Watch Anatomy of a Murder For Free

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

Dear George.C.Scott,you owned this film. Yes, despite the presence of three other stalwarts, you held your own and always had my attention. Even in the scenes where you did not have any dialogs. Your mannerisms and body language helped you steal the thunder from right under James Stewart's nose. The film is a rather long but entertaining, funny and even slightly provocative court room drama. Lee Remick is a sexpot trophy wife who has men fighting over her. Ben Gazzara is her overprotective husband who murders a man who raped Remick. And James Stewart plays their slightly patriarchal lawyer who is scandalized by the change around him. The actors made this film. Apart from you George, Joseph.N.Welch deserves special mention for his performance as a good natured judge. I am surprised a lot of the scenes did not end up on the editing table. I mean, the film is 160 minutes long. I'm not complaining because the brilliant actors were backed by some terrific writing by Wendell Mayes. The film is upto its neck in some remarkable one liners. Otto Perminger does not indulge in too many directorial flourishes. With such a great cast and script, he did not need to.Best Regards, Pimpin.(8/10)

Greetings from Lithuania."Anatomy of a Murder" (1959) is the reason why i love great court room dramas and great movies in a first place. It is amazingly written, directed and acted movie. Script is a first rate as well directing - at running time 2 h 40 min this movie does not drag for s second and is highly involving from start till finish. James Stewart and George C. Scott shine in this movie about a Lt. Frederick Manion - a decorated war hero who shoots a man who raped his wife. There are multiple people who saw it, so his guilt in unquestionable. But maybe it is possible that he did it and still can avoid punishment? It is all in the hands of James Stewart's hands. Overall, "Anatomy of a Murder" is true gem for those who love court room movies (i love them). It is suspenseful and highly interestingly told story. Can't as for movie, truly a great movie.

Anatomy of a Murder (1959) is described by critic Nick Pinkerton as "maybe more universally loved by law students than by cineastes." It is also enjoyed by people who are both film aficionados and former- law students. The film dramatizes the trial of an army lieutenant who shot and killed a resort owner after he raped his wife. We see none of this violence, so the action is in the dialogue and the emotions. Here, the film is a success- the acting and dialogue is smooth and believable, heavy but eased with occasional wisecracks. I watched Witness for the Prosecution (1957) at about the same time and thought the ending lacked these qualities; I was quite satisfied with Anatomy of a Murder.Not showing us any of the violence, the film allows the viewer to piece together what happened along with James Stewart's character. We meet the lieutenant, described by Stewart as hostile and insolent, not very likable. We meet his wife, a "free and easy" type, attractive and friendly. The film teases us with possibilities- the prosecution suggests sex between the woman and victim was consensual, that her injuries were inflicted by her husband. But we know she passed a lie detector test and other evidence supports her story. Generally, the film makes us question whether the lieutenant really was under irresistible impulse- we get the feeling he wasn't, and it's debatable as to how much Stewart's character believed this himself, as he was coaching him on defence strategies in an early scene. As we piece together the mystery, the attention to detail is commendable- the lawyers press for details, addressing inconsistencies, as we see when Stewart wants to know if the dog was in or out of the truck during the sexual assault. This is, as the title suggests, where the anatomizing factors in.Some of that detail gets rather personal- when George C. Scott's prosecutor grills the lieutenant's wife on whether she always wears underwear, and relentlessly demands another female witness to say the victim was her lover. From one perspective he's doing his job, from another he is prosecuting women in general; with extensive testimony on how the wife was dressed and behaved, we see the old stereotypes and the old attitude that it was either consensual or that she was asking for it. Interestingly, Anatomy of a Murder dramatizes not only a murder trial but an old-fashioned rape trial, a sort of two-for-one affair. In doing so, it uses blunt and courageous language defying censorship- sexual details, use of words like "slut" and "bitch." The result is a powerful film, a trailblazer of sorts that retains its impact.

The charge is murder. The defense is that the defendant was legally insane, because his wife had been raped by the victim. The trial testimony focuses almost exclusively on whether she had or had not been raped (the implicit alternative being that she'd had consensual sex with the victim). But all that mattered was whether the defendant believed she's been raped, not with whether she really had been or not. Furthermore, one would expect the focus of the trial to be on the expert psychiatric testimony. That was over and done with in a couple of cursory scenes. It was as if the victim was on trial for rape. Meanwhile, the two attorneys are yelling at each other and getting in the witnesses' faces, while the judge sits there like a potted plant and occasionally warns them that they'd better behave (which he never follows through on). Awful.