Capital Punishment In Dead Man Walking

The film Dead Man Walking (1995) demonstrates the issues of capital punishment through a popular medium in order to attract increased awareness on the controversy. The plot focuses on inmate, Matthew Poncelet, facing punishment for his numerous crimes through authorized lethal injections that would cost him his life. The differing opinions on this controversy are embodied through Poncelet’s trial, however the dominant argument is persuaded through his own character to ultimately portray this film as an anti-capital punishment material. Tim Robbins, the director, deliberately criticizes this government sanctioned procedure by utilizing a Christian perspective, emotional sympathy, and lack of resolution to reveal opposition to these government

The director portrays Poncelet as a real human being through his relationships in order to reiterate the inhumanity involved with capital punishment. As Helen visits Poncelet, they develop a unique friendship that demonstrates his capability of good, humane characteristics, aside from his cruelties. Through this relationship the viewer observes Poncelet as he becomes increasingly kind, considerate, and respectful. The director also includes his familial connections in order to exhibit his character as not simply a criminal, but a son, brother, and friend. In multiple scenes his mother’s love for him is evident as she sincerely weeps for her son’s sentence. Poncelet is also portrayed as a seemingly good older brother to further the insight on his familial relationships. By the climax of the film, the audience is sympathetic for not only Poncelet but the loss that his family and Helen will soon face. The director’s ultimate argument is persuaded through the character of Poncelet to emphasize his humanity that will be taken away by the death penalty and the relationships that will be affected by his

Although Poncelet achieved his own resolution by admitting his own sins before death, those surrounding the trial and Poncelet were left in even more despair than previously. After forming a relationship with the inmate, Helen has to face the guilt of watching him die and begins to realize the truth of the unjust government practice. Poncelet’s family of course is in immeasurable grief, and will forever have the weight of his lethal death on their shoulders. Although the Percy and Delacroix family were anticipating closure by the death of the man that murdered their children, they received no such conclusion. Their overwhelming mourning for the loss of their children was still present, and the death of a stranger seemed to haunt them as well. This is evident when Mr. Delacroix came to Poncelet’s funeral, further demonstrating the lack of closure he received from the death penalty. Poncelet’s family and the families of those he murdered lost a child. Despite the drastically different circumstances, they were nonetheless killed, either by individual criminal or by the unjust state, causing grief that can not be resolved. The absence of closure for all parties involved demonstrates the ineffectivity of capital punishment providing justice, and suggests that the sentence further devastates even those closest to the