I really need to give this movie another try.
I’ve only seen it once many, many years ago.
I was on a prison escape movie binge and in the same month watched The Great Escape, Cool Hand Luke, Papillon, and Escape from Alcatraz. The last one I watched was Shawshank Redemption and either I was totally burnt out on prison escape moives or it never helad a candle to the others.
I don’t remember anything about the film and just remember being bored by it.
I probably should try and see it again.
This apparently will surprise you, but beauty can be analyzed to a point. Even if I myself thought it was the best film ever, I could have still asked the question.
Just a few examples. Rembrandt’s paintings work with a clair-obscure technique. Hitchcock’s movies work with suspense and brilliant shots combined with the right background music. Monty Python remained popular because it conquered the USA. Charlie Chaplin usually plays the outsider in a story while Harold Lloyd plays the normal guy. Classical architecture is designed according to certain proportions. Star Wars is not famous for its weak dialogue but rather for combining traditional stories in a new format with all sorts of interesting characters.
I don’t want to get into a fight you seem to be trying to pick with Biggirl, but what you have done here is a phenomenally bad job of illuminating the word analyze. By your own example what you want is the following:
Okay, mods, we can close this up now. Asked and answered.
I think people like the ending. It’s unexpected when you don’t know it’s coming, but it plays fair wth the clues about it. I think people also like the friendship, they like Andy’s little victories and they like Morgan Freeman’s narration (as parodied as it’s now become).
I disagree that it’s a “prison escape movie.” That’s not really the genre. The escape comes as a total surprise. It’s more of a buddy movie and a survival movie.
This may very well be true but analyzing beauty has nothing to do with how popular a thing is. There are some very popular models who many find ugly. There are some extremely popular movies that are judged horrible.
If you wanted to know what made The Shawshank Redemption popular than starting the thread in CS and asking for opinions is the way to go. Asking in GQ why this movie is popular and then bitching when it’s moved to CS because it’s a ‘factual’ question is silly.
I think it’s a fanbase issue. The people who like it are also the kind of people who are likely to do polls like at imdb.
I don’t think the film is at all good. Saw it once, that was enough and then some. But then I don’t go around doing online polls. So if there are a lot of people like me, that skews such polls.
In other words, online polls are worthless. E.g., askmen’s recent poll that put Don Draper as #1 most influential man. Obama was third. Some guy I barely heard of 2nd.
Shawshank has the attraction of innocent guy put in prison, finds out a way to get a new trial, finds out he’s done so much for the warden that he’ll never get a chance to get out - then BOOM! Screws the warden worse than the Sisters ever screwed him.
It’s about redemption. It’s an awesome movie. One of King’s best stories.
If you’re gonna go on another bender, put Le Trou on the list.
As I remember, the movie hit it big after repeatedly being shown on TBS, rather than from VHS or DVD sales.
I’m not sure if you’re connecting these two points. But the story isn’t about Andy’s redemption - as you point out, he’s innocent and doesn’t need redemption. It’s about Red’s redemption.
One thing that surprises me is how Frank Darabont either was unable or chose not to capitalize on the popularity of his movies. He’s only directed four feature films in his career.
Which movies? Be specific, because right now I can’t really think of any that have all those elements without also being gory, or maudlin, or preachy.
You know, I really couldn’t tell you much about The Great Escape or Escape from Alcatraz. I watched them, but they just never engaged me. I enjoyed Cool Hand Luke, but it’s not something I’d probably watch anything like the number of times I’ve watched Shawshank. It just didn’t have the sort of visceral impact that makes me want to watch a movie over and over.
That’s the secret of this movie’s success, imo. It makes that sort of visceral impact on a huge range of people. What makes it have that sort of impact? Well, that’s going to be slightly different for pretty much everybody, and it’s not something you can quantify or objectively define.
I dislike it with a slightly irrational passion.
The movie’s own merits aside, ftg makes a good point. It’s still a pretty new movie, which is going to help a lot in a poll like this. A quick count shows that nine of IMDb’s top 20 movies were released in 1990 or later.
Why Shawshank in particular? I think the movie’s merits have already been explained. I found it corny as hell, but the same qualities obviously speak to a lot of people. They wouldn’t make cheesy movies if people didn’t like them.
Those were just a few examples off the top of my head. Do you have a better idea? And I’m not trying to pick a fight with anyone, I’m just wondering why people reply if they don’t agree with or don’t want to understand the question.
But yes, topic can be closed.
And I join you in that.
I liked the film; the one incident that stands out in my mind, is when the Morgan Freeman character goes before the parole board. He is (initially) eager to impress the board with his sincerity and his rehabilitation-and they keep denying him parole. Late, after many years, the guy is very bitter, and he tells the board to “shove it”-and they grant him parole!
Kind of a commentary of the mindless nature of parole boads.
It’s got TWO happy endings! That’s hard to find.
Not in porn.
Jeez Louise, lighten up a little! So a newbie didn’t parse the differences we have in our forums! Hardly merits the 3rd degree snark (and I saw no “bitching” in evidence at all).
Sheesh.