Salubfoto It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Abbigail Bush what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Caryl It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

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.

Wuchak 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.

Talysa Bryant Of Mice and Men is a novel written by John Steinbeck. I was assigned to read this book my sophomore year in high school. I really enjoyed the film and feel as if we definitely need more films like this one in our time. The screenplay brings to life the growth of a friendship between two men George and Lenny. The plot of the film is that Lenny and George are always on the run. Lenny always gets George into trouble simply because he just doesn't know any better. The film did a great job showing that George and Lenny really cared for and protected each other. Although some of the most important details in the book were lacking in the film. Such as aspects of the book which really help you to understand each character were not shown in the film. The actors did an incredible job, I was really drawn into the story and was very moved. The storyline along with the performance of the actors really kept my attention. I could not take my eyes off of the screen!

dhubball This movie is OK but its very different from the book in many ways. SPOILERS AHEAD: When Curleys wife dies in the book he is more sad than angry.Also at the end of the book when George is telling Lennie about there soon to be home it is more stretched out. I'm not saying this ruined the movie, it's just a lot more noticeable. I give this movie a 6.5 out of 10 due to it having a lack of emotion and some of the actors weren't the best choices. Sorry for people that disagree with me but I think they could have done a lot better with this movie. I give the book on the other hand 9 out of 10 because I get into the book a lot more than I do watching the movie. I recommend the book over the movie. Thank you for reading my review and I hope it helped you decide whether to watch this. Have fun watching film go-ers.