First time you ever read the book or saw the movie…what were your thoughts about the poll question?
Started unsure. Ended unsure. Whether he was or not wasn’t important.
Interesting,…the votes are all over right now.
Innocent to innocent. (Read the novella first, if that matters.)
What I don’t understand is why so many people think this is a great movie. Nothing wrong with it, TSR is a fine film, but it’s ranked #1 on the IMDB 250. WTF?
Personally, I thought he was guilty at first, but slowly changed to innocent as the movie went on.
Exposure? If you have basic cable, it’s on some channel or other at least twice a day, every day. Compared to some of the other films on that list, I’d guess that a whole lot more people have seen it.
Top 10 IMDB movies:
- Shawshank
- Godfather 1
- Godfather 2
- Pulp Fiction
- Good, Bad, and Ugly
- 12 Angry Men
- The Dark Knight
- Shindler’s List
- LOTR: ROTK
- Fight Club
Possibly - many of these films are shown repeatedly on TV.
It was firmly established in the first few scenes that Andy was framed. If you paid the slightest bit of attention, the question would not have come up.
Andy aside, Shawshank speaks powerfully to me of the absolute power authority used to have in this country (and still does in many places). Those who had the public’s trust could engage in all manner of cruelty and hypocrisy - and all the while the rules of good citizenship kept anyone from saying anything, let alone doing it. Perhaps symbolically, the '50s had to give way to the '60s before Warden Norton’s misdeeds could come back to haunt him.
Ok, enlighten me then? Because I’ve seen the movie probably over 10 times and I’ve never seen anything that firmly establishes it one way or the other.
The film setup the assumption that Andy was innocent from the beginning. I always felt the film would have been much more powerful if the box that Red digs up at the end contained the murder weapon and a confession from Andy that he really did murder his wife. This would have really challenged the audience to consider the nature of redemption. A missed opportunity by King and the filmmakers. It would have also created one of the best twist endings in all film. It is a great movie nonetheless.
I agree. I’ve always thought it was a good movie but not the incredible masterpiece that many people think it is.
My reaction was, “Shut the fuck up, Freeman!” Seriously, I love the man and his voice, but the voiceover anvil just rang continuously and way too hard. A lot of beautifully acted scenes (Andy playing the opera over the loudspeaker, for one) would have been much more powerful without the golden voice stating the obvious.
I guess I didn’t pay attention because I didn’t really care/wasn’t sure if he was innocent at the beginning, and by the end I felt he probably was innocent.
Also I’m just fine with Shawshank being the #1 film on IMDB. I think it really is one of the best ever made. It’s not my personal #1 but it’s definitely worthy of top 10.
I’ve read the novella and seen the movie, but it was so long ago I honestly don’t remember.
I strongly agree with you on this. I hear so many people tout the greatness of this movie. I think it’s a cool little movie, but it’s so laughably unrealistic–these hardened criminals are all the nicest, most friendly group of chaps. Sure a couple of the “bad guys” do bad stuff, but generally the inmate population is portrayed as a fun loving bunch.
First time I saw the movie, about 1/4 of the way in, I kept thinking, “man, the scenery looks just like back home.” Then I see a couple wide angle shots of the prison and thought, “Wow, that looks exactly like the prison in my hometown.”
I waited for the credits. There it was, way down at the bottom: the movie was mostly filmed in my hometown. So every time I watch it, I feel nostalgic. “Oh, they’ve since torn that building down…”
Are you talking about the book or the movie?
Books have scenes?
I also read the story first and I also thought the film was okay-but-not-great.
Maybe knowing the end in advance spoils some of the surprise (if there is one).