Dead Man Walking One of

Dead Man Walking One of the strangest aspects of the film "Dead Man Walking" is that it forces the viewer to see capital punishment from the perspective of the condemned. In the case of the legitimate media, convicted killers are usually viewed through the eyes of the victim's family, or sometimes the sensationalist press, which often depicts the gory details of the crime.

But most of the film takes place in the context of the jailhouse, and the crimes of the guilty man, played by Sean Penn, are not the focus of the plot. Rather, the focus of the plot is saving the killer's soul, so he can admit his wrongs before God, before the law takes his life. The film is explicitly Christian in its focus, although it does not preach.

The heroine of the film is not the person who discovers the truth about the crime, but Sister Helen Prejean, who counsels condemned killers before his execution. Sister Prejean hates the sin, in this case the sin of killing two young people simply because they were of different races and in love, but she loves the sinner. She believes that God's mercy and forgiveness is infinite, and that Matt, the killer played by Sean Penn can be redeemed if he admits his error.

It is possible to read the film as an argument against capital punishment. Penn's character becomes more sympathetic over the course of the film, as he searches within his soul for the reasons that he lashed out at society. At first he admits he is innocent, but finally he admits his guilt, and is saved. Sister Helen Prejean gives an audible sigh of relief when he confesses to her.

Because the condemned man shows himself as capable of moral change, when influenced by a good woman, it is hard not to ask -- why have capital punishment, if people can change their minds and their moral orientation? Wouldn't it be better to allow the killer to remain in prison for the rest of his life, to continue to reflect upon his crime, and perhaps act as an educator to the community, after his redemption? Why waste another life? Sister Helen Prejean, although she does not use the case to act as an advocate against the death penalty, seems to support this point-of-view in her actions.

At the beginning of the film, she is clearly disturbed by the nature of the crime, and the criminal's apparent lack of remorse. But as the film progresses, and the killer and the nun establish a human bond, Sister Helen increasingly believes he is worthy of being treated as a human being by the law. This, for Sister Helen means, being allowed to confess his sins, as all human beings have the right to counseling and confession. Sister Helen seems to believe that only God can take a life.

This makes murder wrong, but it also means that it is wrong for the state to take the man's life as well. The film provides some opposing testimony about the nature of capital punishment when it presents the point-of-view of the families of the victims.

But because the victims and their parents only appear briefly in the film, however sympathetic they may seem, it is difficult to feel for their loss with the same emotional intensity that one feels for the death of the individual that is the focus of the film, namely the killer. The film was based on a true story, and perhaps Sister Helen felt the same way.