La dernière marche

This is a very touching story of a man in a death row. I certainly didn't know anything about death penalty until I saw this movie. It gave me one thing that there is none who has right to take another man's life regardless of what he has done. I really enjoyed it, it made a lot of sense.

Tim Robbins is a wonderful actor. He's an even better director. I believe he would have gotten that Oscar if the subject had been less controversial and his position less clear.

Whether you agree with the movie's position on the death penalty, you can appreciate the human drama and the subtle relationship forming between the two main characters.

Sean Penn is given his first real chance to let his talent shine and Susan Sarandon is quite simply amazing. They create characters that are completely believable and are shown uncloaked. They are human beings, not perfect heroes.

Robbins never try to excuse or diminish the horrible nature of the crime committed by Penn's character. He shows us the grief of the victim's family. He never spares any side of the story. We are in fact shown every side of the death penalty debate and we are left to draw our own conclusion.

I thought it was a brave move when you consider Robbins and Sarandon's well known position. I expected something far heavier. It's never obvious or complacent.

It's quite simply a beautiful movie.

8/10

I haven't seen many films that really, truly made me rethink a long-held position or opinion on a thorny issue, but "Dead Man Walking" is one of them.

I read Sr. Helen Prejean's book, upon which this film was based, when it first came out in 1993. At that time I was utterly supportive of capital punishment -- to quote the script, I felt anyone who committed crimes horrible enough to land them on Death Row was an "expendable human being, suckin' up tax dollars." I also had personal experience with the issue when an entire family whom I knew in my childhood were slaughtered by a man who is now on Death Row for his crimes.

As you might imagine, I was disgusted with Sr. Helen's book. I thought that trotting to death row and holding the hand of some scumbag who'd killed innocent people was about the lowest thing anyone could do, and as a Catholic I was offended by the seeming hypocrisy of it.

Because I had disliked the book, I never saw the film until about two weeks ago, when I bought a remaindered copy of it in a video store. I have watched it four times since then, mostly because I am trying to work out my feelings on it. I am still a supporter of capital punishment, but it's going to be less easy for me to ignore the fact that (to quote again), "There's nobody with money on Death Row" -- and quite a few more blacks, now that I think of it, AND the fact that, like Matthew Poncelet's character, the men who are being executed are human beings who have feelings and fears. It's easy to jeer at Matthew on the day before his execution, fretting nervously about whether the lethal injection will "hurt," like a little boy at the doctor's office for a penicillin shot, since his victims' last moments certainly "hurt." What isn't easy is to realize that while the victims of these inmates didn't know they were about to die until it was too late, the inmates themselves have what seems like a blessing at first, but upon deeper examination is the greatest curse: knowing the exact hour and day they will die, and having to face it day by day, hour by hour, minute by minute.

I'm sorry if this review offends people who are sincere death penalty supporters. I still consider myself to be one, but my thinking has been reformed somewhat and I'm more ready to listen to the opponents and try to make compromises; maybe that's what this issue needs more than anything. I will say finally that ONE part of this film did offend me as a Catholic: the symbolic "crucifixion" of Poncelet during the "last words" scene. That was the one place where Robbins strayed from his even-handed approach to the issue -- the only one I could find.

In all, this was a fine film that made me rethink an explosive issue, and I recommend it highly to anyone debating the pros and cons.

Him, along with certain actors are touched by God. Meryl Streep, Kathy Bates, Gene Hackman, Morgan Freeman, Katherine Hepburn, Bogart, Anthony Hopkins, Day-Lewis, Denzel, Nicholson, Caine, the list goes on.

My husband and I tend to watch actors that we love and then watch all of their movies. Sean Penn has an amazing body of work. We don't care if an actor truly transforms themselves to play a role (but that's impressive) as much as we care about how authentic a performance is. For example, Michael Caine is pretty much always similar and yet he's compelling in every performance he's ever given. But Sean Penn gives a performance here that is next level. Touched by God is the only way to describe it.

Coming from the Hollywood couple notorious for their strong political convictions and social consciousness, "Dead Man Walking" is a multi-layered and thorough examination of a controversial issue. With this film, Tim Robbins really proves himself as a writer and a director, leaving no stones unturned in addressing the many key elements of capital punishment. In what I consider the best film of 1995, Robbins' take on the death penalty is both compassionate and incisive. Though he, Susan Sarandon, and Sister Helen Prejean (the Catholic nun who wrote the book upon which the movie is based) are against the death penalty, "Dead Man Walking" goes to great lengths to encourage debate and to examine the issue from all angles. It provides us with just as many arguments for capital punishment as it provides against capital punishment.

"Dead Man Walking" is perhaps most successful in depicting the families of both the murderer and his two victims. The scene in which Sister Helen visits Mr. Delacroix (father of the male victim) after he has criticized her for not doing so in the first place is particularly moving. As the scene ends, the camera slowly moves back, revealing a quiet and still living room. This shot alone perfectly suggests the shattering toll a murder takes on a family. In fact, this film has plenty of subjective camerawork that is both subtle and potent at the same time. Never does Robbins' feel that he has to hammer in the pain that these families face.

Sean Penn gives the performance of his career as Matthew Poncelet, the trailer-trashy and racist death-row inmate. This is the role that should have won him the Oscar, had there been any justice. A great testament to Penn's acting is that he does not try to win sympathy for his character. He simply plays Poncelet as is, and presents him as human, in the process. I have seen this film many times over the years and my heart still skips a beat when Poncelet finally lets go of his ego and owns up to his responsibility in the murders.

Susan Sarandon is simply wonderful as Sister Helen Prejean, playing her with a combination of bravery and vulnerablility. It is also great to see a Catholic nun depicted in a non-stereotypical way. Just as Penn gives a human face to a hardened criminal, Sarandon makes Sister Helen equally human.

I also strongly recommend the book! I have read it twice myself and I am sure that I will be affected by it once more the next time I pick it up. By reading the book, you will notice that Robbins has taken a few liberties with the actual events. The character Matthew Poncelet is actually an amalgamation of two death row inmates that Sister Helen describes in her book. The spirit and compassion of the book is dead-on accurate. It amazes me that Robbins' screenplay adaptation was not even nominated for an Oscar in addition to the other four nominations this movie did receive. As far as I am concerned, Robbins' direction and writing are assured, and I continue to look forward to his next projects.