Milky Dragon

Will spanking you when you've been bad...

he feels bad and soothes you through the whole thing

"I know, baby, I know. Shh... I'm sorry, sugar..."

that's not his fireplace, that's Hannibal's:

I think most people were extremely satisfied with season 1-3. Now of course there is a huge time gap to build expectations. But I feel like for example what people would have "wanted to happen" in the first three seasons were along the lines of "please kiss and be happy😭" lmao, which we were largely aware would ruin the magic and part of the complexity of the relationship, at least in any moment in the story up to the end of season 3. And similarly for season 4 we're like "I want them to cuddle in bed and be at peace and have bloody sex" which also we are aware would narratively be a bad choice and would not make sense for them at this point in the story (though with more time passing more of these wishes arise). Sort of the typical complexity vs. comfort longing, where the relief from tension and pain is in a sense what you long for, but that longing and discomfort itself is part of the enjoyment of how complex the relationship is (this is not any sort of psychological analysis I'm just speaking as a lover of fiction).

Hugh and Mads wanted to kiss, they were "up for it" but the very specific thing Bryan said was "too in the face, guys", which makes me think he would stall a kiss or other explicit/physical demonstrations of romantic intimacy, and might've even avoided it at all if so many years and fan expectations hadn't been raised. He seems to really dislike the idea of committing to a narrative, which is extremely common in the industry he's in because it's safer.

It's not a show that's only for queer audiences if the couple never truly "gets there", which is exactly why we have some straight cis men who enjoy the show and don't recognize or deny the romance between hannigram. That was the network's/Bryan's purpose. They don't commit outside of fan spaces because it risks audience engagement. So yes, he's very "one of us" but that's almost the same concept of JK Rowling saying Dumbledore was gay after the books were finished. Of course, in the show there is a kind of confirmation from Hannibal's side that he's in love with Will, but still...That's far from just committing to the romance and making it things explicit.

From what I observed, a lot of fans, specially the new comers, view their dynamic through a "teenage girls in love" kind of way. There's a huge lack of nuance and a whole lot of projection, such as seeing Will as sexually closed off or awkward without realizing he's a self aware attractive cis western white male? Who has engaged in sex in canon and only didn't engage more because he was rejected (Alana and Chyioh)? The fans have sexual problems and project that unto Will, not as a fun headcanon but as an actual interpretation of the character, which seems very strange but it's a common trope, apparently.

The same with thinking Hannibal is beyond certain atrocities when he's proven he's pretty much not above much. What he did to Will was very rapey but some fans resist acknowledging that simply for their own preferences.

Saying Will was happy before Hannibal simply because they romanticized his farm life aesthetic. Another extremely common thing in that part of the fandom (which seems to be the majority since these posts are on tiktok and get more engagement than nuanced posts on here) is the total projection of Will's and Abigail's relationship as if he truly loved her and if they truly had any type of bond, when Will never even knew her really and she was put off and uninterested in him.

I think most people were extremely satisfied with season 1-3. Now of course there is a huge time gap to build expectations. But I feel like for example what people would have "wanted to happen" in the first three seasons were along the lines of "please kiss and be happy😭" lmao, which we were largely aware would ruin the magic and part of the complexity of the relationship, at least in any moment in the story up to the end of season 3. And similarly for season 4 we're like "I want them to cuddle in bed and be at peace and have bloody sex" which also we are aware would narratively be a bad choice and would not make sense for them at this point in the story (though with more time passing more of these wishes arise). Sort of the typical complexity vs. comfort longing, where the relief from tension and pain is in a sense what you long for, but that longing and discomfort itself is part of the enjoyment of how complex the relationship is (this is not any sort of psychological analysis I'm just speaking as a lover of fiction).

Hugh and Mads wanted to kiss, they were "up for it" but the very specific thing Bryan said was "too in the face, guys", which makes me think he would stall a kiss or other explicit/physical demonstrations of romantic intimacy, and might've even avoided it at all if so many years and fan expectations hadn't been raised. He seems to really dislike the idea of committing to a narrative, which is extremely common in the industry he's in because it's safer.

It's not a show that's only for queer audiences if the couple never truly "gets there", which is exactly why we have some straight cis men who enjoy the show and don't recognize or deny the romance between hannigram. That was the network's/Bryan's purpose. They don't commit outside of fan spaces because it risks audience engagement. So yes, he's very "one of us" but that's almost the same concept of JK Rowling saying Dumbledore was gay after the books were finished. Of course, in the show there is a kind of confirmation from Hannibal's side that he's in love with Will, but still...That's far from just committing to the romance and making it things explicit.

And because I know it will be asked, I'll try to answer:

Saying you had a great relationship with your father doesn't mean you don't have "daddy issues" because “daddy issues” in popular language rarely refers to whether someone’s father was overtly absent, abusive, or visibly harmful. It points to the subtle ways paternal dynamics shape internal expectations around validation, authority, protection, intimacy, and self-worth...many of which can exist even within relationships that are consciously remembered as loving or “good.”

A person may genuinely love their father and still have unresolved patterns formed through emotional distance, conditional approval, overprotection, idealization, parentification, inconsistency, or even simply the unconscious pressure to maintain that “good” image.

Psychological imprints are rarely determined only by surface satisfaction, they are shaped by what relational structures taught someone to seek, fear, perform, or suppress. For example, a father who was supportive yet emotionally unavailable might still create an internal blueprint where affection feels tied to achievement rather than vulnerability. A highly protective father could unintentionally shape attraction toward dominant or stabilizing figures. Even positive paternal bonds can produce idealized standards that later distort romantic expectations. Memory also tends to preserve broad emotional conclusions (“I had a good dad”) while bypassing smaller formative nuances that influenced attachment.

Hannibal tends to represent an intense, consuming, hyper-competent presence...someone who sees deeply, exerts control, and offers a form of seductive psychological containment. For those who associate maternal absence, inconsistency, engulfment, or unmet nurturing with desire, Hannibal can register as a distorted fulfillment of that void, a dangerous, attentive, consuming, and overwhelmingly present. His appeal is in the fantasy of being fully perceived and chosen by an all-powerful figure who can both destroy and hold.

Will, by contrast, embodies emotional damage, sensitivity, instability, and latent protectiveness. He can evoke paternal wounds because he presents as someone fractured yet deeply feeling, often caught between withdrawal and connection. Those drawn to him may resonate with the desire to reach, save, soften, or finally secure emotional reciprocity from someone who feels unavailable or difficult to access. In this sense, attraction can be around familiar psychological blueprints, where desire attaches itself to unresolved internal patterns rather than surface-level preference alone.

Hannibal tends to represent an intense, consuming, hyper-competent presence...someone who sees deeply, exerts control, and offers a form of seductive psychological containment. For those who associate maternal absence, inconsistency, engulfment, or unmet nurturing with desire, Hannibal can register as a distorted fulfillment of that void, a dangerous, attentive, consuming, and overwhelmingly present. His appeal is in the fantasy of being fully perceived and chosen by an all-powerful figure who can both destroy and hold.

Will, by contrast, embodies emotional damage, sensitivity, instability, and latent protectiveness. He can evoke paternal wounds because he presents as someone fractured yet deeply feeling, often caught between withdrawal and connection. Those drawn to him may resonate with the desire to reach, save, soften, or finally secure emotional reciprocity from someone who feels unavailable or difficult to access. In this sense, attraction can be around familiar psychological blueprints, where desire attaches itself to unresolved internal patterns rather than surface-level preference alone.