Who do you think is scarier, Norman Bates or Hannibal Lecter?
by 
Disturbed in a Jr COAT is so confused
ANSWERS: 17
-
I'd go with Lecter, because he's smarter, thus making him more dangerous. But on the other hand, Bates is more mantally unstable, making him a bigger risk.
-
Hannibal :|
-
Something about Norman Bates... seeming boy-next-door turns crazed serial killer. Hannibal is an ultimate archetype, but with Bates, you're just not expecting it...
-
Lecter is much more frightening, in general. However, whenever I've had to stay at an old, outdated motel, I'm always thinking about the shower scene in Psycho...
-
Hannibal, no contest. Not only do some of the *Methods* he uses make getting stabbed in the shower look like a pleasant mid-morning nookie, but he's much more complicated, which makes him that much more scary. Norman Bates is just crazy. His motives are relatively clinical and easy to understand. Lecter, on the other hand, is intelligent, and his psychosis is complex, you can't just simplify your dealings with him down to "He's a psycho, run like hell!", you have to actually consider the question of *Why*, and ultimately come up with very little adequate answer. I don't know how that dynamic would play out if either one was actually on your tail, but from the perspective of an observer, that element of unknown makes Lecter a helluva lot more frightening.
-
Hannibal Lecter. He's so much more complex.
-
norman bates, he's been following me around...
-
Mr. Lecter--he's very calculating in his methods, extremely intelligent and very calculating in his crimes. Mr. Bates, on the other hand, kills out of need to defend himself, emotionally or physically. However, there is always something compelling about a Hitchcock character.
-
Generally speaking, Hannibal isn't going to kill you unless it's part of a bigger [escape] plan, or if you've wronged him in any way. With Norman's instability, you don't know if or when he'll turn on you.
-
Dr. Lector. Norman is just plain nuts and therefore a bit more predictable in many ways. Hannibal will leave you wondering what he is going to do to you (if anything) and the suspense alone is scary.
-
Lecter. Face it, who wants to get eaten?
-
Hannibal is a little more frightening...both of them are insane, but Hannibal is a whole lot more ''aware'' and plotting. Like he's in tune with his insanity and uses it as a tool instead of being a secondary product of its manifestation, and his actions seem first nature to him, he's very intelligent and efficient. So much so, that he doesn't even seem that crazy...which makes the thought even that much more frightening. While Norman Bates merely follows, blindly, his impulses and is led by his emotional turmoils, it seems his psychological rupture leaves his actions as secondary instead of being his core, and he doesn't enjoy what he does like Lecter does.
-
My italian mother is scarier than both of them put together...;)
-
Their both scary alright no one wants to run into either one of them in a dark alley but that itlian mother is pretty freakin scary
-
I think Norman Bates is scarier. I think I would be scared if Hannibal was angry at me and wanted to eat me. But I like how intelligent and manipulative he is. It's fun to watch him.
-
Jason Vorhees.
-
Hannibal Lecter. When you combine intelligence with being crazy, you truly have "evil genius".
RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC