How is it that The Shawshank Redemption is so good and The Green Mile is completely amateur horseshit?
>>218679910They're both bad
>>218679929As expected of /tv/
the spiritual negro in the green mile has more chakra
>>218679910Shawshank is overrated but it is still a lot better than Green Mile, for sure.The reason is that Shawshank has a better story.Didn't he write Green Mile in installments, making it up as he went along, publishing it bit by bit, the way Dickens used to do? Whereas Shawshank is a long short story and obviously planned out from the start.(I know SK says he never knows any endings when he starts but even if that's true for some of the novels, I don't believe if for something like Shawshank.)
>>218679910It's literally the same movie. Worshipped by the lovers of middlebrow.
>>218679910I watched both and don't remember a damn thing about them. If you like prison stuff, you're better off watching Oz. It's a TV series, but it's pretty good for fiction.
>>218679910tom hanks sucks
>>218681490Oz is entertaining, but also very gay. In Shawshank the butt banditry happens offscreen. In Oz it often happens onscreen, and is filmed in a pornographic way.
Both of these movies are goated, and “people” on this board hate on them to fit in. Frank Darabont is goated also btw. The score, the script, the plot. Darabont knows the beauty of tall grasses, of redemption, of hope, and of pain. Nothing has come close since. This post is indisputable and I look forward to the tireless screeching and foaming at the mouth that is sure to emerge from this.
Green Mile is just a typical Tom Hanks academy museum piece polished to a mirror shine with an “insert oscars here” slot in the front, same as every film he’s done since Sleepless in Seattle. It’s very pretty to look at and has some decent acting but it’s just boring “hey remember THIS period in history?” schlock.
