The gaps in a person’s viewing history sometimes defy
explanation. I have always loved Tom Hanks, I have usually prioritized the
viewing of Stephen King adaptations (there was a time, 25 years ago, when I had
read everything he’d written), and I've had a special fondness for Frank Darabont’s
previous King adaptation, The Shawshank Redemption (a fondness I share with
many others, so I guess not so special). And in 1999, I was well into the era of ranking the films I saw
each year from first to worst, meaning I tried to see most significant
releases.
Yet not until last Friday night did I see The Green Mile,
the only one of five best picture nominees from that year I didn’t see in the
year of its release.
It might have taken me much longer except that the movie came
up in this monthly challenge I’m doing through the Flickcharters Facebook
group. This challenge involves watching the highest ranked movie you haven’t
seen on the Flickchart of another member of the group, chosen randomly each
month. So far for this series I’ve seen The Court Jester, Europa Europa, Henry
V (1944), Explorers and Naked, and The Green Mile was my sixth random pick. It’s
been a pretty good series as Explorers was the only one I didn’t like all that
much.
It’s possible that one of the reasons for the delay was that
the movie cracks the three-hour mark, though if that were the reason, it had
slipped my mind long before now, such that I was surprised when I learned it again. I figured the thing probably clocked in at
2:25 for something, but three hours? It’s listed as 189 minutes, but the
credits start at 180. That’s Lord of the Rings territory, not the expected
length of a little prison movie about a Magical Negro. (Sorry, not my term -- that phrase refers to an unfortunate trope of which The Green Mile is probably the textbook example.)
The thing that surprised me so much, when I did carve out
the time to watch in on Friday, was how little it really is. The movie has no
more than two or three sets, and only one that they visit with any regularity,
that being the death row building itself. The action only leaves these couple
locations on a couple occasions, and not for very long.
Yet three hours pass, and you know what? You don’t really
notice it.
I almost got the feeling I was bingeing a miniseries about
these characters rather than watching one long movie, both because you know you’re
settling in for the long haul, but then also because it goes kind of quickly
when you actually get down to it. (Hence the term “bingeing.”) The movie is
kind of constructed as a series of relatively short episodes, as well. But it
has an undeniable forward momentum and keeps trucking along without ever
wearing out its welcome. In fact, I suspect the only reason I did finally take
a “nap” at the 2:30 mark was because it was late on a Friday night and I was
drinking wine. Otherwise I could have made it to the end no problem. I’ll nap
during movies that are less than half that length.
And while I did like it quite a bit, it’s no Shawshank. It
did feel kind of like Darabont’s apology for Shawshank, though. Who needs an
apology for Shawshank, you might ask? Well, how about prison guards? Assuming
such a vocal faction of prison guards that must be placated actually exists,
which I’m sure it doesn’t, it seems like this is Darabont’s way of saying “See,
not all prison guards are bad.” As a matter of fact, there’s only one bad one
this time, whereas the other four are basically saints. In fact, three of those
four – Barry Pepper, David Morse and Jeffrey DeMunn – are basically rolled up
into one saintly character for how little individual distinction they are given
by the script.
Which is another miraculous thing about this movie. How
could it go for three hours and basically never really develop the characters?
And yet it doesn’t feel slow, and it does feel satisfying.
Maybe I wanted to well up at the end – I had been promised tears – but the
eventual fate of Michael Duncan Clarke’s character didn’t get to me, probably
because the movie had done such a thorough job preparing us for what was going
to happen, and that he was ready for it.
So, solid movie that I obviously should have seen long ago,
and probably would have liked even a little bit better if I had.
1 comment:
This review is pretty spot on. It seems not much actually happens for much of the three hours, but Darabont guides us through it swiftly so we don't feel the runtime. However, I would love to see what a 2 or 2 1/2 hour cut of this would be like. And yes, it is about a Magical Negro. No need to apologize for the term. There is simply no better way to describe it. I've written about this particular trope a number of times on my own site. And, as you suggest, this is THE textbook example.
Post a Comment