After 35 Years, Some Who Worked on ‘The Silence of the Lambs’ Are Apologizing for Stupid Reasons

Based Underground ^

[Tench_Coxe]

Thirty-five years after its theatrical release, the creative team behind one of cinema’s most celebrated psychological thrillers is doing something that has become all too common in Hollywood: apologizing for a film that won the industry’s top honors and captivated millions of viewers.

“The Silence of the Lambs,” which hit theaters on Valentine’s Day 1991, became the year’s fifth-highest-grossing title and made history as just the third film to sweep the “big five” Academy Awards: best picture, director, actor, actress, and screenplay. The film starred Jodie Foster as FBI trainee Clarice Starling tracking serial killer Buffalo Bill while consulting with the infamous Hannibal Lecter, played by Anthony Hopkins. Its cultural impact was immediate and enduring, cementing phrases like “It rubs the lotion on its skin” into the American lexicon and establishing Hannibal Lecter as the American Film Institute’s top screen villain.

(snip)

But there’s a larger question at play: should artists apologize for creating compelling, psychologically complex villains? Buffalo Bill was never presented as a hero or role model. He was depicted as precisely what he was meant to be—a deeply disturbed, violent criminal. The film’s protagonist, Clarice Starling, was a groundbreaking female character navigating a male-dominated FBI, and the story’s feminist themes were revolutionary for mainstream cinema at the time.

(snip)

Thirty-five years after its release, “The Silence of the Lambs” continues to be studied in film schools, watched by new generations, and referenced in popular culture. Its lasting impact suggests that most viewers understood exactly what the film was: a gripping psychological thriller with complex characters, not a social commentary on any particular community. The unnecessary apologies say more about our current cultural moment than they do about the film itself.

[Tench_Coxe]

But Andrew Robinson did make a comeback of sorts, playing Garack in the Star Trek franchise Deep Space Nine. His role eas supposed to be a one-off, but his character was popular with the fans and he ended up with a re-occurring role.

[DesertRhino]

Yes, it was so positive. He was a man of actual substance, and not the shallow soul they intended.

[DesertRhino]

Odd comment. Not sure I follow you...

[Rummyfan]

Hey I don’t understand that one either. ??!!??

[Ransomed]

The movie specifically calls him out as not really a transgender weirdo but a confused and crazy homosexual weirdo.

“Over the years, activists and critics have characterized the portrayal as harmful to the transgender community, despite the film explicitly stating that Buffalo Bill is not transgender. In one exchange between Clarice and Hannibal Lecter, the psychiatrist makes clear that Buffalo Bill is not trans, though he may believe himself to be, and that the vast majority of transgender people are nonviolent.”

Freegards

[WhiteHatBobby0701]

The actor is toeing the SAG-AFTRA line. I am seeing so many mandates to “tow the line” of union leaders that it is now evident the actor is simply saying the union line.

[Verginius Rufus]

I never saw the movie, but if “The Silence of the Lambs” should be banned for having a bad role model, the comic strip Andy Capp should be banned so that men won’t think they should get drunk every night at the pub and marry a woman taller than themselves.