The Green Mile

Rating:
Summary: The Green Mile - Michael Duncan Rocks!
Review: Awesome movie. AWESOME JOHN COFFEY! MICHAEL DUNCAN DESERVED MORE RECOGNITION FOR HIS CONTRIBUTION TO THIS MOVIE. Couldn't (didn't want to) move for the entire length. "Oh, my ..." went through my mind a dozen times. The "transfer" scenes shocked my system and the flashback scenes were very surprising and portrayed well. The story was very interesting and ALL the actors chosen with perfection (even the mouse). I would implore parents to enforce the (R) rating this movie has been given and tell everyone over the age of 18 DON'T MISS THIS MOVIE !!

Rating:
Summary: Fireworks!
Review: This show makes you feel. I loved it! It was a perfect blend of the old stories of bad against good, but with a twist. I almost always think that Hollywood adds too much vulgarity, but in this case, the "bad parts" were a necessary part of the show to make it true to life. This is a keeper.

Rating:
Summary: Sleeping is an Option
Review: You'll feel those old "Important Movie Blues" while watching this heavy-handed adaptation of Stephen King's best-selling novel. You also might start humming tunes from "Song of the South" while witnessing the movie's viscerally racist, "Step 'n' Fetch It" portrayal of John Coffey, a black prisoner on death row who's directed to be almost slavishly devoted to that big-time movie cracker, Tom Hanks (who looks to have ingested a few too many milkshakes these days).

Unbelievably long and tedious, with elements of magic, religion and practically anything else within reach, this is very much a lesser Stephen King adaptation. If you still have the need, try "Carrie" or "The Dead Zone," both of which hold up remarkably well.

Rating:
Summary: A Fine Movie.
Review: The only criticism of this fine piece of work is that it is rather long, being over three hours long. But the story is fascinating nonetheless, humourous for much of the time, but moving also, especially at the climax. There are even some quite scary scenes in the film, especially the flash-backs to the murder of the two young girls. Michael Duncan was brilliant as the huge booming but gentle giant, John Coffey. And of course, Tom Hanks was superlative. There are few characters in the plot, but that enables the viewer to get to know them. Add to that the fact that most of the film was set in death row in the same large hall, and you get quite cosey. Despite this though, you don't sit back and fall asleep, this is certainly a film to keep you watching, and a fine one at that.

Rating:
Summary: WONDERFUL!
Review: This is a total touching story and I think it is one of Tom Hanks most powerful preformances! Perfect for both men and women to watch together and both fal in love with The Green Mile.

Rating:
Summary: maybe not as good as the book, but still a great film
Review: Many people complaign about how long this movie is. It ma not be quite as good as the book but the reason is definately NOT the length. I have to say that over all the movie does a good job of portraying the book. The only reason I do not think it matches up with the book, is the conclusion. In the end of the book, King makes some great points that are not brough up in the film.

To me, what makes it worth the length, is that this is the kind of story where you can't have the full experience without enough detail. Unless you really get to know the characters you can not have the full emotions. Though most people may not agree with me, I think the movie that really needed to be shortened was Titanic. Beg your pardon, but I though that movie sunk. What really made it any good was the sinking of the ship. And the beginning did not do much to lead up to that. However, in the case of The Green Mile the beginning helped to add the needed emphasis on the end.

So, is The Green Mile long, slow, and not maching up to the book. Yes. Is it a good film? Without a single shred of doubt!

Rating:
Summary: Superb movie, King at his best!
Review: Well, most of the other reviews say it best. This movie is a lot like Shawshank, and if you liked that movie, this is pretty much a sure bet. I think Green Mile is a bit better in some ways, and less in others. There is a more supernatural element in this one that does require some suspension of belief. But it is so well done, it is a small stretch for most people. The characters are superb. Tom Hanks in particular I felt was just wonderful in this movie. But he was just the best in a whole cast of great actors and actresses.

There are some scenes that definitely are not for the faint of heart. The executions are not an easy thing to watch, and while I won't ruin the ending for anyone, I will say this is a movie that really tears out your heart. I think that's a great thing, that you are so emotionally caught up in the action, it's hard to stand sometimes. But some people (my mom for one!) want every movie to have a fairy tale ending.

Overall, an excellent movie, easily one of the best of the year, and one that I personally will want for my library.

Rating:
Summary: A BITTER DISAPPOINTMENT
Review: Fast on the heels of Frank Darabont's truly magnificent sleeper "The Shawshank Redemption" comes this ridiculous mishmash of sentimentality called "The Green Mile." A guy by the name of Nadav (below) makes a strong case for condemning this piece of trash, and I can't help but agree with him. (Turns out Nadav's a fan of "The Big Lebowski" -- a work of pure genius, but I digress ...) William Goldman -- a journalistic idol of mine -- wrote some months before the release of "The Green Mile" that he'd seen Darabont's screenplay, and declared it brilliant. Why, Bill, why? Why is "The Green Mile" brilliant? The characterizations are so weak as to be barely recognizable as flesh-and-blood human beings. Take the prison wardens, who are all (with one exception) model citizens, wonderful spokespeople for tolerance and humanity. You just gotta love these guys; they're simply too good to be true. And THAT precisely is their problem. I'm not buying them for a second. The one guy I am ALMOST buying is the immature sadistic, racist, creep of a warden, painted here as being nothing less than 100% evil. Not 50% evil, not 80% evil. But 100% evil. Is that realistic? Is it? Does this guy have even a single redeeming feature? Nope, not one. So I'm not buying this guy either. But what about Tom Hanks -- surely he's playing a real character, surely. Sorry. He's as wooden as the rest. Perhaps even more so, except for one BRILLIANT exception. He suffers from severe recurring urinary tract infections. PRESTO! Suddenly we have a small cause to celebrate: the guy is human afterall. (I even turned to my wife during the movie and remarked how impressed I was to see a Hollywood lead with a faulty schlong!) But, of course, we find out later that the only reason he suffers urinary infections is SO THAT HE CAN MIRACULOUSLY BE CURED. Bummer. It was too good to last; there had to be a catch. And so a few scenes pass and then Hanks is cured by a semi-retarded innocent black christ figure, before the story limps on for another few hours. Whoah! What did I just say? Semi-retarded innocent black christ figure. Why, God, why, did he have to be ALL these things rolled into one, WHY? Mmm, let's see. Could we white folks have handled an INTELLIGENT innocent black christ figure? Hmm, you tell me. How about an intelligent GUILTY black christ figure? Now THAT'S interesting. OK, how about a INTELLIGENT GUILTY WHITE christ figure? Maybe. But we never find out because we're served up this demeaning racist (?) mishmash: a huge retarded black man, afraid of the dark. Doesn't wash with me. But let's skip all that and move on to something else, namely, the most fraudulent scene in the movie -- the tumour removal scene. How REALISTIC is this? A white guy lets a black convicted murderer enter his home in the middle of the night TO GO AND KISS HIS DYING WIFE -- in the South during the Depression era! I'm not gonna waste any ink discussing that remote possibility, so lemme say a few words about Hanks' character -- specifically, the MOST IMPORTANT DECISION HE FACES IN THE FILM. We're near the end of the movie, and we find Hanks in a dilemma: should he kill the christ figure or try to save him? Let's imagine for a moment what must be running through his head: "I know the innocent Christ figure is, well, innocent. So do I put him to death? Or do I try to save him? Maybe I should ask the innocent Christ figure what he wants. Hmmm, he says he's tired. Hey says there's so much evil in the world. Says he would rather die than endure all this pain. Hmmm, ya know what? It WOULD make things a lot simpler if he died. I wouldn't lose my job. I wouldn't lose the respect of the bigoted members of the society I Iive in. Sure, a few nights ago I risked my neck smuggling him out of here to save my friend's dying wife. But who cares? I'm just gonna keep my mouth shut. I'm just gonna kill him. He's right, let him FRY. OK, boys! Plug in Old Sparky!" Uh, yeah.

Rating:
Summary: 5 star video all the way
Review: "The Green Mile" is definitely one of the best movies of the year, if not the best. It's about an old man who recalls his life when he was a young prison guard (Tom Hanks) and how he witnessed the death of a wrongfully accused man who had a special power of healing. The man had been accused of killing two young girls when he was just trying to help them.

"The Green Mile" is one of the most unforgettable movies I've ever seen. It's not only a drama movie. Most of it is a drama movie, but parts of it are hilarious. Some of the most memorable parts of the movie are when one of the prison guards can't quit chasing a mouse around the prison, and when the man who is wrongfully accused uses his power to show Tom Hanks what really happened.

I recommend anybody who likes movies to get "The Green Mile." So far, I don't know anyone who doesn't like this movie, it's a modern classic. It features one of Tom Hanks's best jobs as an actor, and all the other actors do a great job also. Without a doubt, it's one of the best movies of the year. Trust me, you can't miss it.

Rating:
Summary: Really weird story
Review: I wanted to say this movie is disturbing. But I really think of it more as disturbed. What is Steven King trying to say here? This story is just plain weird. It has one particularly horrific scene. The character played by Tom Hanks doesn't seem to act consistently as a decent man. He knows an execution is about to go wrong and does nothing to stop it. He also knows an innocent man is being put to death and does almost nothing to stop it. The movie or story hints at what could possibly have been a better story, but this movie comes accross to me as being "Disturbed". I'l admit it has some good moments and it is well acted but I can't see any reason for watching it twice. Maybe not even once.