Christie’s novels are not easily adapted for film and television. Because in order to increase the suspense of the novel, female writers usually design a lot of suspected characters in the book. Of these, only one or two (perhaps with the exception of the Orient Express) are really murderers, and most of the others serve only as smokescreens to confuse the reader.
But this pattern of storytelling, once embodied in film, creates a serious problem that Hitchcock once mentioned in his review of Jamaica Inn: the director cannot cast an unknown actor as the real murderer.
Because then, when the truth comes out, the audience will be bored. But if only he is played by a big star, it is easy for the audience to guess the ending. So Hitchcock hated to adapt whodoneit-style detective dramas.
But this “Witness for the Prosecution” has no similar obsession. Not only is there not a large number of people involved, but the killer has almost been identified as one person.
The rest of the story is all about whether or not he actually committed the crime! Therefore, under this relatively compact story structure, director Billy White has enough room to use his unique comedy style to enrich the story content and character.
I would like to briefly describe the plot, but because of the suspense component of this film, it is not too deep. So let’s take the first part of the story as an example, and talk about Billy White’s brilliance as a great screenwriter. First of all, to remove all the details of this part of the plot, let’s look at the rest of the main story: the film begins, the barrister who has been hospitalized with a heart attack has just been discharged home to recuperate.
It happened that the assistant attorney brought a murder case and wanted him to defend the defendant. At first the barrister did not want to accept because of his rehabilitation, but later changed his mind.
Through conversation, he learned that the defendant and the deceased, a lady who was alone, had first met briefly in a dress shop, and then, some time later, had met again at the theatre, and had become good friends. That leads to romance.
Plot summary so far, you see, there is nothing special. But what happens after Billy White adds a side effect: the lawyer moves home from the hospital to recuperate, accompanied by a talkative but devoted nurse.
The lawyer hated the nurse, but there was nothing he could do. When they got home, the smart nurse confiscated the lawyer’s cigar hidden in his cane. Let smoke as his life is rather chagrin. Just then, the assistant attorney led the defendant to the door.
The barrister, who was not prepared not to accept a murder case (because he was excitable), came across two cigars in the assistant’s pocket and changed his mind. I wanted to take him to the study and smoke him on the grounds of hearing the case.
Unfortunately, neither of them had any matches, so they had to call in the accused, who was waiting outside the door. He didn’t have a match, but he had a lighter. And saved the barrister’s life.
As if in return, he decided to sit down and listen more closely to the cause of the case. Then the defendant began to tell: one day, he passed a clothing store, and happened to see a lady (the deceased) picking out a hat.
As she tried one on, she happened to catch a glimpse of the defendant standing outside a shop window. The defendant shook his head at her, indicating that he did not like the hat. So the lady obediently changed into a tall hat.
The defendant nodded approvingly. The lady hurried out of the door and exchanged a few pleasantries with him. Then they said goodbye. A few weeks later, in a movie theater, the defendant was watching a movie when his wife came in and sat in the front seat right in front of him. She was wearing the tall hat he had chosen for her. But the tall hat obscured the defendant’s view. He put his head in the front row and was about to complain when he suddenly recognized the other, and the two began to talk excitedly…
See the genius here? Plot development has a strong correlation. And what ties them together are the “key things.” First, the nurses. Nurses were introduced to create conflict with lawyers. And the paradoxical result is the first “key thing” : cigars! She confiscated the lawyer’s cigars. And this is not a simple show of character or purely comedic cut scene.
The cigar is directly related to the behavior of the next barrister: the barrister who has declined to visit suddenly finds the cigar in the pocket of the assistant barrister! So I did not go to nap, but into the study for the so-called “talk.” But because two people did not have matches, they were forced to pull the defendant in to borrow a fire. So the story turns to the barrister taking the case.
The defendant’s recollection is even better. It also has the key thing: the hat! The first connection between the two was the hat. But if the writers are going to run into each other again, design it to recognize each other by walking face to face on the street or something. Sure, but it’s boring. For lack of drama.
So how do you make the second encounter dramatic? Billy White thought of hats. He thought of the theater. Blocking the view of the people behind you through the top hat! Ha ha, how clever!
But back to the plot. Next, the defendant’s wife also paid a visit to the barrister who took the case. Judging from the testimony she gave, the accused does seem guilty. The barrister immediately pointed out that she was the wife of the defendant and could not testify against him.
But the other party’s response is even more shocking: in fact, they are not married! In the face of this sudden change, how will the barrister cope, and what will be the next development of the story? …
The barrister is played by veteran British star Charles Laughton. Although Lawton is listed in the credits behind Dillon Bowie (the defendant) and Marlene Dritch (the defendant’s wife), his portrayal of the barrister is the central character of the film. The second half of the film’s trial is dominated almost entirely by him. This character, arrogant, arrogant, unreasonable.
But at the same time, he has the qualities of a good lawyer: keen observation, careful thinking… Billy White added a visual gimmick to his investigative style: talking to the people involved, he often pulled out his side glasses to scrutinize his opponents.
The function of the lens here is not to see things, but to reflect the sunlight outside the house and flash the other person’s face. According to the barrister, by observing the instant reaction of the person being swayed, he can tell whether the person is telling the truth. But does this wacky trick really work? You won’t know until you watch the film.
There is another interesting detail in the scene of the barrister. During the trial, when others spoke, Lawton seemed to be bored with the two dozen pills the nurse had given him on the table, arranged in a neat square. Then it was revealed that newspapers about the development of the case were being sold at newsstands on the high street. Integrate back into the courtroom.
By this time, Lawton had less than half the pills on his desk. The nurse asked him to take the medicine every half hour. So this sequence of scenes is actually a hint to the audience about how long the trial lasted… One seems to be Billy White from the early years of cooperation with Liu Biqian to absorb the pure film expression of “understanding”. It seems a little complicated and obscure, but it’s interesting.
Marlene Dritch may be a true evergreen in Hollywood history. The evergreen here is not referring to her acting career, but the face that seems to never grow old! Watching the film, it is hard to imagine that the defendant’s wife is already 56 years old.
Dillon Bowie, on the other hand, is treacherous in appearance. Especially those two dark eyebrows, so that the audience can not not from the preconceived assumption that this person is the real murderer.
Can such “obvious”, is the director deliberately using the image characteristics of the actor to do some kind of misleading? Again, you don’t know until you see it.
There is no nurse in the original. Billy White inserted this character to enhance the drama and comedy of the film. Laughton’s real life wife, British actress Elsarlancaster, as always showed off her outstanding talent with the field of comedy. And the opposite scene between her and Laughton, because of the real identity of the couple makes the performance more wonderful, the comedy effect is also more intense.
The most interesting opponent of Lawton’s trial was the victim’s maid. The old lady, from appearance to pronunciation, is full of joy. At the same time, the combat effectiveness is also very amazing! In the first round, we hit the mighty barrister. Of course, in the end, because the other side cunning to seize a physiological weakness and defeat. Golden Age American films, especially comedies, were impressive even in small supporting roles. This may have something to do with the high number of European immigrants in the film industry at that time.
The way they perform actually reflects the European understanding of comedy: the comic expression of the actor’s image, expression, body movement and even voice is emphasized, rather than just reciting lines. But now, with a new generation of pure-blooded native Americans taking over, this fine tradition of Hollywood comedy is dying out.
Although there are few directors such as the Coen brothers trying to stick to it, people have seen too many: Hu Tianhu, a handsome girl who does not know what is a real comedy, has become a youth comedy; It is not the same as the six people, regardless of whether my performance has a funny sense of persuasion, anyway, the mouth is a bundle of jokes. In fact, in the end, it is nothing more than a substitute voice tool for talk show writers.
There seems to be something questionable about the film’s ending. But it no longer seems to matter. Because Billy White has built this courtroom drama so that the audience can completely ignore the thriller and suspense, and simply watch it as a good comedy or drama. Of course, several performing artists also contributed to the excellent interpretation.
