SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION: Favorite scene.

Dammit, Steph! The moment I read your thread title, these two scenes popped into my mind, and you said it all!

All I can add is that they are my favourite scenes because of the emotional release they bring, and because of the great universal truth in both these scenes: that happiness can be independent of external circumstances; that it truly is within our power to find moments of true bliss even when the world is falling apart.

Your analysis was a good explanation of the scene's function from a technical point of view; but I believe that when a scene really WORKS it's because something inside us is deeply satisfied. Sure, it's not possible to dissect that effect because it so subjective: but subjective responses are important, as these are the ones that will determine whether a film works with general audiences, or doesn't. A successful writer must be able to tap into and touch subconscious responses.

"Is that obtuse enough for you?"

Shawshank Redemption is one of the best movies ever. IMDB agrees with me; I think they rank it #2.

Stephanie76 said:

My first favorite scenes was when the gang is on the roof and Defresne gets an in with the guard Hadley when he offers to set up the "tax free gift" for him. For this Defrense manages to squeeze out a case of beer for the boys and in return he gets to feel free and normal.

I liked this scene because it reveals a lot about Defresne. He knows he's innocent and all he wants is to feel normal again. But he not only wants to do it for himself but for his pals who have become prisoners in their own shells. Defresne sees this hopelessness, this fear. He gives them a taste of the world outstide their prison, a world in which they don't need to fear but embrace.

How this scene moves the story forward: Because Defresne helps Hadley, he gets moved up into the library with Brooks, he gets to do all the guards taxes and even help the warden with his books. This pays off big time in the end.

Click to expand...

great scene choice steph.
whats great about it is the revealing of DEFRESNE's giving nature in a way that establishes his institutionalisation.

one of the themes of the entire piece i felt was institutionalisation and the consequences of it. Andy's giving nature (his desire to get his friends beers/establish a stronger friendship with them) is what establishes him within the prison. He helps Hadley as you rightly point out and its that which gets him really involved in the perison, leading to doing the accounts and so forth. the film is riddled with ironies (i had to come to prison to learn to be a criminal, Andy tells Red at one point) and i think that his giving is what got him into a position where he was taking (taking money and putting it in a fake account) to give himself freedom. this only comes clear ones the script is finished and we are able to trace back the subtle ironies, but the reader is aware throughout this scene (and many others) of the V.O of Red, which is in past tense. from this we are aware that a different future may exist for Red, or at least this allows us (as we start to like him) to hope that he does.

of course, hope being another of the themes. also, the fact that Red in this scene has to speculate about why Andy approached Hadley and got the beers for the others grants Andy an air of mysticism. he is not something we wholly understand, he is the mysterious angel of hope, beyond the human characters, always believing, never fully like the others (as pointed out by his refusal to drink the beer).

Not quite

I feel that the best scenes in this film are rooted in Darabont's great use of imagery...the scenes where nothing is said at all. Of course Red's VOs set the whole movie in motion. But I feel undeniably the greatest scene is the montage of Andy's escape.

Thanx Stephanie 4 starting us out!

The first thing that came into my mind was when they were on the roof drinking the beers. It felt free, normal.
Aruna I think your comments on the scenes couldn't have been said better. "Ditto".

There's constant contrast throughout the script. It makes the story stronger and the satisfaction of it stronger. These men don't want to be there yet fear being on the outside. When the bus arrives and we meet those evil guards, even more duality. It's a place of danger and living hell, and yet also love and comradship. The negative aspects of Shawshank enhance the positive aspects. It's an intense visual of the theory of relativity, a sort yin/yang.

The library being expanded: shows so much-team effort, hope, contrast.

Tommy getting his diploma: He didn't have to say anything. His actions said it all. It was an all "show" visual scene.

The night Andy escapes- I was about sure he was going to hang himself. I was right there inside Red's head. The visual foreshadowing of the thunderstorm heightened the intensity.

The beginning started out with a good hook: Andy with the gun, the road the cabin the gun-wasn't the best scene, but it got me to stick around for the rest.

When Red got paroled at the third hearing, He told it like it was. I could pick up how this character grew and changed.

After the "read" I rented the DVD. On the back of the box was a sort of long version of a logline:


It's not the way I would word it, but it somes it up.


Change sure leads to growth.

Jennifer

Okay wev'e gone over our favorite sceens and why. I think we need more discussion on this (ie: structure, plot and everything else that makes a script work).

We can get a lot out of this.

What does everyone think on this.

Also see Scripter1's post How do You Study a Script. There' s a good link there also to a tip on Martell's site.

Jennifer

My response to the discussion.

I've been thinking about this a bit and I've got a different take on Nique comments.

"whats great about it is the revealing of DEFRESNE's giving nature in a way that establishes his institutionalisation.

one of the themes of the entire piece i felt was institutionalisation and the consequences of it."

I never really saw Andy as being institutionalised.
He never intended nor wanted to stay in that prison a minute longer then he had to. He never accepted prison. He could have walked out of there a free man and never suffered like Red or Brooks. Red had accepted his fate, didn't think about escaping. Brooks apparently hadn't either.
Nor did any of the other inmates. Or the crow for that matter.

But Andy couldn't accept those bars.
Very, very early on he formed a plan to get out.

I see a difference between making friends, fitting into the inmate system and becoming institutionalized. Brooks could not survive outside the prision. He attempted to ruin his parol. Red only survived because he believed in Andy. Andy had given him a hope that Brooks didn't have time to acquire.

In fact, I would say that Andy helped UNinstitutionalize Red.

Andy was a quiet oppurtunist.
In order to survive he had to think on his feet and use the skills that he possed. When that opening presented it self Andy quietly turned it to fit his needs. He didn't know when, how, or where it might lead but he knew it was something. Once he started laundrying the money he knew what he had.
At that point it was a matter of surviving and how fast he could dig the hole.

I definatly think the two scenes mentioned show Andy's character. His giving nature and his need for normalacy, to enjoy just a few brief moments of happiness and pleasure.
Andy understood the human spirit, and I think he also knew how to win friends and influence people. It was a good set up with a fantastic pay off.

I don't think he did it manipulativly, it was just his nature.
Andy was an honest good guy, someone who just has that "You can trust me" nature. The kind of guy that stops to help you on the side of the road or gives you the dollar you're short in the grocery store line.

In prison he had to come up with a way to get back some of what he'd lost. The system had failed him, been abused, and so he felt justified in taking the money. I don't blame him.

At this point I haven't really developed a thought or take on the script. Nothing profound or unique leapt out at me.

I enjoyed the read, thought it was a great, well written script, an excellent writing style. Just nothing has clicked inside my brain regarding it.

I just don't think Andy experienced institutionalization.
That was a theme explored through the other characters.

Wow! Scripter: Thanx 4 the input here. It has given me more clarity on how an audience Identifies w/ a main char.-in this case Andy and grows to like him.

This script really showed Andy's char. and need, followed by his growth and acheivement of that need, against a great deal of conflict.

Jennifer

pstudios said:

Wow! Scripter: Thanx 4 the input here. It has given me more clarity on how an audience Identifies w/ a main char.-in this case Andy and grows to like him.

This script really showed Andy's char. and need, followed by his growth and acheivement of that need, against a great deal of conflict.

Jennifer

Click to expand...

Thanks for the great analysis, Scripter. However, I'm wondering about Andy's growth. It seems to me that he was a nice, giving guy to begin with, and doesn't have much of a (hate to use the word!) character arc. Sure, merely surviving prison and maintaing your humanity is enough to make you grow strong, but do you see any active evidence of how Andy grows and changes?
I'll be thinking of this today; just put the question out there for you more experienced ones.

Actually,

I fully agree with you Aruna.
I don't really find this a character arc film. I don't see that the characters themselves were really any different from beginning to end.
Andy was a smart, self contained man when he went in, and he was a smart, self contained man when he escaped, only now he was several hundreds of thousands of dollars richer. And I guess maybe he was more cautious and untrusting of people. I suspect that he spent a great deal of time alone, problably never got remarried or involved with anyone.
But we don't see any of that.

But did he arc? If so I would say it was very, very subtle.

I didn't see Red change that much either.
Course we don't know what he was like when he came in. I suspect that he actually did kill his wife in a fit of rage and had accepted his punishiment. Red I guess learned and understood a bit more of the human spirit through Andy. He saw a different, stronger, more human and generous side then he'd ever really experienced before. And it gave him hope for when he got out.

Andy changed more of the people around him then he changed himself.
I think the lasting character arc would be seen in the other inmates, the ones that learned to read and got their GED's and could make something of themselves once they got out.

The conflict though is strong, and is built and sustained through out the film, while the goal, Andy's goal isn't made perfectly clear until the end. We go through the film believing that Andy is just trying to survive.
We don't know about the tunnel.
We don't know about the money.
But we understand the obvious goal. Survive Shawshank. Survive and don't give up.

What I find interesting about this story is that there are really bad guys that we can clearly hate, The Sisters, and then there are the guards, who are okay as long as you don't piss them off , then there is the Warden who seems like an all right guy.
BUT, who is the greater evil?
The Sisters are bad through and through and up front about it.
But the Warden is playing both sides and he allows all the other bad stuff to happen, twists it to his advantage. He's the man in charge and therefor is the arch villian, the main antag. He IS Shawshank and it's him that Andy is going up against.
Each action Andy takes is in response, reaction to the way The Warden runs Shawshank and each of Andy's actions challenges The Warden's authority.
The letters, the books, the library, the teaching, it all throws it in The Warden's face that Andy is really the better man.

The Warden knew he was a hypocrite and that's why he shot himself.

Another thing I find odd about this film is how the audience sympathies with all these criminals. All these criminals and we feel for them, root for them, see THEM as the good guys. We know Andy was innocent, but we can assume that almost all of the other guys in there were quilty.
But we like them anyway.
(The only "bad" thing they do is jeering at the new fish and take bets on who will break.)
This illustrates how "bad guys" can be protags.

And I think Shawshank shows us a different perspective on prison life then many other films. Course it was a period film.
Do you think maybe the criminal type and prison has gotten more violent, more.... disgusting?
Shows like Oz and some others sure make seem that way.
Shows like Oz, and