Reviewed by Colin Jacobson (May 30, 2024)
Like most literary classics, John Steinbeck’s novel Of Mice and Men has received multiple retellings via other media. However, when I examined how many times Mice hit the silver screen, I was surprised to learn that this has only occurred twice to date.
This means cinemas have hosted just the Oscar-nominated 1939 edition and the 1992 version documented in this review. Mice also was adapted for TV twice – in 1970 and in 1981 – but we went 53 years between cinematic editions.
Directed by actor Gary Sinise, the 1992 Mice starts with scenes of characters on the run. A woman flees some unnamed peril, while we see two men race from a pursuing gang.
We soon get to know the pair of males, George Milton (Sinise) and Lennie Small (John Malkovich). The brains of the operation, George exhibits a cynical world-weariness as he attempts to take care of Lennie and keep the pair alive in the harsh Depression-era economy.
A brawny but intellectually deficient innocent, we quickly learn that Lennie doesn’t know his own strength. He harms animals and others due to overexuberance of affection.
Though down on their luck, they envision a happy future for themselves when they get their own farm and Lennie can keep rabbits. However, the present doesn’t seem so glorious, and the pair go to work on the Tyler Ranch.
First they encounter crippled aging hand Candy (Ray Walston) and his similarly old constant canine companion. After the deal with the farm boss (Noble Willingham) they get to work and also encounter other denizens of the ranch.
Most significant of these are the boss’s hotheaded, mean-spirited son Curley (Casey Siemazsko) and his neglected, flirty wife (Sherilyn Fenn). Curley takes an instant dislike to Lennie, while it seems clear that his wife has the hots for George – along with pretty much every other man on the farm, apparently.
George tries to warn Lennie to steer clear of problems, a notice that hints of past problems. Eventually we learn more of what happened with the girl seen at the start of the movie.
The pair acclimate to the farm life and we check out various events. At one point Candy overhears George and Lennie as they discuss their future plans, and he begs for them to let him come with them. The trio come up with a plan to buy a particular farm in one more month, and the rest of the movie follows what happens during that time span.
A wonderful writer, Steinbeck’s work probably remains strongest on the printed page. Though apparently the author himself endorsed it, I didn’t much care for the 1939 film, mostly because the roles seemed miscast. That didn’t cause any concerns with the 1992 Mice, which presented actors who appeared more natural in their roles.
Possibly the biggest improvement comes from Sinise. While I felt Burgess Meriweather was a talented actor, he came across as too educated and bookish for George.
Sinise manages to bring out the character’s earthy qualities in a more satisfying way, and one can more clearly see why Curley’s wife would gravitate toward him sexually. Sinise brings a nicely weary cynicism to the part but he also conveys George’s caring side as well.
As for Lennie, that character offers both an easier and tougher challenge all at once. On one hand, Lennie is so simple that he doesn’t require the same emotional range as the others.
On the other, he becomes difficult to convey without slipping into cartoonish elements. That was my biggest problem with Lon Chaney’s work in the 1939 flick, as he always felt like an excessively broad and unrealistic presence.
Malkovich doesn’t work wonders with the role, but he seems more grounded than Chaney. It’d be nice to see someone play Lennie without such a self-consciously silly voice, though I understand the actor’s dilemma.
If Malkovich used a normal way of speaking, we’d find it more difficult to accept the character as mentally deficient. However, I think there must be a middle ground where the role can demonstrate some disabilities but not seem so goofy.
Despite the vocal issues, Malkovich presents a nice range for Lennie. He makes the character appropriately simple but doesn’t turn him into a basic moron. This isn’t a great portrayal of a mentally challenged person, but it seems above average.
Sinise’s direction also comes across well, though as I noted earlier, I think the material continues to work best in novel form. Something about Mice tends to defy cinematic adaptation, and the story simply doesn’t function as strongly when depicted visually.
However, Sinise gives us a nicely basic and grounded telling of the tale. He relates Mice in a fairly workmanlike way that avoids theatrics and excessive embellishment.
This absence of showiness is a good way to depict Of Mice and Men, for the story remains a simple and basic one. The movie feels honest and direct.
It doesn’t telegraph its emotions as it stays low-key. While not a sterling film, the 1992 Mice seems like a very good one.
