hardness, coldness, and resilient. It won't bend, and it won't break. It's reliable. Yet it's also relatively cheap, and associated with many cheap materials ("iron pan" versus "stainless steel pan"). Chiyoh, herself, is somebody we know to be quite cold, rigid, and strong in her pursuit. She comes from a modest background (handmaiden to Lady Murasaki, lives in what appears to be a very self-sufficient and basic manner, lacks much apparent extravagance. Yet simultaneously, there is "silver", a much softer, malleable metal that's associated with a much richer lifestyle and is more refined. Chiyoh, herself, evokes a very clear sense of refinement below the surface. We can see in the cellar for the alleged murderer of Mischa that she has a refined taste of food, and (one presumes due to her association with Lecter) a similarly good selection of wine which is associated with a very upscale lifestyle.

Chiyoh, unlike many others in the show, has a great 'balance' in how she lives. Unlike DuMaurier, Margot, Mason, Alana, and many other of the show's characters who have a high class sense of taste, who live in modern homes, with modern lifestyles, and clearly rely upon wealth a great deal, Chiyoh is content with appreciating and balancing simplicity (iron) and a refined taste (silver); she perhaps lives the most reasonable lifestyle of all of those who've encountered Lecter in terms of balancing the cost of their lifestyle, because while yes, she does have a lot, and has exquisite taste, she doesn't flaunt it and appears to live a fairly simple life which she has refined to a great precision (even the way she kills, with a sniper, is suggestive of this).

Beyond the wealth, we could look a bit more at the concept of her in relation to being a victim of Dr. Lecter, and her malleability. Will Graham is extremely malleable, he can place himself in the mind of others with a great deal of accuracy and can understand there viewpoint. While he's very clever, and an excellent companion of Dr. Lecter's, this malleability and cleverness presents an issue to both of them in how it makes him very unpredictable and unstable. While Lecter very much enjoys and relishes this, and makes Will one of his closest friends, it's also something that makes their friendship one of escalation. His plan adapts continuously based upon what's happening, and he's a treasured friend of Lecter's. DuMaurier, on the otherhand, is somebody very, very rigid. She too is very clever, and also can analyse other's viewpoints well, but lives a strict lifestyle and is unwilling to take what she thinks to be very 'direct' actions. She is very much (in her eyes) an observer. She always has a plan, thinks ahead, and sticks to this plan (her routine this season, for example, was very rigid), but rarely carries out any actions herself even if she is willing to manipulate them as required. It helps in that she also has quite a cold, unflinching (professionally, anyway) personality. While she struggled maintaining her sense of self with Lecter, and it did waiver a few times, we as a viewer never really saw it dissipate. She is one who has interacted with Lecter, yet managed to maintain a very good balance of her traits. She adapts to situations, and shifts her plans, yet still sticks to a general idea and knows where she is going. The sensation that her interactive with Lecter was a positive one is also implicit in both of their traits (a speculative idea that Chiyoh teaching Lecter hunting prowess, Lecter teaching Chiyoh in manipulation and more refined mannerisms perhaps).

Of course, the metaphorical reading can be taken in many ways, it has a very broad range as it just relies upon the balance in her character in light of this episode. Nothing is solid, and nothing necessarily has to relate to another aspect, but I've supplied some suggestions on where an interpretation of the line may be taken. It is, I feel, the literal meaning of the line, that she is a very stable element in Dr. Lecter's life and is an individual who can always be counted on (her motivations, and otherwise), that is probably meant to be clearly taken from it if nothing else.

I hope that helps in some ways, as it's not the easiest of lines.

Click to expand...

NotTheGuyYouKill said:

Hannibal and the Great Red Dragon promo

Holy fuck.

Click to expand...

Turin747 said:

Indeed. He's so hopelessly in love with Will that he'll destroy his own livelihood just to plant himself in a situation where he hopes Will is tempted to eventually come back to him.

Click to expand...

NotTheGuyYouKill said:

Click to expand...

Solo said:

Finally a great episode. Shame the first half of the season was largely a waste.

Click to expand...

Monocle said:

The way you persist in discrediting this season's sensitive exploration of trauma is bothersome, but not surprising. I see a connection to a trend in modern audiences, who are so used to perfunctory stylized violence that they have no patience for a contemplative mode of storytelling that represents a serious attempt to crystallize grief, to represent it authentically by submerging the viewer in the mental states of victims. It's easy to mistake all the abstraction involved in conveying keen emotional pain for empty, indulgent pretension. I suspect Fuller's main reason for characterizing Hannibal as pretentious and arty is to embrace those labels before they can be deployed by a sneering public to further discredit a show they've already dismissed.

Hannibal accomplished something daring and sadly rare in the first half of Season 3: it rejected the trivialization of violence in modern media by treating its effects with appropriate gravity. I'd go further and suggest the show has tried to take this angle from the very first episode. The difference from those early days is now that Hannibal has established its identity and doesn't need to be dialed down and diluted to woo a broad audience, it can commit to the theme of trauma fully. And it's a good thing it did, or Episode 7 would have lacked the impact that can only be achieved after a slow simmer.

Click to expand...

Monocle said:

The way you persist in discrediting this season's sensitive exploration of trauma is bothersome, but not surprising. I see a connection to a trend in modern audiences, who are so used to perfunctory stylized violence that they have no patience for a contemplative mode of storytelling that represents a serious attempt to crystallize grief, to represent it authentically by submerging the viewer in the mental states of victims. It's easy to mistake all the abstraction involved in conveying keen emotional pain for empty, indulgent pretension. I suspect Fuller's main reason for characterizing Hannibal as pretentious and arty is to embrace those labels before they can be deployed by a sneering public to further discredit a show they've already dismissed.

Hannibal accomplished something daring and sadly rare in the first half of Season 3: it rejected the trivialization of violence in modern media by treating its effects with appropriate gravity. I'd go further and suggest the show has tried to take this angle from the very first episode. The difference from those early days is now that Hannibal has established its identity and doesn't need to be dialed down and diluted to woo a broad audience, it can commit to the theme of trauma fully. And it's a good thing it did, or Episode 7 would have lacked the impact that can only be achieved after a slow simmer.

Click to expand...

Monocle said:

The way you persist in discrediting this season's sensitive exploration of trauma is bothersome, but not surprising. I see a connection to a trend in modern audiences, who are so used to perfunctory stylized violence that they have no patience for a contemplative mode of storytelling that represents a serious attempt to crystallize grief, to represent it authentically by submerging the viewer in the mental states of victims. It's easy to mistake all the abstraction involved in conveying keen emotional pain for empty, indulgent pretension. I suspect Fuller's main reason for characterizing Hannibal as pretentious and arty is to embrace those labels before they can be deployed by a sneering public to further discredit a show they've already dismissed.

Hannibal accomplished something daring and sadly rare in the first half of Season 3: it rejected the trivialization of violence in modern media by treating its effects with appropriate gravity. I'd go further and suggest the show has tried to take this angle from the very first episode. The difference from those early days is now that Hannibal has established its identity and doesn't need to be dialed down and diluted to woo a broad audience, it can commit to the theme of trauma fully. And it's a good thing it did, or Episode 7 would have lacked the impact that can only be achieved after a slow simmer.

Click to expand...

Monocle said:

The way you persist in discrediting this season's sensitive exploration of trauma is bothersome, but not surprising. I see a connection to a trend in modern audiences, who are so used to perfunctory stylized violence that they have no patience for a contemplative mode of storytelling that represents a serious attempt to crystallize grief, to represent it authentically by submerging the viewer in the mental states of victims. It's easy to mistake all the abstraction involved in conveying keen emotional pain for empty, indulgent pretension. I suspect Fuller's main reason for characterizing Hannibal as pretentious and arty is to embrace those labels before they can be deployed by a sneering public to further discredit a show they've already dismissed.

Hannibal accomplished something daring and sadly rare in the first half of Season 3: it rejected the trivialization of violence in modern media by treating its effects with appropriate gravity. I'd go further and suggest the show has tried to take this angle from the very first episode. The difference from those early days is now that Hannibal has established its identity and doesn't need to be dialed down and diluted to woo a broad audience, it can commit to the theme of trauma fully. And it's a good thing it did, or Episode 7 would have lacked the impact that can only be achieved after a slow simmer.

Click to expand...

Monocle said:

The way you persist in discrediting this season's sensitive exploration of trauma is bothersome, but not surprising. I see a connection to a trend in modern audiences, who are so used to perfunctory stylized violence that they have no patience for a contemplative mode of storytelling that represents a serious attempt to crystallize grief, to represent it authentically by submerging the viewer in the mental states of victims. It's easy to mistake all the abstraction involved in conveying keen emotional pain for empty, indulgent pretension. I suspect Fuller's main reason for characterizing Hannibal as pretentious and arty is to embrace those labels before they can be deployed by a sneering public to further discredit a show they've already dismissed.

Hannibal accomplished something daring and sadly rare in the first half of Season 3: it rejected the trivialization of violence in modern media by treating its effects with appropriate gravity. I'd go further and suggest the show has tried to take this angle from the very first episode. The difference from those early days is now that Hannibal has established its identity and doesn't need to be dialed down and diluted to woo a broad audience, it can commit to the theme of trauma fully. And it's a good thing it did, or Episode 7 would have lacked the impact that can only be achieved after a slow simmer.

Click to expand...

Grizzlyjin said:

One of the best episodes of the series. It felt like a movie. Beautifully done.

Click to expand...

Veelk said:

Jesus, this show. It's so incredibly rare that I have to stop and marvel at the sheer grotesquery it is capable of producing. I totally called it being a pig, but in my mind, I was like "She's on the farm? But wait, the only woman other than Margo is Alana, and it's definitely not her, so....oh god. No, he wouldn't, not even him....oh god, he totally would. What the fuck, Fuller."

While I definitely agree with much of the praise given to this show, I always found Margo's actions slightly unbelievable in the sense that she did not murder Mason long before this. Granted, I'm sure she was afraid of her brother for a long time, but it's amazing it took him stealing her uterus and placing it inside a pig with her unborn child to motivate her. He was one of the most ridiculously abusive siblings in all of fiction. Joffrey Lannister would see what he did and cry for him to have some damn empathy. So the fact that she was still abiding him while he was crippled came off as a bit odd to me.

I'm going to miss this show when its gone. Regardless of anything you can say against it, there is absolutely nothing like it on TV, and there might never be again. It's a psychological horror that I've never seen and a far greater realization of Harris' character than he ever penned himself.

BTW, can someone inform me of how many more episodes there are? I'm getting conflicting stories from friends.

Click to expand...

Rez said:

I don't want to be a damper on the people who really like season three, but the mention of Will's dogs caused a weird wave of nostalgia for me and I realised that I really, really miss season one Hannibal.

Click to expand...

Monocle said:

The way you persist in discrediting this season's sensitive exploration of trauma is bothersome, but not surprising. I see a connection to a trend in modern audiences, who are so used to perfunctory stylized violence that they have no patience for a contemplative mode of storytelling that represents a serious attempt to crystallize grief, to represent it authentically by submerging the viewer in the mental states of victims. It's easy to mistake all the abstraction involved in conveying keen emotional pain for empty, indulgent pretension. I suspect Fuller's main reason for characterizing Hannibal as pretentious and arty is to embrace those labels before they can be deployed by a sneering public to further discredit a show they've already dismissed.

Hannibal accomplished something daring and sadly rare in the first half of Season 3: it rejected the trivialization of violence in modern media by treating its effects with appropriate gravity. I'd go further and suggest the show has tried to take this angle from the very first episode. The difference from those early days is now that Hannibal has established its identity and doesn't need to be dialed down and diluted to woo a broad audience, it can commit to the theme of trauma fully. And it's a good thing it did, or Episode 7 would have lacked the impact that can only be achieved after a slow simmer.

Click to expand...

Solo said:

Please, tell me more about how I don't get it and am merely a plebe looking for instant gratification. I do so love that.

Click to expand...