The Shawshank review on the main page (SPOILERS INSIDE)

[ethanwa]

Taken from the last paragraph of the 3.5 star movie review (out of 5).

A more subtle and insidious message of the film is disdain of religion and faith. Warden Norton is a devout Christian who urges his prisoners to study the bible. Norton is also shown time and again to be the most immoral and evil figure in The Shawshank Redemption. Andy uses his knowledge of the bible to quickly earn Norton's trust and to trick him--and that is the extent of Darabont's use of religion in the film. Nowhere is Darabont's message about religion clearer than when the camera lingers on Andy's defaced, gutted bible. This message stands in stark contrast to real-life stories of hardened criminals who have been successfully rehabilitated, adopted more ethical principles and found true redemption in religious teaching and in faith. While Darabont's emphasis on prison education is commendable, it is disheartening that he and other Hollywood figures feel the need to denigrate and vilify religion in their films.

I must say that this part of the movie review disturbs me. When I saw that the reviewer gave the movie 3.5 out of 5 to begin with, I was taken aback. I would say at a minimum most people give this movie 4+ stars, sometimes even 5, so I knew something was up.

Now, this is totally a guess here, but I feel the reviewers religious beliefs in the bible and Christianity has gotten in the way of an agnostic review. He's let his personal beliefs in religion, and his feelings about a scene in general, get to him to the point where he likes the movie less. As a viewer he has the right to feel that, but as a reviewer he needs to try and look beyond those feelings and judge the movie as a whole for what it is. It's like giving the movie "Shoot Em Up" a bad review because it has killing and you don't believe in that; It's a review that probably doesn't hold up the majority of the publics opinion and isn't a valid reason for most people to not go see the movie.

Anyway, I had to get that off my chest. I know many of you will disagree with me, but I found the last paragraph more of a preach rather than review.

Ethan


As a side note: The point of the warden's character could have been to show that just because bad people read the bible doesn't make them good people. And Andy knew that and he used religion (the bible) in a creative way to redeem himself. Some people could say that God gave him the gift of the bible to help him escape. Its all about how you look at the film and it's message.

[ryoohki]

Originally Posted by ethanwa

Taken from the last paragraph of the 3.5 star movie review (out of 5).



I must say that this part of the movie review disturbs me. When I saw that the reviewer gave the movie 3.5 out of 5 to begin with, I was taken aback. I would say at a minimum most people give this movie 4+ stars, sometimes even 5, so I knew something was up.

Now, this is totally a guess here, but I feel the reviewers religious beliefs in the bible and Christianity has gotten in the way of agnostic review. He's let his personal beliefs in religion, and his feels about a scene in general, get to him to the point where he likes the movie less. As a viewer he has the right to do that, but as a reviewer he needs to try and look beyond those feelings and judge the movie as a whole for what it is. It's like giving the movie "Shoot Em Up" a bad review because it has killing and you don't believe in that; It's a review that probably doesn't hold up the majority of the publics opinion.

Anyway, I had to get that off my chest. I know many of you will disagree with me, but I found the last paragraph more of a preach rather than review.

Ethan

Well Review of the movie itself is a personnal thing. I mean my friend would give a 9/10 to Reservoir Dog, while i would give a 4 because i find it incridibly boring, but the actor are doing a fine job for acting..

[BACsader]

No, I completely agree with you. I too was surprised when I saw a 3.5 on the movie review.

[SquidPuppet]

Just because a character is depicted in a certain fashion, it doesnt mean that the director shares the same beliefs. And, to presume that is, in my opinion, a sign of insecurity. I am with you OP.

EDIT: I just re-read the paragraph and find it to be VERY presumptuous regarding the directors (and Hollywoods) intent. How can the reviewer KNOW what message Darabont is attempting to send? Can the reviewer know that those are Darabonts beliefs? NO. Those are the characters behaviors.

Rediculous paragraph, inappropriate in a movie review, BIAS.

PS. I am not a Shawshank megafan. I thought it was OK.

[JasonR]

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...76#post1352376

[Clark Kent]

Every reviewer has their own personal biases. The key is by reading the context of the review you can guess whether you agree or not. The final rating is not so important but how a reviewer "gets" there and justifies it. No piece of any art has had universal opinion on it, since how each human responds to it is subjective and based on the life experience and expectations of the individual. The review looks fine to me.

[phantompwr]

I think it is a valid point that the reviewer should be allowed to give any score he wants. Having said that, when I read the section about religion I did feel that it came kinda out of left field. I don't think it was the film makers intention to criticize religion itself. If anything, it was criticizing the way that religion is often used by bad people as a tool to oppress or hurt others, and in this case it was also the means to deliver some very poetic justice.

I think that any reviewer is entitled to his or her opinion, and they have a right to say almost whatever they want, but I am glad some other people here noticed this as well, and have what I consider a more reasonable opinion.

/my two cents

[xtop]

99% of the time i agree with the people defending the review, but in this case, i believe he's totally off base

[Tempest]

I would say he clearly did give it a worse rating because of his religious beliefs. To give it 5/5 would of meant he was heading to hell or something

I wonder what he would rate the Passion of Christ at? I personally would rate Passion of Christ at a 2/5 just because the movie by itself is not that great of a movie at all. As far as Shawshank, I would rate it 5/5, great movie and have it on pre-order.

[Variable]

I didn't like the review either. it seemed like a very strange reason to not like the movie. If you think it's a 3.5 that's fine, but the whole explanation was odd.

I guess that's why reviews are more than just numbers, though . By reading the explanation behind the rating I realized the review didn't really apply to my point of view and I shouldn't let it shade my decision.

[Gremal]

I knew I would catch a lot of heat for this review. For what it's worth, I am not Christian, but I am tired of Hollywood's campaign of demonizing religion.

I did rate it as an above average movie. If you guys disagree with any of my comments in particular, that would make for an interesting discussion. But just taking shots at a reviewer because he didn't like a movie as much as you did is kind of boring, don't you think?

[AaronSCH]

Greg just found deeper thematic elements in the film than the casual viewer. I wholeheartedly agree with his analysis of the film. It is solid and far from off-base. Hollywood's recent tendency to vilify Christians is "insidious" to say the least. This anti-Christian theme is repeated in Mr. Darabont's take on another of Stephen King's works, "The Mist." Once again the antagonist, Mrs. Carmody is characterized as being an "insanely" religious zealot—coincidental? I highly doubt it. Growing up in a mixed household of Christian and Jewish heritage, I have been very sensitive to how people of faith have been characterized in film. The treatment of Christians in today's films mirrors that of Shakespeare and Dickens' treatment of Jews in their literature. Hollywood needs to be "called on the carpet."

There is an excellent documentary called "The Celluloid Closet" which deftly presents the disgraceful representation of gays and lesbians in film over the past 100 years. Ironically, many in the gay community seem to be in the forefront of this anti-Christian movement. Whether you want to believe it or not, film, television and literature plays an enormous role in shaping the attitudes we as people have towards each other. If you doubt this, ask a friend of Asian or African descent how they feel about the treatment of their race in cinema over the last 100 years.

I enjoyed "The Shawshank Redemption" but that doesn't mean I don't have some reservations about the story.

[jpm35216]

I took the review for what it was. One person's opinion. Personally, I could care less what the reviewers think about the actual movie, b/c 90% of the time I don't buy blind and have my opinion about the film. I am more interested in the reviews of the actual PQ and AQ of the disc. I don't think they should act as a film critic and should simply review the technical aspects of the Blu. Shawshank is actually is actually my second favorite movie and (becuase of the review) I will buy the disc with confidence.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Gremal

I knew I would catch a lot of heat for this review. For what it's worth, I am not Christian, but I am tired of Hollywood's campaign of demonizing religion.

I did rate it as an above average movie. If you guys disagree with any of my comments in particular, that would make for an interesting discussion. But just taking shots at a reviewer because he didn't like a movie as much as you did is kind of boring, don't you think?

Do you believe that The Mist vilified Christianity?

[Lepidopterous]

If the reviewer does not approve of a message the movie is portraying, then he is allowed to express his opinion. Although it is thought unacceptable and surprising to see a more critical review of such a noteworthy film, I think the review is still credible because he provided an explanation for his analysis. No movie is perfect beyond reasonable argument.

[Clark Kent]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Do you believe that The Mist vilified Christianity?

I thought "The Mist" at times was a not very subtle slam against Christianity and in particular fundamentalist Christianity.

[Gremal]

Do you believe The Mist vilified Christianity?

I haven't seen it, but I did see The Green Mile, which as a strong theme of spirituality running through it. Spoiler: You can view that movie as Darabont casting Duncan's character as an enormous, African American Jesus figure, with healing powers, who died for the sins of the guards.

[vegeta88]

3.5/5 does suprise me a bit because I'd give it 5/5 easily but I kind of like how non-fans of the movies do the reviews some times. For example, in a gaming magazine, a person who likes neither DBZ or fighting games may review a DBZ fighting game and give an unbias opinion.

However, I agree that the religious thing in the review didn't exactly excite me. Luckily I've seen this movie and the film review will not affect my purchase, only the AQ, PQ, and Supplements.

[Gremal]

Originally Posted by AaronSCH

Greg, you just found deeper thematic elements in the film than the casual viewer. I wholeheartedly agree with your analysis of the film. It is solid and far from off-base. Hollywood's recent tendency to vilify Christians is "insidious" to say the least.

Thanks for understanding, Aaron. I guess we are in the minority, though.

[mrgreed202]

Originally Posted by AaronSCH

Greg, you just found deeper thematic elements in the film than the casual viewer. I wholeheartedly agree with your analysis of the film. It is solid and far from off-base. Hollywood's recent tendency to vilify Christians is "insidious" to say the least. This anti-Christian theme is repeated in Mr. Darabont's take on another of Stephen King's works, "The Mist." Once again the antagonist, Mrs. Carmody is characterized as being an "insanely" religious zealot—coincidental? I highly doubt it. Growing up in a mixed household of Christian and Jewish heritage, I have been very sensitive to how people of faith have been characterized in film. The treatment of Christians in today's films mirrors that of Shakespeare and Dickens' treatment of Jews in their literature. Hollywood needs to be "called on the carpet."...

I agree with you and the review only because, Christians and religion DO get portrayed a lot in a very bad way in films, but I also agree with the OP because, in the essence of it, It's (most of the time) the Christians and religious people who DO act that way, and therefore they get portrayed that way in films. So in a way it is kind of the Christians fault, but im not totally pushing it on them.