Not Number 1 Material, But Still Good

Rating: 8/10 (22 January 2010)

I break my reviewing of movies down into five aspects, each worth two stars, plot, characters, cinematography, soundtrack, and acting. So here's my broken down review of Shawshank Redemption: Plot: One star. While the plot flows neatly, is well developed, and doesn't have any loopholes I noticed, it lacks the originality one would expect from the top rated movie on IMDb. I have no complaints other than the lack of providing me with something truly original and complex. It's not a simple plot, per say, just as it's not an unoriginal plot, but it is by no means an extremely original or complex plot.
Characters: Two stars. No characters went blatantly against psychology, nor did they ever break their characterization. Characterization was pretty good and I have no real complaints, all I would have to question is Andy's character. He was gang raped and got his ass kicked multiple times and was still this calm, cool, collected guy. I don't see how that would work out in the real world, so I didn't find that really believable, but he kept with his characterization and the movie made up for it with the almost relatable nature of Red's character and how well the minor characters were developed. That's probably what blew me away character-wise. No character was exceptionally complex, but all stayed true to their characterization. However, Andy should have been more complex than he was, seeing as how he was the main character.
Cinematography: Two stars. I have no complaints. Camera angles, effects, etc. were very good, though there was nothing exceptional about them that really stood out to me. Though I do realize that it was pretty well done for a 90's movie. Again, no complaints.
Soundtrack: Two stars. Again, very well done, no complaints here. At no time did it overshadow dialogue, and at no time were there awkward silences. However, nothing really stood out to me. Not a soundtrack I'd go on raving to my friends about, but no complaints.
Acting: One star. This is obviously unexpected. I mean, Morgan Freeman and Tim Robbins...I was surprised I didn't find it amazing. But Morgan Freeman's monologues lacked heart and Tim Robbins' character didn't give him any room for heart to be placed into it. Again, the best acting in the movie, in my opinion, would be from the minor characters. Frank Medrano is worth note, in my opinion, as he was very, very good. But he didn't remain in the movie long, so him and the other minor characters didn't make it enough for me to give acting two stars. I'm sure many people would disagree, though.
All in all, I give this movie eight stars and would recommend it to a friend, but I wouldn't have it rated first on IMDb because, while it was very good, it didn't strike me as THAT good. There are more original movies out there that I would recommend before this, though I do recommend that people watch this movie along with the others.