|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:07 pm
A thread about the movie The Green Mile.
Share your opinions here.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:00 pm
Wow, this is weird. I'm reading the book right now. But I havent seen the movie, I have heard good things, though. The book is excellent, by the way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twinkle.xx.Toes Vice Captain
|
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 3:12 pm
NO NO NO. That movie was soooooo sad. I cannot believe what happens. (I won't say of course, for Aaron's purpose) it's just sooo sad. And OMG I'm soo upset now. crying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 1:47 am
professorB Wow, this is weird. I'm reading the book right now. But I havent seen the movie, I have heard good things, though. The book is excellent, by the way.
I must read the book, want to compare. But as for me, books are usually better, though the film can be very good as well. But I prefer creating new worlds from books in my own imagination. blaugh You have to think while reading, whilst when watching a movie, you see everything and sometimes you just don't like it cos the director's imagination and his visions are far far away from yours.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 1:50 am
finding.my.inner.emo NO NO NO. That movie was soooooo sad. I cannot believe what happens. (I won't say of course, for Aaron's purpose) it's just sooo sad. And OMG I'm soo upset now. crying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 6:46 am
I did read the book and I really enjoyed it, I'm sure the movie is good too!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:17 pm
Very good movie. Quite sad by the end, but really moving. It's a great story about the human spirit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:26 am
Magenta8 Very good movie. Quite sad by the end, but really moving. It's a great story about the human spirit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:48 pm
I finished the book and it was sooooo good! Of course, I can never watch the movie now because the book was so good. I'll just end up hating the movie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 4:39 am
professorB I finished the book and it was sooooo good! Of course, I can never watch the movie now because the book was so good. I'll just end up hating the movie.
One should keep trying new things and shouldn't have any prejudice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 4:14 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 9:47 pm
Absolutely one of my favorite movies. I mean, the most awesome cast in one of the most moving stories I've ever heard, and it was spectacularly tranferred from book to movie. I just cry my eyes out everytime I watch it.
There was one thing that I thought should have made it into the film, and it irked me just the teeniest bit that it didn't get a mention. Highlight for spoilers:
In the book, when Paul is explaining to the boys why he didn't think John Coffey killed the two little girls, he mentions his lunch. When John was found with the two dead girls, he had some lunch in his pocket, packaged in some newspaper print and tied with twine.
The two girls had a dog, whose neck had been broken by the murderer (which is why the dog didn't alert the family to the intruder.) He had been enticed with a few sticks of sausage, sausage that the prosecutors and jury all assumed had been from John's lunch.
But Paul gave John his shoes to tie and John couldn't get the laces tied (because he didn't know how.) Since his lunch was still tied when the cops found him, he couldn't have opened it to lure the dog with sausage and then retied it.
It was just a tiny thing, but it was forensic evidence (which I thrive on) as opposed to the simple "I just don't think he did it because why would God put a gift like his in the hands of a murderer" explanation in the movie. Doesn't change the outcome or anything, but I'm pretty picky. biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 11:58 pm
Kaen Yashagawa Absolutely one of my favorite movies. I mean, the most awesome cast in one of the most moving stories I've ever heard, and it was spectacularly tranferred from book to movie. I just cry my eyes out everytime I watch it. There was one thing that I thought should have made it into the film, and it irked me just the teeniest bit that it didn't get a mention. Highlight for spoilers: In the book, when Paul is explaining to the boys why he didn't think John Coffey killed the two little girls, he mentions his lunch. When John was found with the two dead girls, he had some lunch in his pocket, packaged in some newspaper print and tied with twine.
The two girls had a dog, whose neck had been broken by the murderer (which is why the dog didn't alert the family to the intruder.) He had been enticed with a few sticks of sausage, sausage that the prosecutors and jury all assumed had been from John's lunch.
But Paul gave John his shoes to tie and John couldn't get the laces tied (because he didn't know how.) Since his lunch was still tied when the cops found him, he couldn't have opened it to lure the dog with sausage and then retied it.It was just a tiny thing, but it was forensic evidence (which I thrive on) as opposed to the simple "I just don't think he did it because why would God put a gift like his in the hands of a murderer" explanation in the movie. Doesn't change the outcome or anything, but I'm pretty picky. biggrin
I hope movies like this one will appear from time to time. Not only big blockbusters (some of them aren't bad, but sometimes an intimate movie is worth 5 blockbusters, maybe more wink ).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:53 am
Kaen Yashagawa Absolutely one of my favorite movies. I mean, the most awesome cast in one of the most moving stories I've ever heard, and it was spectacularly tranferred from book to movie. I just cry my eyes out everytime I watch it. There was one thing that I thought should have made it into the film, and it irked me just the teeniest bit that it didn't get a mention. Highlight for spoilers: In the book, when Paul is explaining to the boys why he didn't think John Coffey killed the two little girls, he mentions his lunch. When John was found with the two dead girls, he had some lunch in his pocket, packaged in some newspaper print and tied with twine.
The two girls had a dog, whose neck had been broken by the murderer (which is why the dog didn't alert the family to the intruder.) He had been enticed with a few sticks of sausage, sausage that the prosecutors and jury all assumed had been from John's lunch.
But Paul gave John his shoes to tie and John couldn't get the laces tied (because he didn't know how.) Since his lunch was still tied when the cops found him, he couldn't have opened it to lure the dog with sausage and then retied it.It was just a tiny thing, but it was forensic evidence (which I thrive on) as opposed to the simple "I just don't think he did it because why would God put a gift like his in the hands of a murderer" explanation in the movie. Doesn't change the outcome or anything, but I'm pretty picky. biggrin They left that part out? Tsk tsk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twinkle.xx.Toes Vice Captain
|
Posted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:09 pm
Yah, definitely the mouse was cute and I hated when they killed him. I officially hate sad movies. And the funny thing is, is that I was watching the show House last night, and one of the cops in this movie was a guest...well, from the week before too. Weird. eek
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
