The Winslow Boy

Rating:
Summary: A fine movie from a fine play
Review: When I saw this movie, I didn't know that it is based on Terence Rattigan's play. Then I had an opportunity to read the play and found that director David Mamet adapted it remarkably. He kept original plot, characters, and even dialogues from the play, yet, he altered several scenes(for example, sir Robert Morton's powerful speech at the House of Common) which make the movie more vivid. "Winslow Boy" is based on a true story which involves a lawsuit, but, it is focused on Winslow family rather than Winslow case in the court. So, it could be an unexpected approach. People who expected thrilling arguements in the courtroom might be somewhat disappointed. But this unexpected approach gives a real value to this movie and it makes it masterful. Anyone who is tired of seeing typical hollywood movie will find a pleasant surprise in this film.

Rating:
Summary: Subtle, evocative, masterful film
Review: Terence Ratigan's 1946 play about the devastating effects that a family's search for justice can cause, a quiet "G" rated period piece in which all the essential action happens off stage, does not immediately strike the viewer as a likely subject matter for David Mamet to film. Yet, the Winslow Boy succeeds magnificently, artfully telling both the principal story and the submerged "real story within the story". The plot is simple--the Winslow boy is expelled from English military school after having been accused of stealing a small postal money order. His family seeks to clear his name, at considerable personal and financial cost. But the playwright and the screenwriter, wisely refrain from any of the courtroom theatrics and Perry Masonesque cross-examinations that such plot material might usually generate. Instead, the movie takes place in the "background" of the effort to clear the boy's name, as we see the way in which the expense and stress of the effort takes a lethal toll on essentially everyone, other than the boy himself. The movie does ask the big questions inherent in the play--"what price justice?". Yet the movie's goal is not to draw easy moral conclusions, but instead to show us the human consequences of moral choices. Rebecca Pidgeon, as the boy's elder sister, is simply stunning, and the pas de deux love story buried deep beneath the surface of the film is brought to life by her understated, tremendously insightful performance. Mamet and Pidgeon understand that the moral dilemmae of this film are set in bold relief by the Edwardian English culture setting in which the film takes place, but they never bathe in the cinematographic fountain of bygone quaintness that have drowned many an earlier film. If you believed that adult films can no longer be made with a "G" rating, you must see this film. Indeed, under every circumstance, you must see this film.

Rating:
Summary: Let Right Be Done
Review: I have probably watched this one 15-20 times. It's based on a true story, and there was evidently a play about it which preceded the film.

I saw it the second and the third time because the tenor was so appealing to me, the heroism of the father so compelling and the love story so masterfully executed. It could be the best ending I've ever seen on film. Furthermore, Mamet's grasp of that time and place was solid enough, that I was convinced he was born in England before the Second World War. And the acting was incredible -- particularly that of Jeremy Northam who admittedly had the best part, but also all the other major parts were played very, very well.

And then for a time with each new viewing, I saw things I hadn't seen before. The plot is so complete and well conceived, that I'm left a little breathless.

The central theme of the film, it seems to me, is "Let Right be done." Everybody gives up everything for Right. Only the incompetent maid doesn't observe any loss, though it is her unswerving faith that makes her impossible to fire. If she must go, then the point is lost somehow. So the entire ship sinks or floats as one. The father spends all the family money and sacrifices his health. The wayward older brother must leave Oxford. The daughter gives up her marriage. . All of it reasonably cheerfully. And for what? For Right. Yet on the surface, it seems "such a very trivial affair". A kid is accused of stealing a couple bucks. The discrepancy between the triviality of the case and the forces brought to bear upon it suggests something very powerful.

And then in the final sentence, everything is restored. It's beautiful.

All aspects of this problem of Right are addressed. It's not only about the comfort of the boy, whose life would be easier without the publicity. Nor is it about his honor. "The case has much wider implications than that." The father describes himself as fighting for 'justice'. But it's not even about that.

It's about Right. The only thing that has the power to cause Sir Robert to show his emotions is when Right is done -- "very easy to do Justice, very hard to do Right." And I think it is because Sir Robert sees the distinction, that he is able to play the trick without losing his moral ground. He plays the trick to take control of the House of Commons, to discredit a witness, to determine whether the boy is telling the truth, and even to trip up Edmund Curry so he can seize the girl at a distance. Kate initially mistakes this trickiness for simple avarice, and although she lays into him for being so 'passionless', she shares his capacity to keep a level head. Though they both do have their knee-jerk emotional responses. She falls for some guilty radical just because he takes on the establishment. And he's wrong about women's sufferage. But he shows his eligibility for her by sacrificing his career for Right. And she also demonstrates her eligibility for the big league by sacrificing for the cause of Right her only hope of a decent marriage. They make a very convincing pair.

Rating:
Summary: Beautifully written and exquisitely filmed drama...
Review: David Mamet's fantastic direction makes this version of "The Winslow Boy" my favorite. The acting is superb on all counts. Nigel Hawthorne and Gemma Jones are perfectly matched as Mr. and Mrs. Winslow and play off each other beautifully. The plot revolves around the case of Cadet Winslow, who is accused of a crime and suspended from the Naval Academy. Determined to clear the family name, Mr. Winslow pursues his son's case through the highest court in the land. Sir Robert Morton comes in as advocate for young Winslow. The best pairing in the film is the gifted Jeremy Northam as Sir Robert Morton and Rebecca Pidgeon as Catherine Winslow. Catherine finds her "non-militant" feminism at odds with the views of Sir Robert Morton, whom she has long disliked. This creates a delightful tension between the two in their scenes together and leads up to an ending that will leave you smiling and wishing there had been a sequel. The case of the Winslow boy is an intriguing one, and this film version does not dissapoint. If you like courtroom drama, this is perhaps the best movie about a legal issue that does not include one courtroom scene!

Rating:
Summary: A Masterpiece
Review: So many times in the movie world, we find movies that are packed with either violence, adventure, romance, comedy, or tragedy. Not so with The Winslow Boy. Here is a movie that tells the true story, of a young naval cadet who is thrown out of school on the accusation of stealing a five shilling postal order. Mr. Winslow (portayed in this film by Nigel Hawthore) is determined to defend his son's innocence and honor. Joining him in his fight is his wife (Gemma Jones) and his daughter, Catherine Winslow (Rebekah Pidgeon). When recourses and defences begin to run low, the family turns to the famous lawyer, Sir Robert Morton (Jeremy Northam). Sir Robert accepts the case and fights a determined fight in order to "Let right be done.". As the family loses more and more, they pull together and strive on until the final outcome. This story is about the fight for right and good during the times of the late 1800's. We are allowed to see the courage and character of each individual and we find that we should not judge people by what they at first may appear to be. Some would consider this movie slow and boring, but I say that, in my oppinion, it is a classic masterpiece full of excellent acting, superb cinematography, and morals and ethics that are so rarely displayed in the movies today. Allow me to leave you with a quote that Sir Robert Morton used in his speech to the court. "You shall not side with the great against the powerless! Have you heard those words gentlemen? Do you recognize their source? From that same source I add this injuction. It is this.'What you do to the least of them, you do to me.'" There is no great source of adventure, romance, or comedy here, but it in itself is one movie you will not want to miss.

Rating:
Summary: An Unlikely Mamet Classic
Review: Be surprised that this film based on Terence Rattigan's 1946 play is adapted to the screen and directed by David Mamet. Be even more surprised that it's rated "G." But don't miss this gem. Most of the story focuses on the case of a boy accused of stealing a postal order, and its effect on the middle-class Winslow family in 1912 England. The new screen version surpasses the original with the palpable sexual tension between the characters played by Jeremy Northam and Rebecca Pidgeon. The few exchanges between Sir Robert (Northam) and Catherine Winslow (Pidgeon) are skillfully interwoven by Mamet. They're the sexiest couple in recent memory without the lewdness or voyeurism of blockbuster cinema.The DVD features voiceover commentary by Mamet and the main cast. I expected Mamet to be something like Quentin Tarantino's grumpier older brother, but was completely charmed when he introduced himself as "Dave" Mamet and affectionately called Pidgeon "Becks" throughout the commentary. Mamet clearly loved working with every member of his cast (down to the family maid) and directed them to resonant performances. Northam has never been better -- even in more mainstream films like "Emma" or "The Net." If you weren't a fan before, his portrayal of Sir Robert will cinch it.

Rating:
Summary: Superb Performance
Review: To my taste this is a fantastic film, almost like watching the theater. Jeremy Northam swept me off my feet. I simply fell completely in love with him. To me, Kate seemed a bit cold, even colder than Sir Robert, which is funny because at first she thought Robert was a cold man whose causes are cynical. In any case, what impressed me the most was how Mamet built a huge story out of a minor case. The story is that of emotions. What's important - in life and on screen in this case - is not the events or the results of them, but the people's reactions and emotions towards them. This is what makes the events, and this is what makes this film so fine - all the tremendous streams flowing far beneath the surface, specifically ofcourse, the mounting (and melting) love between Sir Robert and Kate. Almost like Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy... True love very hidden but so obviously there!!! Indeed , go see this film.

Rating:
Summary: Let Right Be Done
Review: --Prologue--
To quote Mel Brooks, 'it's good to be the king'. The King, in England, cannot be sued. It is a presumption in law that King, being the embodiment of civil authority, can do no wrong. Consequent to this, all parts of the King's establishment, household, etc. also carry this immunity by extension.

So, when a 13 year old boy was accused of theft in Osbourne Naval College on the Isle of Wight, and summarily dismissed, the family had little recourse. And only one hope.

The King can allow a suit to go forward, essentially by an act of grace, by proclaiming that despite the legal immunity and presumption of infallibility (and you thought only the Pope claimed infallibility!) that there is a just cause at stake. So, he can let the case be examined and tried, using the proclamation: 'Let Right Be Done!'

--The Case--
George Archer-Shee was the accused. Despite the suspicion of several cadets, Archer-Shee was the only one expelled. This was in 1908. His father, Martin Archer-Shee, a Liverpool banker, believed his son's insistence of innocence, and pursued the case through legal and political channels to the extent that his influence would permit.

It became quite a celebrity cause, complete with all of the trinkets, hats, shirts, etc. that one more recently would ascribe to the antics surrounding the O.J. Simpson trial. People waited impatiently for the latest press reports, and the final verdict in favour of the boy sent the public into cheering.

--The Play--
This movie is based on a play by Terence Rattigan, which opened first in 1946. It was previously made into a film (in 1950), and has enjoyed periodic resurrection on the stage, most recently in 1994 as a West End production by Wyn Jones.

Rattigan changed details, not least the names involved: he changed the sister and brother, both ardent Conservatives, into liberal and, in the case of the brother, less than diligent personages. He moved the date forward, and the age of the boy back, and dropped the religious aspect, to try to make this a tale more involved with justice against the Crown (representing any unfeeling, uncaring, faceless authority).

David Mamet, best known for movies such as Glengary Glenross, The Spanish Prisoner, and Homicide, adapted the play. 'In adaptation, at first it would seem like the other fellow's doing all the work,' says Mamet. 'But when you get into it, you see it's not true. The previous work exists in its own right and for very good reasons, but you have to make changes to adapt it to the medium of the screen. But to the degree that this succeeds, it's because it's a great piece of dramaturgy on the part of Rattigan.' The play actually takes place completely within the confines of the Winslow drawing room.

--The Film--
Mamet of course did not confine the movie to the confines of one room. Also, he changed the dialogue around such that much of it occurs in a rat-a-tat-tat fashion much of the time. Mamet is not one for a great deal of action in a physical sense, but keeping track of the dialogue can be positively tiring.

Sir Nigel Hawthorne, best known currently as the star of the title role in 'The Madness of King George', for which he was nominated for an Oscar. He brings his quintessentially British character and presence to this very English family. In the role of the lawyer (Sir Robert Morton), Jeremy Northam (perhaps most recently seen in 'An Ideal Husband') brings an insight into the cost of career and the distance created from an image of greatness, while maintaining the basic humanity of the character who cares for justice. Rebecca Pidgeon, who worked with Mamet earlier in 'The Spanish Prisoner' plays the pivotal role of the accused boy's sister, Catherine, who sacrifices her marriage to the cause (for the husband-to-be wants a less controversial life, er, wife). In this picture (and play) Catherine is a dedicated Suffragette (Rattigan finally got the real sister to accept his revision of her life -- remember, she was an ardent Conservative).

The acting is superb, seems to be a bit slow at times but that is due more to the intentional style rather than any fault of acting. This is a cinematic style of presenting an essentially dialogue-based play that becomes a bit laboured. Much better in the theatre (either as a play or a film) than on home video, where the minor distractions of the home make it more difficult to concentrate. This film requires concentration.

--Epilogue--

In the end, the case is won. In the film, no discussion is made of the aftermath, for this is a single-pointed story ' 'Let Right Be Done'. Of course, right can be defined in different terms. Despite being acquitted, the young Archer-Shee never got much benefit of this. He was killed shortly afterward serving in the military in 1914, near the beginning of World War I. His older brother (portrayed in the film as a slacker-student) in fact became a Conservative Member of Parliament, and pressed the case to win back for the family a compensation of £3000 (a princely sum in that time) plus court costs. However, the Admiralty never issued an apology and never rescinded the charges.

Such a minor case. Such a major issue.

A pity so few will ever see this film. Be part of an exclusive set who do.

Rating:
Summary: An exquisite look at Honor
Review: Taken from a true early 1900's incident in England about a young boy of upstanding family expelled from school for a theft he didn't commit, The Winslow Boy is a study in honor, signified by the family patriarch's rallying cry, 'Let right be done.' In defense of his son's name, and by extension the name of his entire family, past, present, and future, he risks his family's money and his daughter's chances for marriage by mounting an expensive legal defense, the British equivalent of 'taking it all the way to the Supreme Court.'
Beautifully nuanced film with sterling, spot-on performances by everyone.

Rating:
Summary: Right is better than justice
Review: This British film is British right to the very end of our mental fingers. A cadet is accused of having stolen some money and expelled from his military academy. His father will fight to the finish in order to prove the guiltlessness of the child. And he will succeed. But this battle makes us discover some fundamental dimension of English society and English institutions, the Parliament among others. To succeed the lawyer will have to go back to the 1628 procedure of the Petition of Right against Charles I. Brilliant possibility that enables any citizen, who has the means to do so, to start an action against his or her majesty's government, against the Crown, to redress some wrong decision. This will reveal something even deeper about this procedure : the principle that « right » is more important than « justice » in a common law judicial system. The state has to abide by the principle « Let Right be done » to really not only bring justice to the suing party but to improve the system for everyone by getting to a decision that will impose its jurisprudence on the system. Such an action enables the system to open its eyes and see what right is, what right should be for everyone. This procedure is an eye-opening action not only for the citizens but also for the institutions that are conservative by principle. This film is thus a great illustration of the main advantage of such common law over any other system. Any persistent citizen - who has the means to do so though - can force the system to improve itself and become fairer and more democratic. Democracy, freedom and justice can only come from this slow building of Right and not from laws that are passed by the institutions themselves and hence tend to be either dictated by public opinion, which is dangerous, or by some conservative trend of these institutions that always try to conserve themselves instead of redeeming themselves for the sake and interest of the people.
This film becomes extremely moving when the main impetus of the father is to clear the reputation of his own son, and his own family, endangered by some unsupported and unjust accusation. Victory in this context is soul-tearing, but the lawyer's attitude is also an inspiration for us : never judge from emotions and always keep cool and collected, always use your mind and your objective distanciation from superficial facts to come to a conviction, and in this case to blend your conviction that the child is innocent with the reversal of the first conviction this child has been the victim of.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University of Perpignan