MovieChat Forums > The Green Mile (1999) Discussion > This movie SUPPORTS the death penalty.

This movie SUPPORTS the death penalty.

posted 8 years ago by IceboxMovies
17 replies | jump to latest

The death penalty is founded on the belief that certain guilty criminals deserve to die. If that is the case, then this movie supports the death penalty because John Coffey "punishes" Wild Bill at the end of the movie by having Percy shoot him dead.

Although the film portrays death row in a way that is sad and nihilistic, the film still supports the death penalty because, like the death penalty itself, it punishes the main villain by killing him off and portraying it as justice.

[–] Captain_Beeble 8 years ago

Do you think the death penalty is a good thing or a bad thing? I think as long as the person being executed is known to be guilty, and as long as the execution isn't sabotaged by doing something like Percy does, it's not a bad thing. I highly doubt I'd have the courage to be one of the people that executes the condemned person though. It must really be horrible for the soldiers that are required to kill other men in wars. I wonder if that's the main reason they have boot camp - so they can get the recruits to turn off their emotions and look the other way when they're about to kill somebody.

[–] IceboxMovies 8 years ago

I personally dislike the death penalty because I've always had a subconscious fear of being executed. Yet I can understand the idea that "executing" certain guilty criminals can bring a sense of closure to an extended period of grievance.

I have no definitive opinion on the issue. This film, however, supports the death penalty, though it may seem like it's anti-death penalty simply because it's about an innocent man being executed for a crime he didn't commit.

Many anti-death penalty activists want the death penalty abolished because it runs the risk of ending the lives of innocent people... but to me, that avoids the issue at hand, which is: If a person is guilty, do they deserve death?

In Frank Darabont's other film, The Shawshank Redemption, Red is in prison for murder. He could have been sentenced to death, but instead he was sentenced to life imprisonment, perhaps because murder was the only extent of his crime.

So, I guess the message of The Green Mile is: If you murder AND rape, you deserve death?

[–] Captain_Beeble 8 years ago

Arlen Bitterbuck wasn't a rapist, but he got the death sentence as well. But in the book there were some characters that got their time commuted to life sentences. That poses the question, how come some prisons have the death penalty for murderers, and others don't? Another argument I've often heard in favor of the death penalty is it saves money on having to feed, clothe and shelter the convicted murderers.

[–] IceboxMovies 8 years ago

Another argument I've often heard in favor of the death penalty is it saves money on having to feed, clothe and shelter the convicted murderers.

Of course, there's also the argument that the death penalty itself is a waste of money!

[–] liscarkat (18589) 8 months ago

Prisons don't have the death penalty, or not. It's courts that make the decision. The prison just carries out the order.

[–] Mr_Recchia 8 years ago

Do you think the movie advocates John's views and choices? Especially since he's portrayed as a naive, simple minded manchild? Michael Clark Duncan's acting coach told him, flat out, "your character is five." He got that from reading the script. Certainly we shouldn't take the spontaneous actions of a child seriously. Paul in his old age also refers to John as a "force of nature," meaning many of his choices aren't fallible, but that he can't necessarily be blamed for them.

John's actions are random and impulsive, and the movie knows it. It's not trying to use him as a thesis for its themes.

Officially Canadian for 27 years. Never heard "aboot."

[–] KingCobra686 8 years ago

I would say the opposite. The only characters who died through the chair were shown dying in emotional scenes that made you feel bad for them. If the movie was pro-death penalty I would have expected more villains dying in the chair to show how effective and important it was.

When Percy kills Wild Bill, I think that is also in support of the death penalty. It was a pointless move by Percy because Wild Bill was doomed anyway, and the fact that Percy doomed himself by making a rash decision like that is supportive of the more organized structure of the electric chair process. It also was certainly not portrayed as justice.

[–] IceboxMovies 8 years ago

When , I think that is also in support of the death penalty.

Did you mean to say "against"?

It was a pointless move by Percy because Wild Bill was doomed anyway, and the fact that Percy doomed himself by making a rash decision like that is supportive of the more organized structure of the electric chair process. It also was certainly not portrayed as justice.

It may have been pointless of John to make Percy pull the trigger. But I bet audiences felt pleased to see Wild Bill get it. Admittedly, I sure did.

[–] Citation_Needed 8 years ago

Good! We need to kill more criminals and broken people. They don't appreciate what life offers and are a negative influence on society, who ruin other people's lives. No different than putting down viscous or unwanted dogs.

I'm so in favor of the death penalty, I think if any innocent person gets killed from it, the prosecutor should get the death penalty. They won't even get a trial. Just a hearing where they have to prove the innocent man who died was guilty and when they fail, they get executed. That will teach them to flaunt that power recklessly to try and force a plea or confession without the proper evidence. The only way they can survive is if they show that new evidence was presented and why they didn't find that evidence in the first place.

[–] liscarkat (18589) 5 years ago

Basing my judgement on the fact that the movie shows a brutally botched execution, and that it depicts all of the executed criminals as poor souls who don't deserve to die, I'd say its makers did not intend for it to support the death penalty. That being said, there are certain criminals who do deserve to die. Not only that, but execution is a perfect deterrent: any criminal who is executed is permanently prevented from ever harming anyone again. In that regard it is a foolproof system, which is not the case with a sentence of life imprisonment.

[–] snepts (11123) 5 years ago

I respectfully disagree whole-heartedly regarding the State executing people. It's not the place for a civilized government to KILL PEOPLE. This reinforces the notion that it's proper to take life. No one should take a life, and as was pointed out earlier, the amount of $$ afforded to those who appeal their sentence is beyond what a life sentence behind bars entails.
We should always be a compassionate society. We don't need to excuse wrong-doers for their crimes, but life is a lot more complicated than simply executing a person just because you say you don't want them to commit another crime. They won't have the opportunity to and who knows what kind of hell their own life was like before they did what they did.
It's just a bad business to be in, killing people, and I don't think the State should be in it.

[–] liscarkat (18589) 5 years ago

I don't give a shit what their life was like before they did what they did. That's not an excuse. The state has a duty to protect us from murderers by removing them, so they can never hurt anyone again. Some sons of bitches have committed crimes so disturbing and monstrous that they don't deserve any sympathy. If you don't want to throw the switch on the motherfuckers, I'll be glad to do it, without a second's hesitation, and I'll sleep well that night. It's very easy to avoid being executed--just don't murder anybody.

[–] chilone (17913) 8 months ago

You're talking to an extreme leftist. Common sense is foreign to them.

This just in: This snepts reprobate hasn't posted anything in a year. Good riddance!

[–] Kowalski (76274) 5 years ago

THIS IS THE EXACT REASON WE NEED JUDGE DREDD...

[–] drrclavan (667) 4 years ago

And what's wrong with that? The death penalty is awesome. Certain guilty criminals do indeed deserve to die. I can think of billy "the rapist" cunton, hitlary cunton, dementia joe xiden and his crime family, ilhan omar, tlaib... the list is endless, well it's as long as the list of demonrats really. Those guilty of high treason should all be on death row.

[–] janoss (214) 4 years ago

It's written of a time. You can't judge today based on the 1930's.
It's an existential issue.
I do not support the death penalty.
If someone hurt my kids or wife, I'd kill them myself.

The idea is to let the State handle it. That keeps it out of the hands of vigilantes and people with vested interests that make poor decisions. That's why we protect the criminal because they might be the wrong guy and deserve to not be subjected to harmful treatment.

I prefer the idea of making a reasonable place for criminals to stay where they can't hurt anyone any more. Let them learn. Let them write. Let them grow. Let them atone as best they can for their sins.