Wonderful character development!

Purely Joyful Movie!

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

Saw in one of the episodes Sawyer reading the book "Of mice and men" the title was catchy. Googled it and came to know about this movie. Awesome acting. Might want to read the book someday. Though I am not an avid reader. Saw in one of the episodes Sawyer reading the book "Of mice and men" the title was catchy. Googled it and came to know about this movie. Awesome acting. Might want to read the book someday. Though I am not an avid reader.Saw in one of the episodes Sawyer reading the book "Of mice and men" the title was catchy. Googled it and came to know about this movie. Awesome acting. Might want to read the book someday. Though I am not an avid reader.

Based on the classic John Steinbeck novel and released in 1992, the story focuses on two traveling companions desperate for work in rural California during the Depression: George (Gary Sinise) is of average stature and smart whereas Lennie (John Malkovich) is big and mentally challenged. They get a gig at a big ranch while dreaming of owning their own one day when the opportunity suddenly presents itself. Unfortunately, the arrogant son of the owner, Curley (Casey Siemaszko), and his flirtatious wife (Sherilyn Fenn) complicate matters. John Terry is on hand as Slim, Ray Walston plays Candy and Joe Morton plays Crooks.I've been a fan of this potent Western drama/tragedy ever since I read the book as a teenager and both this version and the 1992 version are worthy film adaptions (I have yet to see the 1981 TV production with Robert Blake and Randy Quaid, which I've heard is good). It seems that you just cannot do a 'bad' "Of Mice and Men," as long as you have decent actors and filmmakers.Some people scoff at the moral of the story, as if it all comes down to shooting your aged, useless dog yourself, but it's way more than this. It's a commentary on the nature of companionship and loneliness: Whereas George and Lennie compliment each other many of the other characters languish in isolation, like Candy, Curley's wife and Crooks, even Slim. Questions of strength, weakness, usefulness, reality and utopia are explored as the story leaves you scratching your head.Comparing the two versions, I slightly prefer the newer rendition because it's in color and is just overall better made with a superior score and cast with the exception of Lon Chaney as Lennie. Malkovich is very effective in the more recent version, but Chaney's Lennie is just more likable. While I don't like the addition of cussing in the 1992 rendition, it's probably more realistic and it isn't so bad that it makes the movie unwatchable (for me anyway). In any case, Sherilyn Fenn is a vast improvement over the original's Betty Field, who's annoying and not desirable enough to pull off the part (but, then again, she might be desirable to male ranch hands with no other females within a dozen miles).The film runs 115 minutes and was shot in California.GRADE: A- COMMENTARY ***SPOILER ALERT*** (Don't read further unless you know the story) Curley's wife has only ever been valued for her sexuality, which she has learned to use to attract attention. Not only is she the only female character, she's also the only character not to be given a name in the book and the 1992 version, which emphasizes that she's a sexual plaything, currently owned by Curley. She was repressed by her mother and taken advantage of by men who made her empty promises. She prefers to believe that her mother stole her letters from the "Hollywood" man who used her, instead of accepting reality. She is married to a boor who places little value on her and so she seeks the only attention she can get from the men on the ranch as the only woman there: sexual attention. The contact with Lennie in the barn is as far as sexual as it gets. When she says "It feels good" to have her hair stroked, she isn't speaking sexually. She is enjoying the only nonsexual attention and affectionate touch she has had in a very long time, if ever. It is almost a meeting of children between this woman who long ago lost her sexual innocence but remains hopelessly naïve, and Lennie, who also longs for soft things in his life. It is a beautiful, tragic scene.Someone argued that Curley's wife wanted to get Lennie on her side so that he would kill Curley and she would be free to leave. If Lennie killed him, no one would believe him if he ever said that she told him to do it; and since she didn't do the deed herself, she could easily leave and start her life over, hopefully as a movie star. While an interesting theory, the young woman doesn't come across this devious or cunning in the story where her actions are more natural and naïve. Similar to Lennie, she was a child in an adult body, albeit not mentally challenged. She was starving for companionship, but none of the other men would hang out with her due to Curley and the threat of losing their job. Lennie was alone in the barn and so she just took advantage of the occasion to converse with someone. Add to this the fact that Lennie was the only man on the ranch to humble (conquer) her arrogant SOB husband, whom she hated. Plus, she noticed earlier how Lennie appraised her with obvious awe. So there was a subconscious attraction and she wanted the gentle giant to touch her, stroke her hair; perhaps to "reward" him.

This film first came to my attention in 2006 when during an English class, we were to watch this film and then write an assessment on it. As a rebellious 15 year old, the film did not sound particularly appealing to me and I was convinced that within two minutes my concentration would start to drift elsewhere. However, to my surprise it turned to be a worthwhile and gripping venture, well served by its cast.Though not a fan of John Malkovich, or of Gary Sinise ( who also produced and directed the movie ), I liked the movie because of its heartwarming storyline, its thoughtful pace and grittiness.Based on the 1937 novel by John Steinbeck, this 1992 film adaption ( adapted by Horton Foote ) follows the lives of two men - George Milton and his mentally handicapped friend Lennie Small. The two have recently had to flee from their previous employment in California after Lennie was falsely accused of rape ( all he did was touch a woman's dress as he has a liking for stroking soft things ). Eventually, the two secure a job at Tyler ranch. Ranch hand Candy ( Ray Walston ) seems to take a shine to them, but Candy's son Curley ( Casey Siemaszko ) dislikes them on sight.The dislike soon turns to hatred when Lennie accidentally kills Curley's floozy of a wife ( Sherilyn Finn ) when whilst stroking her hair he accidentally grips too hard and ends up breaking her neck ( Lennie has no concept of how strong he is ). Angered by this, Curley rounds up a group of men with the intent on lynching Lennie. In a bid to spare Lennie from a slow, agonising death, George takes Lennie to a private spot in the countryside and distracts Lennie by talking to him about their dream of owning a ranch together before reluctantly shooting him in the back of the head.As the film ended, we had the boys of my class being too busy either sticking chewing gum under the chairs or engraving graffiti on the desks to take any notice of the film and we had the girls of my class crying their eyes out. I did not fall into either category. I sat there cool as a cucumber, feeling a strange sensation in the pit of my stomach ( it could have been indigestion from that day's school dinner ).The scene in which Candy's beloved but severely crippled sheep dog has to be anaesthetised, much to Candy's upset, I find a deeply affecting moment. It was about 14 years ago that my first dog ( who, if you can believe it, went by the name of Hannibal ) was put to sleep after losing his ability to see or walk. Even now, I still haven't entirely gotten over losing him so I know only too well the pain Candy must have been feeling.As another poster has said about this film, do not be afraid to show your emotions whilst watching it. Just sit with a box of tissues at the ready and let your emotions loose.

'Of Mice and Men' is about two guys who had just changed the ranch they worked at because Lennie caused trouble. It's genre is period drama. The main character are Lennie, the big baby, who is played by John Malkovich and George, the small guy, who is played by Gary Sinise. In my opinion the film is successful, because the act was very well done.I think the character that did the best was Lenie, because acting stupid is not an easy thing. The best part of the movie is when Lennie crushes Curley's hand because at first Lennie had to act frightened, what he did well, and then he had to act furious, in which he did again good job. The film starts and ends different from the novel. One particularly successful aspect of the film is that there weren't almost any special effects. The camera was always positioned on the right angle.I think the worst part from the movie was when Curley's wife came at the field where the boys were working and began asking questions about her husbands' hand (Curley). I think the portrayal of Curley's wife was incorrect because in the movie she is not as bad described as in the book. They could have made her look worse like in the book.My overall opinion is that the film is quite good, although there were some parts that were not good. I think the movie can be watched from any age groups. I would give the film 4 stars out of 5.