Tedious, overlong, with "hope" being the second word spoken in just about every sentence... who cares?

Rating: 5/10 (23 July 2005)

I simply fail to understand how this film is so popular... it's quite simply beyond me. The only way I can explain it is that all the fans of King's short story found it very true to the spirit of the book, and voted 10 for that. I really could not find anything worth my time in this film, and apart from a very good monologue from Freeman near the end, one or two good lines of dialog and the acting, there's really nothing in the whole film worth watching it for. It's about hope... and the director won't let us forget it, so it's repeated until the audience mumbles it in our sleep. It's like this short, one-note story was written, and the author just didn't want to end it... so he kept writing... and writing... until someone had the sense to break down the door and wrestle the pen from him yelling "for the love of all that is holy, stop writing!" And I thank that faceless man for doing that, because it is undoubtedly the only reason the film was 142 minutes long, and not 284, or, dare I say it, 568. The film simply drones on and on, scene after scene, containing nothing remotely interesting(but with excellent acting, mind you). There's nothing good about this film except for the acting. Just about all of it is great. I can't really think of anything else to say... I guess my dislike for the film stems from my hatred of King's writing. I suppose it is possible for someone who is neutral on his works to enjoy this film. I recommend this to fans of Stephen King, the actors and possibly Frank Darabont. If you're not a fan of any of these people, I doubt you'd find this enjoyable. 5/10