Pluskylang Great Film overall

Tedfoldol everything you have heard about this movie is true.

Sienna-Rose Mclaughlin The movie really just wants to entertain people.

Kimball Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

jackparr-11645 I watched this a few weeks ago in my English class, and to be honest, I wasn't expecting much. I thought it was just going to be another generic, low budget adaptation of a classic novel, but actually it was way better than I thought it'd be. The acting was really good and it's very well shot. The cast is perfect, but there is one thing I want to complain about.Some characters are completely over-exaggerated. The best two examples of these are Lennie and Curley's wife. Having read the book, I know Curley's missus is meant to be very flirtatious and stuff, but in the movie she literally tries to get with every single guy she sees. As for Lennie, he's too retarded. From reading the book, I thought he was reasonably normal, just with some learning difficulties, but in the movie his childishness is extremely over the top.Other than that, it's a fantastic adaptation. *cough* Chris Fable *cough* It's not an easy task to adapt an 80-year-old text for a modern-day audience. A job well done!(P.S. I love when George swears Lennie says, "You shouldn't do that, George. It's not clever, George." I laughed so hard I nearly wet myself! xD)Dialogue and Acting: 9/10 Animation: 5/10 Structuring: 10/10 Subtlety and Themes: 9/10 Originality: 8/10Total: 41/50

Nick Holland Of Mice and Men is directed by and stars Gary Sinise. Sinise plays George, a man living in California during the 1930's Great Depression. George is a homeless man that goes from job to job trying to earn any scrap of money to survive. However, George's situation is a little different than most; he travels with a close friend with a mental disorder named Lennie (John Malkovich). George and Lennie eventually come to work at a ranch, and that's where our story starts.I watched this film very soon after finishing the novel, and was pleasantly surprised. I was expecting for this movie to be awful, but it was actually pretty good. Most of the acting was nice, the direction was good, and the script was actually really great. Most of the lines in the script were either taken straight from the book, or were very close to it. Of Mice and Men was a pretty good movie, and I quite enjoyed it.The best thing about this film adaptation was the script, like mentioned above. The script was very faithful to the novel, and many lines were exact copies of what John Steinbeck, the author of the book, wrote. The book being only around 100 pages, the film knew it was going to have to lengthen itself, and it did so very well. The scenes added were pretty insignificant, and were mostly time fillers, as they should have been. The script did just about everything right, and I really liked that aspect of the film.Another pretty nice thing about Of Mice and Men was the acting. Gary Sinise was a perfect casting choice as George, and played the role nicely. All of the smaller actors, such as Ray Walston as Candy, were good as well. Most of the acting was really good all throughout the movie. Now, John Malkovich was good as Lennie, but played the role of a man with mental issues a bit too well. Although he wasn't bad by any means, he went a little overboard with his performance. When reading the novel, it was quite obvious that Lennie had issues, but he still seemed like he could at least hide his problems, as he does in the book. However, John Malkovich's performance showed him as a man beyond even recognition. His performance, while decent, went a bit farther than I feel that it should have.Gary Sinise, while great as George, also did great behind the camera as the director. All of the shots taken were pretty nice, and all of the camera angles were really good. Many of the takes were longer, and there were no quick cuts at all. However, I did have a complaint that was mostly with the direction, and that was the suspense build up. Although the direction was good, tension wasn't present very often. There were only two points throughout the film that I felt suspense, and that was because I had already read the book and knew what was about to happen. With my prior knowledge of the major plot points, I felt suspense. However, if I hadn't already have known the next big event in the story, then I don't think that I would've felt the tension almost at all.Of Mice and Men was overall a decent movie, and respected the novel. The script was great, the direction was fine, and most of the acting was good. I'd recommend Of Mice and Men to anyone who's read the book and enjoyed it.

SnoopyStyle Based on John Steinbeck's classic novel, George Milton (Gary Sinise) and Lennie Small (John Malkovich) are traveling through the Depression era landscape. The guys are on the run as a woman runs away screaming. They have dreams of owning a small farm together. They have jobs lined up at the Tyler Ranch. The Boss (Noble Willingham) is a hard man. Candy (Ray Walston) is the old worker with one good arm. Curley (Casey Siemaszko) is the mean-spirited son of the boss. His wife (Sherilyn Fenn) is flirtatious and won't leave George alone.The material is always great. It's just a matter if the actors are up to the material. In this case, both Sinise and Malkovich are fully up to the task. Malkovich may not have the bulk but he has the presence. He brings out the perfect tone of humanity and innocence. Sinise is always the protective brother in the relationship. These are very good performances.

chschullery I thought the movie was generally the same as the book, and I thought both were great. The casting was pretty good. All of the characters, except for Lennie, were exactly as I pictured them while reading the novel. From the book, I thought Lennie to be much younger than he was in the movie. I liked the book better than the movie mainly due to the end. In the novel, it seemed to me that George killed Lennie after they talked about the house for a little longer, whereas in the movie, the murder of Lennie seemed to be much more abrupt. Although certain parts of the movie didn't match up with the book, I still thought that it deserved an 8/10 since most of the events did match up. I also felt that the movie went into deeper detail than the book did in some of the scenes.