Frank Darabont’s Stephen King adaptation was nominated for seven Academy Awards.
Decades later,The Shawshank Redemptionis as popular as ever.
AlthoughThe Shawshank Redemptionhas earned a sparkling reputation, there are some issues which come to light upon closer examination.
However, this intense emotional connection is exactly what blinds some people to the movie’s more questionable elements.
Brooks' dramatic fate hammers home the movie’s point about institutionalization better than the book’s version.
Other characters are more interesting in the novel.
Custom image by Yailin Chacon
Other characters could have been improved if Darabont had stuck to the book a little more.
Warden Norton is allowed to resign in the book, but he doesn’t face jail time.
The IMDB list uses audience scores, but critics are less unanimously enamored withThe Shawshank Redemption.
All the conflict comes handed down from the men in power, namely Warden Norton and Captain Hadley.
To contrast the noble and virtuous characteristics of the inmates, the guards are cartoonishly evil.
Thecast of characters inThe Shawshank Redemptionare divided along clear lines between good and evil.
This simplistic approach robs the story of any potential moral nuance.
The only thing separating the men then would be the side of the bars they find themselves on.
Freeman plays Red, a prisoner serving a life sentence for murder who narrates Andy’s story.
An over-reliance on narration is often seen as a crutch for this very reason.
After Andy’s escape, he changes tact and speaks from the heart.
His fiery speech grants him his freedom, but the reasoning behind this decision is slightly opaque.
However, the story rushes through Red’s journey from Maine to Mexico.
It’s remarkable that Red managed to make it to the beach at all.
Red talks a lot about hope in his closing monologue.
Andy says earlier inThe Shawshank Redemptionthat there are some things which can’t be taken from a man.
For Red, this is the dream of being truly free, in every sense of the word.
