The Witness for the Prosecution (2016)

What makes it different from others?

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.

It was a mistake to advertise this version as a return to Agatha Christie's original short story. The script does jettison at least one memorable addition that was not in the original, but it also adds a great deal of extra material. Some of the material harmonizes very well with the story, and it has to do with a look, from here in the future, back at things that, during the period in which Christie was writing, were taken for granted. The indelible trauma of the First World War, the yawning gap between the haves and have-nots. The actors help sell the point that these are not just reminders of history but also reminders of human nature. The fleshing-out draws the viewer into the story more deeply than many playful or even mechanical Christie-inspired movies have done, but ultimately it wanders into territory that Christie herself, I suspect, wouldn't have entered and perhaps wouldn't even have endorsed.

So, I'm not sure what the original Christie version of this is, I'm going to check that out in my local library, however...this was depressing, sad, and just awful. Yes, I think the acting was good (especially Toby Jones), but golly the ending...no justice, vindication, just depression. I've read a lot of Christie, and I never come away with that feeling. I wasted 2 hours of my life on this...and am bummed out!!!

One word sums it up - terrible. I don't know what's more shocking - the silly "reviewers" here who have never seen or read any iteration of Witness for the Prosecution, i.e. the people who like this monstrosity because they have no history and don't even know what the story, play, or subsequent film versions were about, or the fact that legitimate British reviewers heaped praise on this thing.So, let's just start at the beginning. You want to have the chutzpah to call something Agatha Christie's The Witness for the Prosecution, then don't make up the majority of the movie so that it has nothing to do with Agatha Christie. Sarah Phelps, shame on you - Ms. Christie doesn't need your dreary help and you can't even walk in her footsteps let alone her shoes. The teleplay is dreadful - all the additions are moronic. You know, I have no problem with this soap opera story but don't call it Agatha Christie or The Witness for the Prosecution just because you keep Ms. Christie's central plot element. This isn't going back to the short story, this is a whole NEW story and it's not a good story at that. The only thing that works is the twenty minutes or so of the trial. It just goes on and on, one dreadfully dull scene after another, filled with whispery acting and the awful coughing of Toby Jones (bronchitis we finally learn) - I don't blame him for coughing, mind you, given the amount of smoke they're pumping into every single shot and scene. It's not the 90s anymore, kids. And yes, the green - it's like watching Saw or something. Agatha Christie didn't write horror stories, you know. It's so dark and ugly and ineptly directed. Kim Cattrall is embarrassing in this as is her character, which has little to do with Ms. Christie's Emily French. The big finish doesn't happen where it should, the courtroom, because once the verdict happens the film goes on and on for yet another thirty minutes. The big finish occurs in France and then after that the film goes on and on for another fifteen minutes because this movie isn't about Leonard Vole or Emily French or Romaine Vole, it's about John Mayhew - sorry, does not compute, I don't care about the character and all his and his wife's angst - this is not Agatha Christie, this is Days of our Lives. I got the Blu-ray of this because of the reviews - fool me once, but never again.

The actress who played the maid reminded me of Norma Shearer when she stepped out of silent movies into talkies, a lot of over acting, wide crazy eyes and hand gestures She was totally unbelievable. The story line was bizarre at best. I am sure most people would of guessed who was faking it and who wasn't. THe endless coughing by one of the main characters had me coughing along with him. The scene in the dark dwelling was so obviously a set up, but all that coughing must of dislodged some of his brains cells and they flew out of his ears. I mean, really, something like that happening to anyone would of been all over the newspapers, especially to this particular character. I don't know, I have some old male relatives that look like the old coughing guy and all they want to do is sip on coffee or beer and read newspapers, and certainly are in no desperation to rip off the depends from their old withered wives for an attempted roll around. The hotel scene and ending was silly, and so was his long walk out to the ocean. He was short enough to drown in a deep bathtub. Was very disappointed in this, However, luckily there is Poirot still on Netflix.