Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

Interesteg What makes it different from others?

ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

Alistair Olson After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Anssi Vartiainen Originally a short story by Agatha Christie, which was then adapted into a play, which then served as the basis for this film. A down on his luck fellow named Leonard Vole (Tyrone Power) befriends an elderly widow, who just happens to be loaded. She also happens to end up dead, with Leonard blamed for the murder. Enter one elderly barrister named Sir Wilfrid Robarts (Charles Laughton), who has just gotten out of a hospital after a lengthy stay due to reasons of excessive lifestyle and bad habits. But, the case intrigues him, so he takes Mr. Vole as his client despite the protests of his nurse.Most of these courtroom dramas follow a fairly predictable pattern. Not that other genres don't have their conventions and clichés, but courtroom dramas rarely even try to hide them or shy away from them. With them the pattern is the point of it. You want the predictability, to a certain degree. You want to play along and try to guess the final outcome. Likewise with this film. Most of the running time is spent going over the case, reviewing past events, getting to know the characters.And it works. Charles Laughton especially is a blast. Sir Wilfrid is a wreck of a human being. Man consumed by vice. But then the case starts and his cunning intellect is suddenly at the forefront, his gaze unwavering and sharp.This was also Tyrone Power's last film. He would die during the filming of his next movie. But, as far as swansongs go, this is not a poor legacy to leave behind.But then, the main point of these films. The ending, when something is suddenly revealed. A key point of evidence is found, a new witness appears, someone cracks on the bench. I absolutely don't want to spoil anything, but the original story is by Agatha Christie. Trust me when I say it's wonderful.Witness for the Prosecution is a gem of its genre. Professionally crafted and entertaining, with great characters and an ending that won't leave you disappointed.

clanciai This is actually a comedy, and its artificial intrigue and superficiality is all too transparent for anyone to be able to take it seriously. Yes, it's a murder trial, and murder is dead serious, especially since the punishment in 1952 still was death by hanging, but there are too many flaws in this case to make it credible at all. For example, if Tyrone Power didn't kill her, who did? No other candidate is ever presented, except a fabricated hypothesis of a possible thief, who anyway didn't rob anything, while the broken window clearly wasn't smashed from the outside for a break-in. The prosecutor fails to make this apparent conjecture clear as the absurdity it is and is all the way dwarfed by Charles Laughton as the lawyer.Agatha Christie was a very skillful writer, all her intrigues are logical and water-tight, but they are all superficial constructions. In comparison with Hitchcock's one great murder trial film. "The Paradine Case" (see my review) which is thoroughly organic all the way with very clearcut and convincing characters, each one humanly crippled by his own weakness, this one becomes no more than an entertainment. It is even regularly funny. Billy Wilder made some of the best films of Hollywood in his time, but at the same time all his films suffer from some non-convincing artificial superficiality. He is very seldom serious and can rarely be taken seriously, never in his later films, perhaps in his early ones, especially his maybe best film "Stalag 17" (see my review).Anyway, the film is exciting and enjoyable all the way, although they scream too much at court, also this is not very realistic, and the most enjoyable acting is between Marlene Dietrich and Charles Laughton. His wife Elsa Lanchester adds as usual a very personal touch to the comedy. It's well worth seeing again after some decades for its great entertainment value, but there are certainly more interesting murder cases on film, especially Hitchcock's very underestimated "Paradine Case".

Khun Kru Mark I watched this again recently (2017) after seeing the BBC version on TV.Sixty years on, it's a dated but still immensely entertaining take on Agatha Christie's short story. As with all Agatha Christie submissions, there are more twists and turns than a twisty turny thing and this re-telling is no different.Whereas the BBC 2017 version decided to go in the way of gloom and depression, the movie version is played for laughs for most of the time. The characters are exquisite and deep and the story makes sense and isn't hard to follow.The most fun derives from the relationship between aging defense attorney (Charles Laughton) and his fussy and stubborn nurse Plimsoll (Elsa Lanchester). They could almost be married! He starts off by telling her that he should have stayed in his coma rather than wake up to her bossing him about! Lovely stuff!Unlike the short story, this is a courtroom drama all the way. Much of the movie is consumed with the grand old world of British traditional courtroom affairs. This has the effect of almost sidelining the drama of the murder itself. In fact; if Agatha Christie had taken on a commission to write an episode of Perry Mason, this is what she would have come up with!It's not perfect, though. The wartime flashbacks seem to be there to pad out the running time of an essentially simple story. I'm not sure that the shady meeting in the dark alley really works, either. But the star turns in front of (and behind) the lenses make this a satisfying way to spend a rainy Sunday afternoon.

Scott LeBrun Hollywood legend Tyrone Power, in his final completed film role, plays Leonard Vole, accused of the murder of a lonely rich middle aged woman, Mrs. Emily Jane French (Norma Varden). They'd struck up a friendship, and he continued to see her in the hopes that she'd finance the inventions that he wanted to market. Now she's dead, and all evidence points to him being the killer. Taking his case is the irascible, witty barrister Sir Wilfrid Roberts (Charles Laughton, in a delicious, Oscar nominated performance), who's recovering from a heart attack.This viewer shouldn't relay too much about the plot, but, as adapted from Agatha Christies' play, it's riveting stuff. While it obviously derives from a stage work with so much focus on dialogue and performance, it's the crackling, often funny dialogue and superior acting that makes this so effective and seemingly quickly paced for a film running just under two hours. The script, written by Harry Kurnitz and the well regarded director Billy Wilder, obviously takes great delight in the twist laden scenario. "Witness for the Prosecution" is often throwing surprises at the audience, and while more savvy folk may be able to predict a fair deal, the ways in which characters and viewers alike are manipulated is nothing short of masterful.There's a great deal of humor to be found in the relationship between Sir Wilfrid and his nursemaid Miss Plimsoll (Elsa Lanchester, a.k.a. Mrs. Laughton). She's annoying in a lively, endearing way, and his reactions to her are simply priceless. Lanchester was also Oscar nominated for her scene stealing, comedic work.There are no slackers here, especially when you realize there are performances within performances being given here. Power is quite engaging, and Marlene Dietrich is highly striking as the German woman whom he took as a "wife". Wonderful support is provided by John Williams, Henry Daniell, Ian Wolfe, Torin Thatcher, Ms. Varden, Una O'Connor (that scenery devouring player from some of the Universal horror films of the 1930s, cast here as the housekeeper), Francis Compton, Philip Tonge, and Ruta Lee.The filmmaking is slick without calling attention to itself, with Wilder and company completely trusting the source material. The result is a smashing entertainment that deserves to be rediscovered.Nine out of 10.