Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption

I've seen The Shawshank Redemption more times than I can count or remember, but it’s been a joy to read the details and the the backstories, about the characters that weren’t covered in the film. The hardest part is trying to suspend what I already know about ‘Shawshank’ and to read this just on its own merits. Nevertheless, this is a real treat, especially if you’ve fallen away from regular reading. This book is just long enough to get you back in the game.

As a writer who loves character, I am a huge fan of this book. Of course plot is important to every story, but I adore characters who carry a story. This is my favorite from Stephen King. While this differs some from the film, it remains a fantastic story about Andy, his friend Red, and how hope and determination triumph. I never get tired of the film or of reading this novella. I can't recommend it enough.

I am not much for Stephen King novels, but I wanted to read this one because I am such a fan of the movie. I was not disappointed with the novella at all, and it was interesting that the portrayal of Andy in the movie is slightly different than the way King develops him in the text. This is definitely worth reading if you enjoyed the film; just understand that in several respects it is different.

I’m sure many people have seen the movie based on this book, and if any of them are like me, have seen it at least a dozen times. It is one of my favorite movies. This is one of the most normal books that King has ever written, and in my opinion, the most brilliant. It differs somewhat from the movie, of course they have changed several important things, both overall, the outcome is still almost the same and it’s a beautiful story that I would recommend to anyone. A must read!

One of the greatest movies ever made came from this little book of only 111 pages by the horror master himself, Stephen King! But it is not a horror book and the evil person did not have to be killed 5 times before they were dead! There are some differences from the movie like "Red" being a white Irishman, however, when I read the book I could hear Morgan Freeman telling the story. His great rehabilitation speech comes in the beginning and not at his parole board meeting. Brooks does not kill himself nor does the warden as he quietly resigns after the escape. The movie ending was a lot more satisfying than Red just getting on a bus. The great news is that the major elements are taken from the book including most of the ending narration that is almost completely lifted from the book. A fast read and highly recommended especially if you loved the movie. It does get a little graphic concerning the "sisters" and poor Andy.

Thoughts and feelings come through while reading this story that you don't find in the film adaptation. I'm a King fan for decades, but read this for the first time, then purchased a few copies to share with other readers whom I thought would appreciate the written story. I found the written story more hopeful, the friendship deeper between the two main characters, just more touching overall. Thanks, Mr King!

One that continues the vision of Stephen King and Frank Darabont, the perfect cast of Tim Robbins, Morgan Freeman, Bob Gunton and the others. The grace of Rob Reiner in allowing Frank's script and direction and Liz Glotzer's inspired suggestion for the ending that Frank ultimately used. It is in that spirit that I have written a script that can include contributions of all the original cast, one that includes the passions of Tim Robbins with legal reform and Mo Freeman's love of sailing.

(Excerpt)

The Pacific was as large and blue as in Andy and Red's dreams but would it scare them to death or truly set them free?

"Some birds were not meant to be caged. That boat, that hotel, it wasn't too much to ask. I guess you can say I was no longer a skeptic. Hope wasn't a dangerous thing. Well, one thing you learn of the sea, things can change."

The 30 year anniversary of this beloved movie is approaching in 2024. Florence Staples Dorr along with her husband Russell were the dedicatees of the novella and as an 8th cousin to the late Florence as a Staples and Dixon cousin in Eliot and Kittery Maine maybe what I put on paper was inspired more than I can know.

Stephen King proves he can write more than just horror with this very entertaining tale (along with THE GREEN MILE and THE BODY, reincarnated as STAND BY ME for the film version).

Both the story and the movie follow the basic storyline (SPOILERS)....Andy Dufresne is a vice-president at a Maine bank who is tried and convicted of the brutal murders of his wife and her lover and is sentenced to life in Shawshank State Prison. The tale is told by the man who becomes his confident and closest pal all through out Dufresne's imprisonment Red (big difference here is he's a white Irishman, as opposed to the African American inmate played by Morgan Freeman in the movie but that's a change I approve of whole-heartedly).

Unlike in the movie, Red goes into details about what he did to land in prison but I won't go into it in here.

The movie does differ from King's original tale in quite a few ways, but for the most part I approve of them.

For example, it makes more sense for Warden Norton to have Tommy killed rather than just transfer the kid to another prison....as long as the kid lived, there would always be the chance he would tell what he knew about Andy's case....that someone else, an old cellmate of Tommy's, actually confessed to the murders Andy was imprisoned for.

I also think it was wise to have Andy walk off with the warden's money rather than just have an old pal set up an emergency 'just in case you get locked up' trust fund for him should Andy decide to escape.

The story ends with Red off to finding Andy with the words, I hope. We never find out if he ever does reunite with his friend. At the end of the movie we do see the two of them reunite on the beach. I definitely love this change, we needed a happy ending with our two leading men.

But King's words have their valid and strong points as well. In the book Norton actually goes out of his way to seal Andy's fate not out of fear for being exposed for his part in the money laundering schemes, but simply because he hates Andy for whom he perceives to be a self-important snob and outright tells Andy to his face he wants to see him rot. I almost wish that Frank Darabont (the movie's director) had kind of stuck to that. In the film, I get the impression that Norton almost has a hard-on for Andy, another reason he'd want to keep him in Shawshank other than not wanting to lose his cash cow or risk being arrested for the money fraud.

In the novella, there are several wardens who reign at the prison during Andy's time at Shawshank. A bit more realistic in my view, as I understand it, a lot of wardens don't stay at the same prison for more than a few years. But I can understand why Darabont felt he needed to just clean cut through it and settle for just one warden (again, maybe it's just me, but as far as the movie is concerned, I always wondered the reason that Norton never left the prison for greener passions was because of his dependence on Andy, both financially wise and for other reasons).

Both the short story and the movie have their strong points, but even though I like the movie a bit better, I still recommend reading King's story, it does feature a bit more backstory into our lead characters.

Both are winners, so I say read the short story first then move on the movie if you haven't read it or seen the film already.