Watch The Winslow Boy For Free

If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Did you people see the same film I saw?

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

This is an adaptation of a play by David Mamet which he also directs. Unusually it does not feature con artists, a favourite area that Mamet likes to re-visit.The film where a family wants to clear the name of their almost 14 year old boy who has been dismissed from the naval academy for stealing a postal order is all about performances, there is very little visual trickery but good use id made of sets, lighting, music and direction. The actors are very much at the fore of the performance with Jeremy Northam as the Barrister delivering the goods as someone who believes in the boy's innocence but seems distant and uninvolved. In some cases he got the role of the barrister in the pre World War 2 era very much spot on. Its all about the law and proving your case.Nigel Hawthorne does well as the father of the family who might be on the edge of financial ruin as he fights to clear his son's name. It might be viewed the Hawthorne would be too old to play a father of a 14 year old lad although his other children are older.Rebecca Pidgeon who in other roles comes across as uninspired especially when she plays tough Americans is more comfortable here as the radical sister of the accused who also suffers loss as her engagement is broken because of the fight to clear her brother's name.Its a brave undertaking to adapt a Rattigan play on the screen and Mamet has done very well in making the film watchable and highlighting the mores of the time.

this is another directing attempt by David Mamet, and as usual he uses it as a vehicle to employ the mainly unemployable actors in his family.in most of his directorial projects he has produced films so stiff and wooden, and it amazes me that he sometimes finds excellent actors to appear in them. and it must be because as bad a director as he is, he can be just as brilliant a writer.i think Mamet chose, this time, a stiff cultural period which would hide his wooden direction, and his wife's poor acting. and it worked to a degree.the problem is that Mamet has gone to england and short circuited a perfect machine for turning out perfect period pieces. it is what the English film industry does best.his direction has sedated actors, worthy of giving a lively performance, and inspired little more than a walk-through of the lines: sedately matching the abilities of his wife.it all ends up in a mediocre effort. i wish Mamet should stick to writing, but he probably arrogantly believes he is the only director that can do justice to his words. interviews i've seen by the man, back this belief.

Set in 1912 and based on an actual event, David Mamet's "The Winslow Boy" is the story of an upper-class family whose 13 year-old son (Ronnie Winslow- a naval college cadet) is accused of stealing and cashing a five shilling postal order.Expelled from school, Ronnie returns home terrified of his father's reaction. But Arthur Winslow (superbly played by Nigel Hawthorne) isn't angry. Instead, he believes his boy to have been wrongly accused. And so with the help of his suffragette daughter (Catherine) and esteemed attorney Sir Robert Morton, Arthur sets out to clear his son's name.What follows is a beautifully written legal drama. But unlike "The Verdict" (also written by Mamet), there are no courtroom scenes here. No tense battles between lawyers or nail biting cross examinations, Mamet film revoking the usual legal maneuvers and opting instead to explore a family's determination to retain its dignity.But how can they remain dignified when their case becomes a nationwide news story? How can they remain dignified when their steadfast belief in their son is mocked by journalists and newspapers? How can they remain dignified when the British Parliament argues the case in the House of Lords? How can they remain dignified when the family suffers financial loss, much self-doubt, media scrutiny and even the break-off of Catherine's engagement to a status-sensitive snob (Aden Gillett)?"A fine old rumpus," the maid calls it all. And indeed it is. As Arthur's health deteriorates, his steadfast wife demands to know why he's sacrificing the family's well-being. "For justice!" he says. "Are you sure it's not pride and self-importance?" she counters.Of course, this being a David Mamet film - all Mamet's films are con games - "The Winslow Boy" is also a film about misdirection. On the surface, we're asked to wonder whether or not the Winslow Boy is really guilty, whilst below the surface, Mamet works in another layer of misdirection. On this level, every character is lying, every one of them misdirecting the audience by putting on a false facade.In this regard, every character's behaviour is precisely the opposite of their actual beliefs. So the father cares not for his son but rather his own family honour. The Winslow boy is guilty and stands embarrassed out in the rain. The older son is broke, hates his father and shall be shipped off to war, yet he accepts it all with cheerful good faith. Similarly, the maid, who always enters frame when there is talk of no money, is ambivalent to the fact that she will surely be fired soon. Then there's the three way relationship between the hotshot lawyer, the Winslow daughter and her fiancé. Her fiancé pretends to love her, yet leaves as soon as the case gains momentum, whilst she pretends to fight for women's independence (she's a suffragette) despite being entirely dependent on her family/men for her income. Similarly, the hotshot lawyer pretends to take the case because he believes the boy to be innocent, when in fact he's simply after the boy's attractive sister. When he confides to his friend that he has turned down a promotion to take the case, he does so knowing that this news will be confided to her, thus making him seem more appealing in her eyes.The entire film is thus an exercise in misdirection, the film communicating one thing while the truth sits just below the surface. The artifice is all a lie, a slick Edwardian card trick. End result: we're so busy looking for clues of the kid's innocence, that we don't realize that the whole family is guilty. 8.5/10 - Worth two viewings.

If you're fond of good dialogs, good acting and good movies...go and rent this one. I didn't expect much when I rented it, and it was a big surprise. I don't know if this movie would work that well with a different cast, but they seem to be made to be part of it. I've read some bad comments about Rebecca Pigeon but in my opinion she's perfect for the part, she acts natural. I didn't find anything that I didn't like, which is something difficult to say about most of the movies.Summarizing, this movie confirms that with a few exceptions, David Mamet keeps giving us something interesting in every movie. Before this one I had only seen The Spanish prisoner,