User reviews

After seeing this movie I could not notice to be misled by the IMDB rating. The movie is nice, even good, but no way it should receive a 9.0.

The movie could easily have been produced by Disney: strong moral & a happy ending. Sure, there are strong points. The scene of the old man who have been imprisoned for almost his whole life is very well placed and Tim Robbins' performance is good but the story itself does not leave anything behind.

3 out of 5. That's all there is to it.

This is just a typical prison yarn with some mawkish sentiment

tossed in. I really don' t understand the fuss. I guess some people

look for grandeur and prjoect it onto middling, palatable material

like this. That's the only explanation I've got for the unwarranted

popularity of this flick. Production credits are fine enough, as is the

acting but it certainly doesn't belong on any repsectable list of

greatest films of all time.

Come on guys! According to the IMDb Top 250 THIS is the second best film EVER!! Better than Citizen Kane? Better than Godfather Part II? Better than ALMOST EVERYTHING?!?!

No, it's a very, very long, very, very predictable, very, very cliched, very. very old-fashioned and sentimental film, blessed by some good performers (especially James Whitmore, who, alas, does not figure prominently enough.)

It worries me that many of the comments here seem to think the film artistically transcends the usual Hollywood fare, when in actual fact, it wallows in all the conventions of its genre.

I give it 6/10, mainly because I like Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman.

The only people who could mistake this for a Great Film, would be those who mistake the works of Stephen King for Great Literature.

I'm not going to tip toe around it, this film is crap. Its completely unoriginal, its not artistic, its not demanding (except for being boring).

You will not learn anything about the world through this film.

This film is not a part cinematic history, unlike nearly all other films in the top 250.

It is predictable and emotional crap.

But even if your not into cinema, and you just like popcorn entertainment there are far better movies out there...basically any on the video shelf.

This bloated and soggy piece of work is so far from earning a number 2 spot on the IMDb that I have to imagine that Stephen King has bought votes for it. Trite , mawkish, shallow, unconvincing, ugly... How much more can I say about its awfulness? Morgan Freeman is tolerable, Tim Robbins is not. There is a romantic glow to the cinematography that is really inappropriate if the main characters are heterosexual. If they aren't there is an unexplored subtext poisoning the base of the movie. There is nothing else about this movie that makes a lick of sense: emotional, dramatic, logical, racial, penological. Rips off the Count of Monte Cristo and Huckleberry Finn and cheapens and flattens them. Its appeal escapes me utterly. For the love of God, sink this film!

I've been content to lurk and learn on this web site for months, but after reading the reams of glowing critiques of this film, I felt obligated to get an IMDB account and print a contrary point of view.

The Shawshank Redemption is an obvious, thinly characterized, visually uncompelling film. Whether it's the good guy/bad guy cliche or the white guy/black guy cliche, it's still the same old Hollywood.

This is not a film which discovers life through enigmas, dilemmas, and reflections. It is a film which wears its rather plain message on its sleeve.

3 out of 10. For prison flicks try Dancer in the Dark. Someone else recommended alternative prison flicks Kiss of the Spider Woman and Cool Hand Luke. I heartily agree with those choices.

This film should barely scratch out a spot in the top 250, let alone be one of the top ranked films of all time. It is rather dull, extraordinarily predictable, and filled with clichés. This is not even the best prison film, let alone #2 among all films! Cool Hand Luke or Papillon anyone? I'd give it a 7-8/10 (Freeman & Co. do not disappoint), but someone needs to bring down this bloated rating. The film is little more than a rehashing of conventional sentimentalism painted in prison stripes and sold in bulk to a (apparently) gullible audience. Help bring this down to a reasonable position so that more deserving films can attain their proper recognition.

That this film ranks as No2 in the 'all time' list on IMDB says a lot for how folks don't watch films from any era before the 90s anymore, for how else could it genuinely sit atop that list? I suppose in an age where everything on amazon gets at least four stars, good subjective criticism is proving harder and harder to find...but really...is this film better than Chinatown? Better than Casablanca? The Third Man? Mean Streets? Withnail and I? Better than Adam's Rib, Singin' in the Rain, Rear Window, Day for Night, Bande a Part, Taxi Driver, West Side Story, Les Quatre Cent Coups, Some Like it Hot, Seven Samurai?

I've seen this film twice, once at the cinema and once on TV as I lie stuffed with Xmas dinner. The first time was mildly enjoyable, the second pretty turgid. Despite the presence of the ever excellent Robbins (though Morgan Freeman phones in the same performance he's given in every film ever since), this film never transcends the humble source of its story - a Stephen King short - and whilst it's a 'nice' tale with a reasonable twist at the end, can anyone else explain to me why such praise has been heaped on this utterly average experience?

And it's not just IMDB. A recent UK Channel Four poll found Shawshank right up there. Perhaps it's the combination of pseudo-harsh prison story and a buddy tale along with the lashings of on the nose humanism that appeals across genders and other boundaries. I don't know. But believe me, if this were the 2nd best film ever made in the world ever, let's just say cinema wouldn't be the popular influence it is today.

Go out there, people. Find the true 'classics', find the films this piece of sentimentalia stole its every beat, every note, every word of dialogue from. And then come back and tell me this is anything other than a hotch potch, a 50s throwback with a 90s sentiment.

It is strange that this movie is 2nd in imdb chart, as it is the same old american story, where good people win, and bad guys died. More strange, the USA is still the place where this story must sound more false.

Let's be honest, it's a fairly mediocre movie. Entertaining, I'll grant you, but profound? No way. Not much here in terms of innovative or even creative film-making either.

Is it one of the most popular films of all time? Probably. At least of recent time. Is it the greatest film ever made? Don't make me laugh.

That said, I'm glad people can enjoy this movie. I won't watch it again, but I don't exactly regret it.

I don´t like movies about "way of life" or about a hope. In this movie is handled a problem with "normal life" or with resolution to take a life to "own hands". A topic of this film is such like Papillon. This is not an authentic subject, this is not an authentic movie....

Dont get why is this greatest here, lol ok but i mean it is a movie after all

The Shawshank Redemption is reasonably well written, directed, acted, and filmed. Yet in my judgment it is a below-average movie. It lacks a real plot, and, while the title promises redemption, nobody and nothing is redeemed. The characters lack depth, and many events are implausible.

No doubt, wardens and prison guards can be wicked people. But those portrayed in this film are so completely perverse that they become uninteresting. Their function is to represent "the establishment" and "authority." The audience is meant to identify with Andy Dufresne, the main character. While innocent of the murders of which he is convicted, he's hardly an admirable character, and he becomes worse during his imprisonment. He's a clever manipulator who eagerly cooperates in the warden's criminal activities in the hope of profiting from doing so--which he eventually does. The prison also has has a contingent of homosexual rapists, who are called "not human" so as to avoid admitting that their behavior is all too human, and very much in need of redemption.

Thus, the film's popularity: it appeals to our tendency to rationalize our own wickedness by comparing ourselves with moral monsters. Unfortunately, serving that function does not make a mediocre film great any more than serving sound moralism does.

It's boring, i don't care about the characters. Overrated to madness. The movie could have been way darker, feels like a disney adventure.

Great acting, ok story.

The Shawshank Redemption is in my opinion the most Overrated film in history. With the highest IMDb rating ever it confuses me why people like it so much. It's a fine movie but not the Greatest Ever. Morgan freedman's performance is Alright wildly Overrated It's hard to believe this is the best. I've watched this movie 3 times each time I was disappointed with literally Everything. With such an iconic legacy for a movie I don't understand what people love about this Film it's just not Great. The film should be fantastic with a Amazing Cast all around I don't understand how this film truly flops so badly.

"The Shawshank Redemption" has so much skill which went into the production that it is regrettable that it's overlength undermines its attributes. Episodic, slack and slow formatting stretch the narrative far beyond what its material requires. The result is a fair film, with some worthy touches.

Stephen King's best adapted movie Misery and Stand By Me were the best adaptations up until this one, now you can add Shawshank to that list.

This is simply one of the best films ever made and I know I am not the first to say that and I certainly won't be the last. The standing on the IMDb is a true barometer of that. #3 as of this date and I'm sure it could be number 1. So I'll just skip all the normal praise of the film because we all know how great it is. But let me perhaps add that what I find so fascinating about Shawshank is that Stephen King wrote it.

King is one of the best writers in the world. Books like IT and the Castle Rock series are some of the greatest stories ever told. But his best adaptations are always done by the best directors. The Shining was brilliantly interpreted by Kubrick and of course the aforementioned Misery and Stand By Me are both by Rob Reiner. Now Frank Darabont comes onto the scene and makes arguably the best King film ever. He seems to understand what King wants to say and he conveys that beautifully.

What makes this film one of the best ever made is the message it conveys. It is one of eternal hope. Andy Dufresne, played by Tim Robbins, has been sent to prison for a crime he did not commit. But he never loses hope. He never gives up his quest to become a free man again. His years of tenacity, patience and wits keep him not only sane, but it gives his mind and a spirit a will to live. This film has a different feel to it. There has never been anything like it before and I don't know if there will again.

I'm not going to say any more about this film, it has already been said, but just suffice to say that I am glad that Forrest Gump won best picture in 94. I would have been equally glad if Pulp Fiction or Shawshank would have won. It is that good of a movie and one that will be appreciated for years to come.

Very nice movie and realy good for your eyes, i don't know what to say...

Before you write this review off, please know that rating it a 4 does not mean I hate this film.

My rating system may be a bit different than others. If a movie exists, I want to immediately give it a 5. A 5 seems very middle-of-the-road for me, and I want to give each film the benefit of the doubt. So, I automatically go into a film thinking it's a 5, and if it goes well or gets better as I watch it, that rating goes up. The rating goes down if I see more negative than positive aspects about the film.

I explain my rating process to ensure to others that I do NOT hate this film. I thought it was okay - nothing special - but far from a disaster, and yet, further from a masterpiece.

As this review is intended to be more advice for first-time viewers, let me get right to the crux of my view on the film: The Shawshank Redemption gets a lot of hype. It has been the pinnacle of many Top 10 lists since its release, and even IMDb here has it at the top of its Top 250. So, unless you have lived most of your life under a rock, you are fully aware of the attention and praise this film has gathered since 1994. Do not - I repeat, do NOT - go into the film expecting great things. If you can watch the movie without any preconceived opinions, that would be the best. You might thoroughly enjoy Shawshank. Going down the checklist, the movie has just about everything you need for a great film:

Theme: It's got "redemption" in the title, everyone. I think you can figure it out, but the film also touches on forgiveness, endurance, and friendship - all good themes to explore in film

Acting: Morgan Freeman is amazing, as always. Tim Robbins is loved by critics (I've never particularly cared for him), and does a decent job of conveying a full spectrum of emotions

Source Material: It's based on a Stephen King short story. Stephen King has been cinema gold, as far as I can tell. The Shining, Stand By Me, and The Green Mile have all been successful It all sounds so good, right? Well, I would definitely tell you to watch this film, as I think most films should be given a chance, especially modern classics such as this one. However, I would not believe all the hype.

For me, it was an average film with major expectations, and ultimately, I was let down. I can't say that watching this movie was anything like being in prison, but I could actually connect emotionally with Andy by the end of the film.

Shawshank Redemption is a story of, well, Redemption. Just like any film from Quentin Tarantino, but with an extra dose of melodrama. Orchestral music to drive you to tears, overly dramatic dialog, and plot twists that come so far out of left field even M. Night Shylamalan would cringe. You just have a hard time seeing them, because the movie is relatively laid back.

Which is the best part of the film. It slows down whenever it needs to take its time. It's the story of two prisoners who bond over. One is a wrongfully accused man hoping to find a way out. One is a man who has given up all hope. And random acts of kindness help them earn their redemption.

See, it's about Redemption. It's in the title. No use thinking about the theme. Morgan Freeman is perfectly cast in this film, and gives one of the best performances in his life. But every one of his lines is not the line of a prisoner, but somebody who has been paid to pretend to be a prisoner.

The movie lacks any sense of reality, from the poorly supervised chain gang, to the subplot of the sinister warden, and even down to the fact that a man is allowed to keep a tool made for chipping away rocks in his cell.

The film would have worked as a stage play easily. Because we expect this detachment from reality. But this film likes to pretend this is reality. The film also likes to make conclusive statements, and then immediately retract them.

This movie has a heart. It spills out all over the screen while we watch the characters monologue, getting to the point of the movie over and over again. Long movies never bothered me. On the contrary, I think it's a shame four hour movies never get released these days. Still, when it's two and a half hours plus of monologues reiterating the same plot point, it's two and a half hours too much.