Bribery works with the Academy too, you know.

Rating: 5/10 (23 September 2001)

Stephen King-based movies are, if anything, a mixed bag. His stories work very well when the screenwriter/ director focusses on internal tensions within the protagonist (see Stanley Kubricks The Shining, Rob Reiners Misery or Taylor Hackfords Dolores Claiborne) and they usually turn out less successfull when external horrors are 'examined'. Perhaps the best film (and certainly the most humane) based on Kings work is The Shawshank Redemption, at the time criminally ignored by both audiences and the Academy. Half a decade later, however, it's one of the most loved films of the nineties (check out the IMDb top 250; it's probably still in the top 5).

Which explains why Frank Darabont took the same direction again. The Green Mile is another prison-set film (on Death Row during the Depression, actually) based on Kings writing. And again Darabont draws your attention to the characters instead of aiming for cheap thrills. There are differences aplenty, however. Most significantly, The Green Mile has supernatural aspects Shawshank didn't have. Still, the similarities are so great (and the reasons behind casting America's favourite actor Tom Hanks are so transparant) it's hard not to consider The Green Mile as anything but an attempt to translate Shawshank's critical success to box office receipts (and Golden Baldies).
Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean it's terrible. And it really is not. The Green Mile is hardly a Shawshank Redemption either, though. It's far too Oscar-friendly for that. I though Shawshank was an honest, moving and cleverly written film. The Green Mile plays the emotions up to the max however. So much so that to me it just felt a little faked. It is highly manipulative and its characters are less well rounded than those in Shawshank. Best examples? The (gratuitously) horrific electrocution scene and the sadistic guard character (the Wild Bill character is a pretty good one, too). Extra Oscar points for an extremely long running time, an annoying wraparound time set in modern time (see also: Titanic, whoever thought these wraparound things work?) and a zillion shots of people crying.

It's also loaded with that so-called bleakness that works so well for the Academy. The world can be a horrible place (well duh...) in which death can be a form of release. Not wanting to be to depressing, it luckily shows the role of being humane to eachother. Yep, that's Oscar-material all right. Not too challenging or complicated, it reaffirms all which is traditionally believed in the U.S. (also of peculiar interest is the Academy's preoccupation with optimistic films related to death; see Titanic, Gladiator, American Beauty, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon even).
But I mentioned it's NOT a terrible film, right? Well, it isn't. The Green Mile is reasonably well (although very traditionally) directed and at times its heart-tugging does work. Also, the acting isn't that bad. Tom Hanks I'll never really like, he's just either too bland or too much Tom Hanks The Actor for me. But the supporting performers are, within the limitations of its writings, excellent. Michael Clarke Duncan (who gets to do most of the crying) is oddly convincing as giant, retarded angel and David Morse and James Cromwell are good. The outstanding member of the cast, however, is Michael Jeter as mouse-loving Cajun inmate Del. The cinematography is also highly atmospheric and the presentation of the supernatural aspect is surprisingly subtle (as are religious undertones).
Solid acting and effective use of old techniques make this a watchable film, but in the end it's far too hyperbolic in it's emotions and simply too bloody long. Not really bad but as good as it's IMDb rating would have you think? Not by a long shot.
Rating: 5/10