Anatomy of a Murder Reviews
Paul Biegler is a former low-key district attorney that now operates independently but very infrequently. He prefers to fish, harass his underpaid secretary, and hang out with a local drunk who is also an attorney. One day a murder case falls in his lap that he's enticed to take and prove a military officer innocent, even when it appears there may be some funny business in the case on both sides...
"I'm sorry if I offended you awhile ago."
"No you're not."
Otto Preminger, director of Laura, A Royal Scandal, Where the Sidewalk Ends, Carmen Jones, Skidoo, Exodus, and Bunny Lake is Missing, delivers Anatomy of a Murder. The storyline for this picture is amazing and very unpredictable. The acting and script are brilliant and the film is wonderfully paced despite the long runtime (160 minutes). The cast includes James Stewart, Lee Remmick, Eve Arden, Bem Gazzara, Arthur O'Connell, George Scott, and Orson Bean.
"You surprise me sometimes."
'Why? I've been around."
I grabbed this movie off Netflix because I love both Otto Preminger and James Stewart pictures. This was a very well done courtroom drama and reminded me slightly of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. The pace of the film is very well done is Stewart and such an amazing and compelling actor. I strongly recommend this gem!
"I used to think the world looks better through a glass of whiskey. It doesn't."
Keep the eye moving. And for a film largely verbal with very little seen of the crime itself it was very necessary for the audience to be able to look at other things to stay interested in the story. A great deal of this story requires the audience to infer and use your imagination to create the picture of what the troubles were and what happened at the crime scene.
One of the things I found it interesting how the audience of the film is not told upfront what the case is all about. so in many ways the perspective or point of view which the audience is learning about what is going on with the case is just like a jury verses from the aspect of the victims or lawyer.
I also realized fairly early on that there is a lot of smoking and alcohol beverage drinking within the film.
I thought is was interesting to watch how the wife acted totally different once Jimmy Stewart mentioned her husband may be watching by looking out the window. She went from very close to her own car door window. She moved to the other side of the car away from the jail window or Jimmy Stewart giving a lot of personal space.
I think that one of the scenes could have been edited out cut when they showed that the victim was with the Psychiatrist.
Psychiatrist evaluation Temporarily insane. What does that mean?
I was surprised by how Large the courtroom was with two floors and large paintings above that may be 8 or more feet tall. It surprised me because usually you don't see court rooms that large in a film.
I find it interesting yet funny how Jimmy Stewart was seen at the beginning working on something to catch fish while sitting in court to keep him focused.
I find the story interesting in that it is about a controversial issue in the late 1950's like sex or rape. That was an issue rarely heard of fir its time. Things like panties are seen as funny by the Jury in court yet today it is heard more often therefore more common and viewed as not as funny.
One line that fascinated me that Jimmy Stewart mentioned was somewhat on the lines that; People are not just merely good or bad but are many things. I thought it was an interesting point for its day to bring up.
The other line that Jimmy Stewarts character brings up is that "Everyone loves something" weather it's fishing or any other personal interest.
One scene that stood out to me from a film aspect was The momentary pause/stare between the husband and wife on the way for the wife to go to the stand. It was a great scene with a lot of tension that leaves the audience curious what exactly could she reveal that may hurt either both herself or her husband whatever she may say.
I thought it was interesting when the Council sued by George C. Scott purposely blocking view of Jimmy Stewart's character.
I enjoyed the realism with ill-relevant discussions that are unrelated to the main story.
This film stands interesting as this film explores different elements such as Psychology, fishing, court, police investigation, military aspects are looked at in the film as aspects yet they all come together in the story to create one story.
I found it interesting when Jimmy Stewart brought up the aspect of Country lawyer Jimmy Stewart verses big city lawyer George C. Scott in the courtroom. It identified that there was a major difference in technics or styles how each lawyers went about facing the case. Such as in how the city lawyers has an associate to go to for information verses a small lawyer who had fewer resources to go to. An old style verses the new style of law.
Good points were brought up about how the side with George C. Scott consistently tried repeatedly to not bring up the rape case in court but rather a murder case.