Comparison Of Rita Hayworth And The Shawshank Redemption

When freedom exposes itself in various ways, it tends to scare people. When someone has been accustomed to or stuck in a certain environment, freedom may seem like a far away grasp of reality. In his novel, “Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption,” Stephen King, expresses freedom as seemingly distant and untouchable. The novel also has a tendency to leave the readers questioning whether freedom surely wins or not in a specific scenario. Although the movie, The Shawshank Redemption, also extends that effect, it definitively establishes whether the hope and comfort for freedom is dead or alive- metaphorically and literally. These differing scenes and scenarios between the novel and the movie provide more intricate underlying and supporting aspects

In the movie, Andy gives Red a harmonica, knowing that Red used to play. When Red receives the harmonica and is asked to play he says, “Not now” (movie). Music being a supporting theme for freedom in the movie, the audience knows that music is something no one can touch, it is vulnerable. Music helps people feel, which is why Red is not ready to feel hope for freedom; especially when he says, “Hope is a dangerous thing” (movie). Feeling that hope once again can be self-destructing for Red, and seeing what that did to some inmates at Shawshank, he does not want to risk

But, Brooks let go of that freedom before he is even released from prison. In the novel, Jake cannot get passed the four walls of Shawshank, and Brooks can’t seem to pass any walls “protecting” him from the outside world. Brooks goes straight from Shawshank to an old person’s home. Since Jake and Brooks become so attached to each other, when they are set apart, they cannot live on their own. In the movie, however, Jake is never found, meaning Brooks never finds his freedom. So, not being able to leave behind his four walls everyday, he kills himself. If maybe the bird showed up, they could have made it