Redlass's Full Review: Witness for the Prosecution
Agatha Christie would have been pleased with Billy Wilder’s adaptation of her play Witness for the Prosecution. She was a big believer in adapting a story to its medium. Her first venture into playwrighting was a response to the frustration she felt at others adapting her work. She thought they didn’t change it enough.
Wilder changed just enough of Dame Agatha’s best play to translate her charm and suspense from the stage to the screen. I’ll confess I’m partial to this play. Last year, I made my own directorial debut on a community theater stage and it was Christie’s version that I directed. After the show, the actor playing Wilfrid gave me this video. I hesitated to watch it at first, because I have great respect for both mediums and didn’t want to compare the two. I was pleasantly surprised to find that I did enjoy the film as much as the play—even though the two were very different.
What’s Different
Much has been changed in the movie to make it more appropriate for the screen. The screenplay also takes advantage of the acting talent available. The screenplay has a star-studded cast: Tyrone Power in his last completed role before he died of a heart attack, Charles Laughton in what many consider his finest role, Marlene Dietrich whose performance is stunning, and Elsa Lanchester--Laughton’s off-screen wife.
Marlene Dietrich plays the title role, so a scene with her dancing and singing to the troops was added—highly appropriate considering it was for this that she was most beloved and this that she considered the best thing she ever did in her career. They also changed the name of her character to Christine. I suppose it was considered more acceptable to American audiences than “Romaine.”
Elsa Lanchester’s role was added, and it is a nice touch. Indeed, she won an Oscar for her performance as the good-natured nurse who had to keep a tight reign on her difficult patient. The chemistry between her and Laughton’s Wilfrid was wonderful.
Wilfrid ages in this movie. Indeed, he has just been released from the hospital after a heart attack and it seems as though Leonard Vole’s case will be his last one. In the stage play, Wilfrid is still at the height of his career and is probably a younger man than is seen in the movie.
What’s the Same
Ultimately, the story is still the same, which is good because it was one of Christie’s best. There are so many twists and turns and the ending is a classic one. It is a story of love and loyalty and betrayal.
Leonard is always the guileless innocent who doesn’t realize how in over his head he is. His wife, to whom he is devoted, has some rather nasty surprises for him and is diagnosed by the attorneys as cold and heartless.
There is some wonderfully witty courtroom banter—especially between the two opposing attorneys. Although they are battling over the fate of a man’s life, they manage to poke at each other.
Which is Better?
I’m going to cheat. Christie’s Witness is the better stage play and Wilder’s Witness is the better screenplay. Both are worth seeing.
Epinions.com periodically updates pricing and product information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it.
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.