This is one of my all-time favorite films, and I don't have anything bad to say about it (perhaps the cons were a little overly sensitive, but otherwise). It is one of the two Clancy Brown films I watch over and over (the other is "Bad Boys" with Sean Penn).

Anyway, during Oscar time in 1995 (honoring 1994), Morgan Freeman was singled out from the rest of the cast with a nomination for best actor (which he lost to Tom Hanks in "Forrest Gump").

What are your thoughts as to why. My thought is this: Freeman's monologue during his final parole hearing. That single performance, I think, allowed Freeman to get recognized over Tim Robbins.

Because the film is really about Red's redemption, not Andy's. If you notice, the entire film is told from Red's perspective of how he views his friend Andy. You never actually hear from Andy.

Red finds redemption for his crime through his friendship with Andy.

As such, Red is really the lead to the film.

Plus, the part of Andy Dufresn is really like the straight man.

Great movie. Good performances but I agree with Sherm, because everything was told from Red's perspective, he was really the lead in the film. Plus it's easier for me to take Morgan Freeman seriously than Tim Robbins. Robbins always looks like a goofball to me.

Freeman deserved to get nominated, Robbins didn't.

...and so was Red.

If anyone has ever deserved an oscar based solely on their narration during a film, Morgan Freeman in this film is it. I listen to this movie with my eyes closed and still be entertained. If you think about it, he didn't even do that much physical acting.

I'll go against the grain and say I think Tim Robbins' subtle performance was remarkable (he plays Andy perfectly in the way he keeps everything in but you just know there's so much going on with him under the surface) and I thought he deserved an Oscar nomination every bit as much as Morgan Freeman (who was great also). I think Robbins is one of our most underrated actors. I honestly don't think anyone else could have played Andy better.

And just so we're clear on this I think he's a political idiot but that doesn't mean he's not a fine actor.

Ya know, The Shawshank Redemption might just be one of the best, yet most underrated movies, ever.

Not underrated at all. It's widely considered a modern classic and is cited by cinemagoer polls worldwide as a favorite. Deservedly.

You know, I have seen this movie MANY times...and I never realized this. It was right in front of my eyes.

This bit of info gives the film an -even deeper- meaning for me.

Thanks sherm42

He deserved the Oscar, IMO.

Yet its funny that the film didn't do too well at the box office. Goes to show...

I thought Robbins' performance was great (as was Freeman's), and I also don't agree that only Freeman's performance received accolades & award nominations.

It was a great ensemble cast. The warden, Samuel Norton, and the Clancy Brown character especially. Great supporting roles!

I especially think Bob Gunton should have gotten a supporting actor nomination.

Bob Gunton (Warden Norton) whistling "Davey & Golaith" was priceless. Who wrote that in? The screenwriter? Or was it ad-libbed? Little things like that, boy.

("Davey & Golaith" was also evident in "Frailty.")

Very true. I remember this year very well. Twas 1994 and the critical faves that year were Pulp Fiction, Shawshank, Ed Wood, Quiz Show and Forrest Gump.

I remember seeing Shawshank Redemption opening night and it was nearly empty. I saw it a few months later at a local $1 theater and it was sold out. This was definitely a movie that gained momentum by word-of-mouth.

Yet another Warner Bros. film that was marketed terribly.

I know nothing about "Davey & Goliath" so I didn't catch that.