THE GREEN MILE, 1999
Movie Review

Paul Edgecomb sits in a retirement home trying to escape his past. Seemingly reminding him itself, time takes us back to a period where Edgecomb’s life is surrounded by death. From death however, something greater than life enters his world. Along the corridors of the “Green Mile,” the nickname for Death Row, Edgecomb, a correctional officer, receives an inmate condemned to the electric chair. John Coffey is hulking, gentle, innocent and scared. More so, he’s a man with a gift, and a miracle himself. How could one kill a miracle?

OSCAR nominee for Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor (Duncan), Best Sound, Best Screenplay

CLICK HERE and read Classic Movie Reviews from every year and every genre!

What is WILDsound?

REVIEW:

There’s not much I can say about this film that’s not already been said. I’m also positive that you, who are reading this right now, have seen it, or heard of it, or it’s been recommended to you at some point in your life. Not only because you wouldn’t click on this review otherwise, but because this film has good reason to produce speechlessness in those who have experienced it. It’s a damn good movie.

Yes, its three hours long. Yes, that may seem intimidating; it is for any would-be viewer. I don’t need to convince you that you’ll forget about its length, because it wastes no time immersing you into the story. The Green Mile does not let your mind go until you’ve made it to the end, and when you do, you won’t want to leave. This is a film that is everlasting; one of the few which are capable of staying alive for years to come. This is a classic film.

Nonetheless, the most important factors are not hard to distinguish. One of these is the exceptional and unforgettable performance of two particular actors, among others. Tom Hanks being one and an unknown actor by the name of Michael Clarke Duncan being the other. Surprisingly, Hanks’ performance was not the spotlight of this film. It’s hard to choose between these two performances, as both of them seem to complement each other so perfectly that having to choose is a daunting thought. Hanks provides one of the most profoundly honest performances I’ve seen in dramas, and Duncan’s acting is just superb from beginning to end. It’s his heavy-set frame that seems to get attention in the film industry, but this film is his highlight, and the proof the world has that this man can act.

The film begins in present day, as Paul Edgecomb (Hanks) is an old man in a retirement home, watching an old film on television while several elderly are crowded in front of it. He begins to cry. Every time I look back on that scene, the first of many scenes that hit you hard, I guarantee you’ll feel something. Maybe you’ll get chills, or a lump in your throat. Maybe you’ll even hold back a few tears, but you’ll feel something. Once you watch this film, even just once, it makes you feel something. Particularly, seeing David Morse—who plays a character that emanates a tough, no-nonsense intimidator—have tears in his eyes at the end of the film. That did it for me.

The tear-jerking qualities are not this film’s only quality—far from it. I mentioned before two particular actors, but I’ll confirm for you there’s an ensemble of cast members accompanying them. Some of them are inmates, some of them are officers. Some are kind-hearted, others are malignant and insane. But these characters are complicated. There are those who you can easily label as this or that, but like any well-produced film, we connect. There’s no question of the two protagonists, but when these supporting characters share their emotions with us, it’s an emotional catalyst, if you will; nudge us on in our attachment with the characters, plot and story.

Besides that, there’s that ever-present risk that goes hand-in-hand with adaptations. Is it better? Is it as good? Does it destroy its source material, or complement it? The thing about what Frank Darabont did is that he probably gave Stephen King a vaster fanbase after those two films. Not like King needs it, but this film achieved the title of a medium-blender. Watch this film, and you’ll be inspired to read the book. Read the book—though it’s not my place to say (I, for one, haven’t read it)—and you might find out that you prefer this version over the other. I’ll assume that the third case of this film falling short of the novel’s prestige a rare one, but if that is the case, I’ll also assume it doesn’t fall much.

By the end of it all, I didn’t know what to make of it. Sure, it was quite overwhelming with such an emotional response to a film. I can describe to you why this film deserved what it got, and how you might react after seeing it, but I can’t describe to you why it makes you feel that way. I can describe to you the expertness put into crafting these emotions, or maybe how all the components that were put into this movie worked perfectly to what it wanted to achieve. I can’t tell you, in few words, what this film is, or expresses, or presents. I simply think I won’t find the right ones.

What I can tell you is that you should go see this film. I’m sure you’ve gathered that I’m fond of it. ‘Emotional’ would probably be included in the few words to describe it, if I were forced to. Most likely mixed in with some words of devoted praise and recommendation. The point is The Green Mile is a wonderful film. It’s one of the best dramas I’ve ever seen, with some of the best performances I’ve ever witnessed. It’s Frank Darabont’s (arguably) biggest achievement, if not his second. Maybe both of his King adaptations belong together as his greatest trophy. Whatever the case may be, The Green Mile is an example of why we watch movies. We want to be moved, in some form or another, and this film doesn’t hold back.

SUBMIT your SCREENPLAY Voted #1 screenplay contest in the world!	NEW MOVIE REVIEWS Read Today's POSTED REVIEWS	SEE 1000s of PICTURES Best of photos, images and pics	MOVIES YEAR BY YEAR Pages from 1900 to present

YouTube MySpace Facebook Twitter

The Green Mile