The Green Mile: The Complete Serial Novel

This book came on time and packaged well. I ordered it so that I could lend it out! I have the original chapter books and don't want to lend them. As far as the Novel goes, I'd suggest that even though you are among most who has seen the movie; this book is worth reading. I have read Stephen King novels since I was a young adult and never have been disappointed.

If you've seen the award-winning movie with Tom Hanks, then by and large, you know exactly what to expect from this book. That's not to say you shouldn't read this book for fear it will be redundant. In fact, I would almost advise you to watch the movie first, then read the book. The movie recreates the novel almost scene for scene, so much so that, barring some minor omissions, the movie quotes much of the dialogue verbatim. I say watch the movie first because when you read the book, you'll compulsively imagine each of the characters using the actor that portrayed them in the film. Each actor that was cast was PERFECT for the character as they're described in "The Green Mile", so for those who have trouble transforming words into a face and accent, the movie helps out a lot. A word of caution though: while 3/4s of the novel is translated to film almost perfectly, the movie cuts out multiple scenes that occur later in the book, and ultimately changes the ending quite extensively ... and that's for the better. The final scenes in the book are good, without a doubt, but in comparison to the film, somewhat lacking for dramatic impact. Additionally, there is a chapter at the very end of the book that, really, can just be ignored, as it feels tacked on and doesn't add anything to the rest of the story.

If you're familiar with, and have read Stephen King's work, then in many ways you know what to expect from this novel: dialogue, including slang and vernacular, are handled beautifully in this novel, and as always, makes you feel like someone you know is relating this story to you. In the case of "The Green Mile", this is especially true since this is one of King's only books to use the first person perspective throughout. And it's not simply that instead of a lot of third person phrasing it uses first person phrasing, but that the narrator himself is truly a character both within and outside the story. What I mean by this is that "The Green Mile" takes the format of an old man recalling, bit by bit, his experiences from 60 years prior. As would be befitting of something like this, this means the narrative is frequently interjected with frank opinions, incongruous recollections, and general use of slang that makes it feel exactly like a real person is recalling a real set of memories. To some this might make the story somewhat confusing; at times, the narrative doubles back on itself (though this is mostly an artifict of the conversion from serial novella to one piece novel), and each chapter begins in the present day before flipping back to the 1930s.

Unlike many of King's novels, this story is largely devoid of any monsters, aliens, or magical happenings. In fact, other than a few scenes (possibly a half-dozen in number or so), this story reads mostly as a period piece centered around one strange man's time on death row. But this isn't a bad thing at all; this story is still incredibly compelling, reading like a combination of a character study and a classic mystery tale. The eventual plot twist heigtens the drama and throws things for a loop, which makes the conclusion of both the 1930s plot, and the current day plot nothing short of memorable to a degree that might bring forth a few tears. I would definitely advise that you leave yourself an hour or so to read right through the final chapters of the novel to avoid interrupting the pace and emotional impact.

I've a project to read two books by each of the ten novelists who will be lecturing at the Maui Writers Conference this summer. When I finished The Blackstone Chronicles by John Saul, a serial horror novel which the author says he was encouraged to write by King's success with The Green Mile, I took a break to engage in another pending project; to compare the book and video versions of The Green Mile. My stepdaughter is an avid reader and a Stephen King fan. After enjoying the video version of The Green Mile, I asked her if the book was significantly different. She said it was very similar, but varied in some respects. It occurred to me that comparing the two might be helpful in understanding the difference between book and script writing. It was. Both the movie and the book are five-star. Despite their similarities, they have a different feel, and doing both is a worthy endeavor. I recommend you read the book first, but that's not crucial. My review technique was to read about a scene, study its video version and then read some more; I used the rewind button frequently. This method percolates up some interesting trivialities. In the movie, Coffey says, "as lonely as a sparrow in the rain," but in the book he says "as lonely as a robin in the rain." King is an expert writer in every respect, and I'm certain his research is faithfully done. I suspect "robin" was a boo-boo though. Stephen King hangs out in New England, where robins are plentiful. Coffey is a southern boy, and not too bright. He never saw a robin. Another triviality that smacks of a research problem is the year. The events in the book happen in 1932, whereas the movie is set in 1935. Some Hollywood sharpie may have noted that a crucial prop was not available in 1932. I couldn't spot the problem, perhaps because I wasn't born until 1936. Maybe the clip from the Fred Astaire movie shifted the date. Although watching movies in the "Resource Room" at the Georgia Pines home for "wayward droolers" is featured in the book, the tear-jerking dancing scene is not. Congratulations Hollywood, you gave me a real Kleenex moment. I doubt if even a master like Steven King could write that cry, however, or even want to. Hollywood has the advantages of sight and sound to stir our emotions. Movies, after all, are drama; a combination of facial expressions, artful camerawork and musical scoring designed to grab us in the groin. Writing, on the other hand, can suck us into the minds of the characters, and make us think. That is why I say the feel of the two versions, two unlike mediums, is different. This is a story about death. While reading the book, I shuddered on occasion with a sense of mortality, my mortality. King made me droop his book onto my lap as I stared at the willow tree out back, he having reminded me that my time is running out. The video, on the other hand, often had me wiping my eyes, as much from laughter as the pathos, the response to good actors playing out a predicament and making it feel real. Still, even with the facilities of the pause and rewind buttons, the movie is about this scene, then the next one, and moving right along. How often have you walked out of the theater after the show before you could begin to think about it? The acting is excellent. Expressions, pauses, posture and stutters suggest what is going on in the character's head, but they cannot compete with the power of the written word. When Paul and his wife visit Melinda, who is dying from a brain tumor, King writes for Paul: "...my eye happened on the blue hearth rug by the fireplace. It occurred to me that it should have the shade of tired old limes, because now this room was just another version of the Green Mile." Hollywood can't do that. Writers work with protagonists, whereas scriptwriters work with stars. Although the movie dialogue is usually verbatim the book, the best lines from Brutus and Dean, like "What happens on the Mile, stays on the Mile," are given to Tom Hanks. In the book, when Brutus and Paul (Hanks) confront Percy in the room with Old Sparky, Percy drives the end of the scene and forces the handshake. In the movie, Tom Hanks never loses control of the altercation. Hollywood's tendency to sharply distinguish between its villains and heroes sometimes overly exaggerates reality, although it was not offensive in this case. There are some subtle differences for the role of women. In the book, King points out that only two women attended Delacroix's execution; there are several in the movie. In the book, Paul's wife pointedly excuses herself when the men plan their risky mission, whereas in the movie she is an influential participant. Hollywood, I suppose, is more politically sensitive than King. There are only two major differences between the two works. In the book, Paul sleuths the solution to uncertainties about the death of the Detterick twins. The movie accomplishes this with dramatic visualization by making one of King's incrediblenesses more incredible. I prefer King's version; too much hard to believe stuff upsets my stomach. The other significant difference is that the movie version eliminates the sub-story with Brad Dolan, the Georgia Pines orderly. To me, this is an important plot echo, a twist on the theme of mortality. Its omission underscores the difference between the two forms, the visual versus the thoughtful. Similarly, after reading the book, you might remember what John Coffey said about Old Sparky; "They're still in there. I hear them screaming." King put it in Italics; the movie left it out. As an amateur (i.e. unpublished) novelist, I sought to understand the difference between book and script writing. I found my answer just as the credits began scrolling up the tube. "Screenplay written by Frank Darabont, based on a novel by Steven King."

I started reading my favorite book when I was in jail,oddly enough. I wasn't in for anything along the lines of the other prisoners mentioned in this book. Or, series of books. But I was incarcerated, nonetheless. A wonderful, macabre book of fantasy (?) about a collection of characters interwoven to create this marvelous story of responsibility, awareness and redemption. Wonderfully laid out by one of my favorite authors. I believe anyone that desires to read the story that takes place over a span of 64 years,but takes place primarily at the tail end of the Great Depression will enjoy it completely.