The Green Mile: Screenplay [Paperback]

With "The Green Mile: The Screenplay", writer-director Frank Darabont provides would-be screenwriters with an unprecedented look at how a perfect screen adaptation is written. Stephen King, author of the novel on which the film is based, has called Darabont's screenplay "hands-down, the best film adaptation I've ever read." Tom Hanks, the film's star, said of the screenplay, "It's that rarest thing, that thing you're always looking for, this piece of work that shows up on your desk, ready to shoot, and you look at it and say, 'Wow! We just have to show up and make this thing!'" In most situations, directors come to actors hat in hand, begging actors to work on a film. With "The Green Mile", Darabont had actors lining up to work in the film. Even actors of the stature of Gary Sinise were willing to take virtual cameos to appear in the film. The book contains Darabont's final shooting script, which even in that form, contains minor differences from the finished film. It also features introductions by Stephen King and Darabont, as well as a selection of stills and storyboards which give readers added insight into the production of what is easily this year's best film. Although lacking the in-depth analysis of changes in the screenplay which were present in Darabont's last book, "The Shawshank Redemption: The Shooting Script", this book is well worth reading, and, in copanionship with the forthcoming "The Making of 'The Green Mile'", will give readers a guided tour of the production of a modern film classic.

I discovered the first episodes of The Green Mile in Biloxi, Mississippi, and the last ones in France. I read them. I was moved by strong emotions, practically to tears, and yet I remained unsatisfied. I reread it when it came out in one volume, and I had the same sensation of frustration. The book, the story had two lines and the unity was not clear, the message was not obvious and it seemed to be that there is always a devil somewhere to torture, at times to death, the righteous and the innocent. The two time lines were not really reinforcing each other. The bad nurse of the old people's home was not a real continuation of Percy, and Percy did not have and could not have, does not have and cannot have a continuation. Evil in man is repetitive, but in no way continuing, developing, getting any kind of amplification with time. I have just been listening to a tape about the psychiatric hospitals of the old days (up to the mid 70s in France), and the doctors, the nurses, and even the patients, those who dedicated their whole life to get rid of that institution, compared these asylums to concentration camps and demonstrated how the inmates were reduced to animals, and yet resisting, how the rations (during World War II) where starvation rations meant to slowly kill the inmates by starving them. Doctor Lucien Bonnafé, MD, cannot be in any way stopped in his explanation of this alienation, of this reduction of men to vegetables, especially with the chemical straight jacket. Hitler did not invent concentration camps, and he did not invent eugenics, the cleansing of society of their misfits. He just systematised, industrialised it. But, But, BUT, I finally got to the screenplay of The Green Mile by Frank Darabont. He got that second time line out. He recentered the whole story on Paul, the only one Paul that crosses time. And then the light came out so strong that I was not moved any more, but literally blinded into ever stronger and never before experienced emotions, into unquenchable tears, tears that were a salvation, a redemption, an epiphany that would not ever satisfy and quench my thirst for optimistic humanism. This human world contains angels that can transform evil into good, and it is John Coffey, a black man. He has done that for a very long time, till the one day he gets trapped by his naivete and simplemindedness, because angels are naive, simpleminded and maybe slightly retarded, since then cannot conceive evil. When one does only good things and can only bring good news to the world, he is totally isolated, rejected, and thus he becomes the prey of all evil beings who will abuse him and trampled him down. And yet he is not completely trapped, because he comes to the point when he wants to go, to leave this world, where he can only love and be loved by fireflies. So he is happy when he gets trapped, relieved of this enormous responsibility of making the world better, of killing or repairing evil. Even if it means Death Row. But, before leaving, he gives his good nature to some other beings, even if he cannot give them his powers. Here it is a mouse, Mr Jingles, and a man, Paul. And his gift takes the form of a very long life. The very long life of telling the truth, the truth of God, the truth that killing is ugly, no matter whether it is criminal or judicial. Only life is beautiful, and the story of life has to be told forever and ever, to push death away, even if it is Death Row. This life story has to be told over and over again, just like a mouse will play with a spool forever. And thus, Darabont gets us to a universal lesson, to a unique and eternal metaphor. The writer, the storyteller is forever the one who will bring life to earth, real life, the life of justice, of beauty, of emotions, of truth, of entertainment, of happiness. The storyteller is God himself, or at least his angel, because he nourishes our souls with the desire to know a better world. When are we ever going to have the film, the video, so that we can be moved to frantic tears by the images that will demultiply the screenplay into a real piece of human paradise, in our dreams, in our night, in our daydream, in our sunshine of hope ?

I am amazed at the genius of Frank Darabont. SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION is the type of film that many directors spend their entire lives trying to make. That film alone is worthy of placing Darabont in the top echelon of modern directors. However, with THE GREEN MILE, Darabont has triumphed again. This screenplay is not as in depth as the SHAWSHANK shooting script. Nevertheless, it is still quite informative and is a useful resource for aspiring filmmakers. Transcribing an already successful published work into a successful movie is extremely difficult and rarely happens. However, Darabont has done it twice. A person can learn a great deal about writing just by reading this book. There's no better way to learn than to learn from a master.