Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Barry Pepper’

Walking the Miracle Mile

Posted in General Comments, Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 25, 2025| Leave a Comment »

“The Green Mile” (1999) – movie review
Today’s review is for the supernatural prison drama: “The Green Mile” (1999), starring Tom Hanks as Paul Edgecomb (a death row supervisor whose moral compass is tested by the inexplicable), Michael Clarke Duncan as John Coffey (a gentle giant convicted of a horrific crime, whose healing powers defy logic and prejudice), David Morse as Brutus “Brutal” Howell (Paul’s loyal second-in-command, steady and humane), Doug Hutchison as Percy Wetmore (a sadistic guard protected by political connections), Sam Rockwell as “Wild Bill” Wharton (a violent, erratic inmate whose chaos masks deeper menace), James Cromwell as Warden Hal Moores (a man caught between duty and desperation), Bonnie Hunt as Jan Edgecomb (Paul’s wife and emotional anchor), and Patricia Clarkson as Melinda Moores (Hal’s ailing wife, whose suffering becomes a moral fulcrum).  The film also features Barry Pepper, Jeffrey DeMunn, Michael Jeter, and Harry Dean Stanton in supporting roles that round out the emotional and ethical landscape of Cold Mountain Penitentiary.
Background:  This film came out while I was working in Saudi Arabia, and I did not hear about it for quite some time.  I’ve recently (finally) seen “The Shawshank Redemption“, so I approached “The Green Mile” with high expectations and a curiosity about another Stephen King prison story.  I knew it was long — nearly three hours — but I didn’t know it involved supernatural elements.  What I also didn’t know was how deeply it would explore themes of justice, mercy, and the weight of moral witness.  I watched this and found myself unexpectedly moved — not just by the story, but by the performances and the seeming dignity of its pacing.
Plot:  Set in 1935 Louisiana, the film follows Paul Edgecomb and his team of guards on “The Green Mile” — the death row block of Cold Mountain Penitentiary.  Their routine is disrupted by the arrival of John Coffey, a massive but soft-spoken Black man convicted of raping and murdering two young white girls.  Coffey’s demeanor and actions quickly unsettle the assumptions of guilt.  He heals Paul’s bladder infection with a touch, resurrects a crushed mouse, and later cures Melinda Moores of a brain tumor — each act accompanied by a mysterious expulsion of black, insect-like energy.  As Paul and Brutal begin to suspect Coffey’s innocence, they face a moral dilemma:  uphold the law or defy it in the name of justice.  The film builds toward Coffey’s execution — a moment of profound sorrow and ethical ambiguity — and ends decades later with Paul, now aged, reflecting on the burden of having witnessed a miracle and participated in the death / destruction of its instrument.
So, is this movie any good?  The acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  excellent;  restrained and evocative;  a few;  yes — deeply.
Any good?  Yes.  “The Green Mile” is a slow, deliberate film that builds and sustains its emotional weight.  It’s not a thriller (in the normal sense), not a courtroom drama, and not a typical prison movie.  It’s a meditation — on guilt, grace, and the cost of innocence and bearing witness.  The supernatural elements are handled with restraint, and the film’s moral questions linger long after the credits roll.
Acting:  Tom Hanks is quietly masterful as Paul — his performance is all internal shifts and moral gravity.  Michael Clarke Duncan is extraordinary.  His Coffey is childlike, haunted, and transcendent.  Duncan’s physicality never overwhelms his vulnerability, and his final scenes are emotionally devastating.  David Morse brings warmth and steadiness to Brutal, while Doug Hutchison’s Percy is viscerally loathsome — a portrait of cowardice and cruelty.  Sam Rockwell steals scenes as “Wild Bill”, but it works as his chaos is the film’s counterpoint to Coffey’s calm.  Cromwell and Clarkson deliver understated performances that ground the film’s emotional stakes.  The ensemble — Pepper, DeMunn, Jeter — all contribute to the film’s sense of place and moral complexity.
Filming / FX:  The cinematography is “Old South” warm and sepia-toned, evoking a sense of memory and myth.  The supernatural effects — Coffey’s healing, the mouse resurrection, the expulsion of illness — are minimal but effective.  The prison set feels authentic, claustrophobic but not theatrical.  The pacing is deliberate, with long takes and quiet scenes that allow emotion to build in the characters and in the viewer.  The flash-forward framing device (with Dabbs Greer as old Paul) adds a layer of melancholy, though it occasionally feels like a separate film.
Problems:  A few.  The film’s length is a challenge (to viewer bladder and butt cheeks) — some scenes linger a bit, and the pacing may test viewer patience.  Percy’s protection by political connections is under-explored, and Wild Bill’s backstory is hinted at but never fully developed.  The racial dynamics — a Black man with healing powers sacrificing himself for white characters — raise questions that the film doesn’t examine.
Did I enjoy the film?  Yes — and more than that, I felt it.  “The Green Mile” is a film that asks you to sit with discomfort, with sorrow, and with the possibility of grace.  It doesn’t offer easy answers, but it offers moments of profound humanity.  Coffey’s final request — to not be in the dark — is heartbreaking in emotional simplicity.  And Paul’s long life, his “curse” of memory, is a quiet indictment of justice delayed and mercy denied.  The film received critical acclaim and was nominated for numerous major awards, though it didn’t win any Oscars.
Final Recommendation:  Highly Recommended. “The Green Mile” is not really a film for casual viewing.  It demands attention, empathy, and a willingness to confront moral ambiguity.  If you’re willing to walk the mile — to witness, to feel, and to reflect — this film will stay with you.  It has stayed with me…  and I suspect it will for some time.
.
Click here (25 October) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Running To the End

Posted in General Comments, Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 19, 2025| Leave a Comment »

“Maze Runner:  The Death Cure” (2018) — movie review
Today’s review is for the third episode in the dystopian action thriller franchise, titled:  “Maze Runner:  The Death Cure” (2018), starring Dylan O’Brien as Thomas (a former Glader turned resistance leader, still haunted by betrayal and loss), Kaya Scodelario as Teresa (a scientist whose divided loyalties drive the film’s central moral tension), Thomas Brodie-Sangster as Newt (Thomas’s closest friend, whose fate becomes the emotional fulcrum), Rosa Salazar as Brenda (a fierce fighter and Thomas’s romantic anchor), Giancarlo Esposito as Jorge (a smuggler with flexible ethics), Will Poulter as Gally (reappears, but instead of a hardline enforcer, fearful of change and quick to scapegoat Thomas, he’s now a leader in the revolution against WCKD), Patricia Clarkson as Dr. Ava Paige (the morally ambiguous head of WCKD), Aidan Gillen as Janson (a ruthless enforcer with a personal vendetta), Barry Pepper as Vince (leader of the Right Arm resistance), and Walton Goggins as Lawrence (a scarred rebel with a messianic streak).
Background:  I watched this film to complete the trilogy.  I’ve seen the earlier entries, and while I wouldn’t call myself a YA fan, this series is starting to bring me around (for entertainment value, not for cinematic value).  I like O’Brien’s work so far in this franchise and I was curious to see how the franchise would play out its final installment.  This was my first viewing of the film (and series).  I watched this film with very tempered expectations — hoping for franchise closure, not mythic brilliance.  The second film in the trilogy was less original than the first, but it was more “open” (outside of the maze) and therefore “felt” more interesting (to me) in terms of franchise development.
Plot:  The film opens with a high-stakes train heist as Thomas and his crew attempt to rescue Minho, who’s been captured by WCKD.  Their mission leads them to the “Last City” — a fortified urban stronghold where WCKD is conducting experiments to find a cure for the Flare virus.  As Thomas infiltrates the city, he confronts Teresa, who believes her research could save lives, and Janson, who sees the “immune” as expendable.  (The “immune” are those born with a natural immunity to the virus.)  Newt’s deteriorating health adds urgency and heartbreak, culminating in a tragic sacrifice.  The climax involves a chaotic uprising, collapsing infrastructure, and a final escape that leaves Thomas with both victory and loss.  The film closes with a voice-over epilogue (Newt’s last letter to Thomas) and a beach-side memorial, offering a bittersweet sense of resolution.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I like / enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes (mostly);  solid performances;  visually competent;  a few narrative stumbles;  yes – more than I expected.
Any good?  Yes.  It’s a competent finale that tries to balance action / spectacle with character closure.  The emotional beats (especially Newt’s arc) land with sincerity, and the pacing — while occasionally uneven — keeps the story moving.  The film doesn’t reinvent the genre, but it respects its characters enough to give them meaningful exits.  It’s not profound, but it’s not too lazy either.
Acting:  O’Brien carries the film with a mix of gritty leadership, determination and on-your-sleeve vulnerability.  Brodie-Sangster’s Newt is the emotional heart — his final scenes are quietly moving.  Scodelario’s Teresa is more nuanced here, though her motivations still feel unclear.  Salazar adds spark as Brenda, and Esposito brings charm to Jorge.  Clarkson and Gillen play their roles with icy detachment.  Pepper’s Vince is mostly functional — a plot device more than a character.  An interesting point to mention is this installment was delayed for over a year due to an injury to O’Brien during the filming of a stunt.  Apparently the injury was serious enough to end production until he was fully recovered.
Filming / FX:  The visuals are polished — urban decay, sterile labs, and explosive set pieces.  The Last City is rendered with scale and menace, and the action sequences (especially the train heist and final escape) are well choreographed.  The FX are frequent and effective:  collapsing buildings, viral mutations, and gunfights.  The film’s aesthetic blends “Children of Men” plague / health with “Blade Runner” urban dystopian survival.
Problems:  Several.  The plot leans on familiar genre tropes — rogue agents, secret cures, last-minute rescues.  Teresa’s redemption arc feels unlikely, and Janson’s bad-guy villainy is cartoonish.  The emotional beats work (mostly), but the dialogue occasionally slips into YA melodrama.  Also, the idea that Thomas survives multiple near-death encounters without lasting injury strains credibility – but then, he IS the hero of the series.  (Not to mention the “real life” accident which delayed filming.)  Finally, the epilogue — really fails to explain a lot of things.  Why was Thomas working with Teresa for WCKD?  What does “WCKD” stand for?  What were they doing?  Why didn’t anyone test Thomas to see if he (or any of the “immunes”) was the cure they were seeking.  Were runners the best serum makers?  If yes, why weren’t they separated out for preservation / protection instead of endangered in the Maze?  If the virus was airborne, how was anyone safe, anywhere?  The character Gally, gets speared in the original movie, but he’s okay in this third film?  As unrealistic as it sounds, he was rescued and saved!  Now, that’s stretching credibility!
Did I enjoy the film?  Yes.  I appreciated the attempt to give characters closure and the willingness to embrace loss.  It’s not “entertaining” in the traditional sense I’m used to watching (action and superheroes), but it’s a competent finale.  It made me think about sacrifice, loyalty, and the cost of institutional decay.
Final Recommendation:  Strong recommendation (more for the series than this film) — While definitely not a standalone movie, I found this episode to be the best of the trilogy – especially for viewers who’ve followed the trilogy.  “Maze Runner: The Death Cure” is not “great”, but it’s a film that tries to honor its mixed genre (action, sci-fi, a little horror), characters and themes.  If you’ve come this far in the franchise, this film (more or less) finishes the journey.  If you haven’t seen the earlier entries, go back and start at the beginning or this film won’t make a lot of sense.
.
Click here (19 October) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

The Other Side Of The Walls (And Few Answers)

Posted in General Comments, Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 18, 2025| Leave a Comment »

“The Maze Runner: Scorch Trials” (2015)  —  movie review
This review is for the dystopian action sequel “The Maze Runner: Scorch Trials”  (2015), starring Dylan O’Brien as Thomas (the Gladers’ increasingly defiant leader), Kaya Scodelario as Teresa (his conflicted companion with her own secrets), Ki Hong Lee as Minho (the group’s athletic scout), Thomas Brodie-Sangster as Newt (the quiet strategist), Dexter Darden as Frypan (the loyal cook), and Alexander Flores as Winston (the wounded realist).  New additions include Giancarlo Esposito as Jorge (a survivalist with shifting loyalties), Rosa Salazar as Brenda (a fierce fighter with a tragic past and “semi-” daughter to Jorge), Aidan Gillen as Janson (a manipulative WCKD agent), Barry Pepper as Vince (leader of the Right Arm resistance), Lili Taylor as Mary (a scientist with moral qualms), and Patricia Clarkson returning as Dr. Ava Paige (the enigmatic head of WCKD).
Background:  This was my first viewing of the sequel. I watched it hoping it would be at least as good as the original “Maze Runner” which I had just watched a couple of days prior (review here). As with most sequels, and particularly for franchises I really had never heard of, I approached “Scorch Trials” with tempered expectations.  Mainly, I was curious whether the franchise could expand its world outside the glade / maze without collapsing under its own increasingly convoluted storytelling.  I bought this as the three-pack bundle, so I went in knowing this is supposed to be act two of the story and there was NO danger the lead was going to be killed off.  He’s on the poster for all three films.  LoL.
Plot:  The film picks up immediately after the events of “The Maze Runner” (2014), with the Gladers escaping one trap only to enter another — this time a scorched wasteland filled with “Cranks” (humans infected by the “Flare” virus), moral ambiguity, and the slow unraveling of trust.  The Gladers, having escaped the maze, are captured and now prisoners in a facility run by WCKD.  When Thomas uncovers the truth — that they’re being harvested for their immunity to the Flare virus — he leads a breakout.  The group traverses the “Scorch”, the nickname for the sun-blasted ruin of civilization, encountering Cranks (zombie-like infected humans), scavengers, and resistance fighters.  Their journey is both physical and existential, as loyalties shift and the line between survival and sacrifice blurs.  Teresa’s eventual betrayal adds emotional weight, while the introduction of Jorge and Brenda injects new energy into the narrative.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  Did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes (mostly);  solid performances (for YA actors and for the genre);  visually ambitious;  several narrative issues;  yes.
Any Good?  Yes — it’s a visually rich film that tries to expand its universe while maintaining momentum.  The world-building is ambitious, though frequently muddled.  The film trades the claustrophobic tension of the maze for the sprawling chaos of the Scorch, and in doing so, loses (inverts) some of its “perceptive” tightness.  Instead of a self-contained area we (they) are released into a vast wasteland (the “Scorch” desert and the mountainous wasteland / retreat of the resistance fighters).
Acting:  Dylan O’Brien continues to anchor the series with a mix of earnestness and grit.  Ki Hong Lee and Thomas Brodie-Sangster provide steady support, though their arcs feel lesser.  Kaya Scodelario’s Teresa is more plot device (group traitor) than character here (love interest or viable survivor), which undermines her emotional impact.  Giancarlo Esposito is a standout — his Jorge is unpredictable, charismatic, and oddly paternal (towards Brenda).  Rosa Salazar’s Brenda adds urgency and vulnerability, and Aidan Gillen plays Janson with the kind of smirking menace that’s become his trademark.  Clarkson, Pepper, and Taylor are underused but lend gravitas.
Filming / FX:  The cinematography captures the scorched landscapes with dry / dusty grandeur.  The ruined cities, collapsed buildings, and sandstorms evoke a post-apocalyptic aesthetic that left me feeling it both worked and didn’t work.  The Crank sequences are sufficiently creepy, blending horror and action. CGI is competent.  The pacing is brisk, with kinetic chase scenes and moments of eerie stillness.  The film’s visuals exceed its storytelling clarity.
Problems:  Several.  The plot is convoluted, with bursts of talk meant to explain instead of just using character’s actions.  Character motivations — especially Teresa’s — are murky, mostly unstated or not shown via flashbacks (which is the usual fallback to substitute action for monologue).  The world-building is intriguing but inconsistent;  WCKD’s goals remain vague (undisclosed), and the resistance lacks definition except they are against WCKD (with no explanation / history).  The film leans heavily on genre tropes:  betrayal, infection, escape, repeat.  Emotional moments are present but underdeveloped.  The post-apocalyptic aesthetic is the most confusing as there in no reason for the massive destruction – the Flare virus doesn’t infect buildings and there is no explanation of a war happening.  The “aesthetic” makes for good visuals and actions scene backgrounds, but it doesn’t make any sense (to me, anyway).  And, of course, NONE of the virus or Cranks story-line makes sense, but that’s kind of a given.  This is entertainment, not a science class.  So, the ending of this film sets up the next installment without resolving much.
Did I Enjoy It?  Yes (moderately).  It’s a visually engaging ride with moments of cinematic tension and somewhat genuine character interplay.  While it doesn’t fully deliver on its potential — philosophical questions of autonomy, sacrifice, and trust — it does enough as an action movie to keep you invested in the trilogy.  I found myself wanting more from the characters (and story), but not abandoning them – mainly because I know (knew) there is (was) a third installment to tie up the loose ends.
Final Recommendation:  Moderate recommendation.  “The Maze Runner:  Scorch Trials” is a middle chapter that expands the scope of its universe while sacrificing some of its coherence.  It’s visually interesting and reasonably entertaining as an action flick.  If you’re a fan of dystopian survival stories with a YA edge, it’s worth watching.  Just don’t expect resolution — this is a franchise “bridge” installment, not a standalone narrative.  For its atmosphere, performances, and momentum, it secures its place in the series.
.
Click here (18 October) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started