SPOILERS
For many years, there was something about this film that I wasn't sure about. I don't know if it was a trailer or a review but I'd always steered clear of it but after a solid recommendation, I gave it a go.
I should have trusted my gut, for it is an uncomfortable and unlikeable film. I've seen and enjoyed many films about people with mental health problems - Rain Man, Forrest Gump, Peanut Butter Falcon etc - but these all have something endearing and likeable about the characters. Yes, they've been dealt an unfair hand but they usually have some humanity within them that as an audience member you can relate to. That was not present in this film.
None of the characters are likeable. Lenny is unhinged, weird and dangerous. It's patently obvious from the beginning that he isn't a 'gentle giant' or a benign character. You don't feel compassion for him or his fate, you just feel fear and unease because you can sense what he is capable of.
And this isn't me being uncharitable as it is clearly a choice by the actor and director that whenever he sees a woman, Lenny start looking sheepish and grabbing his crotch area, exhibiting the kind of mannerisms that makes it patently obvious that there is an underlying sexual angle to his behaviour.
For this reason, the lack of compassion also extends to George. I'm sorry but knowing what Lenny is capable of means that George is responsible and culpable for Lenny's actions. Lenny is clearly a ticking time bomb and hence you have to charge a duty of care to the guy who knowingly leaves a time bomb unattended.
In Rain Man, Raymond slightly changes but it is Charlie that completely changes. There is character growth and Charlie grows because he learns to protect and love his brother. Although Raymond can be draining, his idiosyncrasies are endearing and Charlie gets something back from his developing relationship with Raymond.
Likewise in Peanut Butter Falcon, Shia's character doesn't know it but he is looking for someone to look after to replace how his brother looked after him. There is shared affection and each character gets something back from the other and in turn develops because of their connection to each other.
This doesn't exist in Of Mice and Men. George doesn't change, Lenny doesn't change and neither brings joy to the other person. Lenny isn't an anchor that despite the extra hardship still makes George happy, he is simply a dangerous volatile individual.
Likewise George isn't a protector. When Lenny is getting beaten up by the Ranch owner's son, George doesn't step in to break up the fight or start fighting himself, he actually eggs on Lenny. He knows that Lenny cannot control his emotions, his temper or his strength yet he grandstands over a situation that everyone can see is going to end badly.
And then finally with the frustrated wife, it seems that there is almost some kind of victim blaming going on. Yes, she was lonely and frustrated and would be all manner of bad news to any guy in that situation but come on, she didn't deserve to die. She goes from potentially flirting with Lenny to getting her neck snapped in another situation whose outcome was clear to see.
And once Curly's wife has been killed, what are the audience meant to feel? I don't feel sorry for Lenny because it wasn't an accident. She struggled to escape, he could feel her panic, we saw the anger on his face and whether overtly intentional or not, he crushed her. He knew what he was doing during the tussle and he knew what he had done when he ran off. It wasn't an accident, he didn't swing round a ladder and knock her off a fence - he killed her with his own hands.
Likewise I don't feel sorry for George. He effectively left a loaded shotgun in a nursery full of children and walked away to play hoops. Given Lenny's possible diminished responsibility, George's hands have the blood of the woman on them.
And hence by the time they get to the river bed, I don't feel sympathy for Lenny or for George. Lenny gets an escape via the bullet to the head but what about George's penance for the death of an innocent woman?
I have to say that this really belongs in that category of films that everyone tells you is great and a real classic and it truly isn't. Is it the fault of Gary Sinise or is the book just like this, either way it isn't special or a classic and if anything is a really, clumsily told and unsympathetically written tale. Lenny isn't the Gentle Giant that the write up would have you believe but a dangerous man-child that would generate nightmares rather than sympathy in most normal people. I have to say that Frank Darabont/Stephen King did far better with what is obviously an homage to Of Mice & Men with The Green Mile, than Steinbeck ever did. Very poor and wildly over-rated.
For many years, there was something about this film that I wasn't sure about. I don't know if it was a trailer or a review but I'd always steered clear of it but after a solid recommendation, I gave it a go.
I should have trusted my gut, for it is an uncomfortable and unlikeable film. I've seen and enjoyed many films about people with mental health problems - Rain Man, Forrest Gump, Peanut Butter Falcon etc - but these all have something endearing and likeable about the characters. Yes, they've been dealt an unfair hand but they usually have some humanity within them that as an audience member you can relate to. That was not present in this film.
None of the characters are likeable. Lenny is unhinged, weird and dangerous. It's patently obvious from the beginning that he isn't a 'gentle giant' or a benign character. You don't feel compassion for him or his fate, you just feel fear and unease because you can sense what he is capable of.
And this isn't me being uncharitable as it is clearly a choice by the actor and director that whenever he sees a woman, Lenny start looking sheepish and grabbing his crotch area, exhibiting the kind of mannerisms that makes it patently obvious that there is an underlying sexual angle to his behaviour.
For this reason, the lack of compassion also extends to George. I'm sorry but knowing what Lenny is capable of means that George is responsible and culpable for Lenny's actions. Lenny is clearly a ticking time bomb and hence you have to charge a duty of care to the guy who knowingly leaves a time bomb unattended.
In Rain Man, Raymond slightly changes but it is Charlie that completely changes. There is character growth and Charlie grows because he learns to protect and love his brother. Although Raymond can be draining, his idiosyncrasies are endearing and Charlie gets something back from his developing relationship with Raymond.
Likewise in Peanut Butter Falcon, Shia's character doesn't know it but he is looking for someone to look after to replace how his brother looked after him. There is shared affection and each character gets something back from the other and in turn develops because of their connection to each other.
This doesn't exist in Of Mice and Men. George doesn't change, Lenny doesn't change and neither brings joy to the other person. Lenny isn't an anchor that despite the extra hardship still makes George happy, he is simply a dangerous volatile individual.
Likewise George isn't a protector. When Lenny is getting beaten up by the Ranch owner's son, George doesn't step in to break up the fight or start fighting himself, he actually eggs on Lenny. He knows that Lenny cannot control his emotions, his temper or his strength yet he grandstands over a situation that everyone can see is going to end badly.
And then finally with the frustrated wife, it seems that there is almost some kind of victim blaming going on. Yes, she was lonely and frustrated and would be all manner of bad news to any guy in that situation but come on, she didn't deserve to die. She goes from potentially flirting with Lenny to getting her neck snapped in another situation whose outcome was clear to see.
And once Curly's wife has been killed, what are the audience meant to feel? I don't feel sorry for Lenny because it wasn't an accident. She struggled to escape, he could feel her panic, we saw the anger on his face and whether overtly intentional or not, he crushed her. He knew what he was doing during the tussle and he knew what he had done when he ran off. It wasn't an accident, he didn't swing round a ladder and knock her off a fence - he killed her with his own hands.
Likewise I don't feel sorry for George. He effectively left a loaded shotgun in a nursery full of children and walked away to play hoops. Given Lenny's possible diminished responsibility, George's hands have the blood of the woman on them.
And hence by the time they get to the river bed, I don't feel sympathy for Lenny or for George. Lenny gets an escape via the bullet to the head but what about George's penance for the death of an innocent woman?
I have to say that this really belongs in that category of films that everyone tells you is great and a real classic and it truly isn't. Is it the fault of Gary Sinise or is the book just like this, either way it isn't special or a classic and if anything is a really, clumsily told and unsympathetically written tale. Lenny isn't the Gentle Giant that the write up would have you believe but a dangerous man-child that would generate nightmares rather than sympathy in most normal people. I have to say that Frank Darabont/Stephen King did far better with what is obviously an homage to Of Mice & Men with The Green Mile, than Steinbeck ever did. Very poor and wildly over-rated.