The Story on Page One

Trailer—The Story on Page One

source: The Story on Page One

The Story on Page One

I started watching this movie with somewhat low expectations based on comments about the director, the script and blah blah. To be honest it didn't grab me right out of the box, but it it grew on me quickly, especially the sad, lonely and hopeless housewife done so expertly by the lovely Rita Hayworth. Gig Young and Tony Francisco played their part with great expertise as did each actor, which I is a tribute to the director. I ended up having a great appreciation for Clifford Odets' approach and directing skills and don't understand why he was panned at the time. I wish he had gone on with other movies. Overall, it is just an enjoyable drama and is well worth the time to watch.

All I could think about during the courtroom sequences of this film, especially those involving the crazed prosecution attorney, was that this film was not about murder, but about innocence. The question wasn't whether the husband had been killed pre-meditatively, but whether the lovers would turn against each other in order to save their own skins. Badgering the witness, Senator McCarthy? The fact that they remained true to each other, and didn't "name names" was the reward for the audience. The project came off more as a stage exercise than as a feature film. The cast was effective. The direction was adequate, if not particularly inspired. Technical credits were 50's studio black and white average. What one brings away from this is a feeling that if more "witnesses" to Senator McCarthy's witch hunt had stood up to him, he might have been proved to be the monster he was sooner.

Rita Hayworth plays a woman wrongly accused of murder, Anthony Franciosa plays her lawyer. This is a fairly solid, if routine, courtroom drama. You probably pretty much know where its basically going from the start and, to b honest, it sort of goes there.

This movie is pretty disappointing. Rita Hayworth and Gig Young are, each in a different way, completely unconvincing in roles that portray characters so dumb and passive that it would be hard to play them really well. The long denouement, their trial for murder, is boring and inferior to a standard Perry Mason. How Odets did a movie this trite is a puzzle. For a while I had hopes of a surprise ending, a la "Witness for the Prosecution" -- but Tony Franciosa is not Charles Laughton and the heartwarmingly straight ending is so unsurprising that I was surprised by it.

The acting is great here except for Mildred Dunnock who is cast with that sympathetic voice as a vicious mother trying to be in full control of her grown son-Gig Young. Dunnock's voice is similar to that character of Elsie Thornton, the beloved teacher in 1957's "Peyton Place." The story is too unbelievable here. Rita Hayworth and lover Young are put on trial for killing Hayworth's husband. Hayworth's lawyer is Anthony Franciosa, who gives quite a performance as attorney. The killing was really justifiable as the husband, a cop, pulled a gun when he catches the 2 lovers together. Why she told a story of a burglary taking place was beyond me. As Jack Webb would have said, "Stick to the facts, miss." Hugh Griffith is out of line here as the judge. He talks to those on the witness stand as if he were in medieval times. You know how this is going to end and then you wonder why you've sat through all of this. this.

From the beginning, I noticed how well my TV's stereo was working when watching this story. Funny thing is, this was a Mono. recording originally? Perhaps it was an illusion but it was as if each person had their own microphone and the voices seemed to jump left and right just as the characters sat across from each other. In most films, I hardly notice anything stereo when two people are sitting quite close together. The sound worked well with the 2.35:1 wide screen image...so wide that it still only filled half of my digital TV screen. In the courtroom, in addition to the voices, the smallest noise of rustling paper or moving a glass filled the background. The result was very lifelike. Not a great story, but one that is a real treat for the ears.

As a long time criminal/civil trial lawyer, I think most films/TV shows about trials are pretty bad. I thought this one was was good in that the trial procedures, in particular the direct and cross examinations of the witnesses, were highly realistic (as they are in the better known " Anatomy of a Murder"). Sanford Meisner's cross examination of Gig Young was very well done as was Franciosa's of Young's meddling mother. Hugh Griffith also did a good job as the judge. The police and prosecution were not portrayed in a very favorable light which was unusual during that era. I'm surprised that it's not out on DVD as yet. I caught it on FMC when that station was still running good movies. This film gives a far better picture of a trial than those in most TV shows which tend to show actors making speeches for the jury.