I'm constantly surprised that women's hats don't provoke more murders.

Leonard Steven Vole finds himself on trial for the murder of a wealthy widow from whom he has inherited a fortune. Top barrister Sir Wilfrid Robarts takes up the defendants case, but he, along with everyone else, is stunned when Vole's seemingly loving wife Christine turns up to testify against the defendant.

Based on Agatha Christie's successful 1953 play, "Witness For The Prosecution" benefited from fine tuning from master director Billy Wilder and writing partner Harry Kurnitz. Here the dialogue becomes razor sharp and the characters are fully realised with quite wonderful results, but chiefly the masterstroke here is not letting a court room drama become just that, a court room drama. The film plays out with no wasted scenes, no moments of boredom, and it has such vim and vigour you sometimes forget that there actually is drama in the story.

The cast here are on fine form, Wilder had wanted to work with Charles Laughton for some time, and it's obvious that both parties here are getting the best out of each other. Laughton is a pure delight as Robarts, a sharp tongue, all bluster and cheeky into the bargain, his interplay with Miss Plimsoll (Laughton's real life wife Elsa Lanchester) is quality, and it's another testament to Wilder's genius for putting them together. Tyrone Power, in what would be his last completed film before sadly passing away, is devilishly smart as Vole, whilst Torin Thatcher is great as the gruff prosecution barrister Myers. Yet as good as they all are, they all sit in the shadow of Marlene Dietrich and her turn as Christine Vole, sultry and femme fatalistic, it's a sizzling performance that crowns this delightful film.

It occurred to me overnight that it's probably the closest film that Wilder got to being Hitchcockian, and I'm pretty sure the big master of suspense himself would have enjoyed this one. It's a mystery that is dramatic, it's a thriller that is also funny, it's pretty much a multi genre classic. 9/10

I might be asking for trouble here, but did Charles Laughton ever actually make a bad film? He leads this one as the brilliant but curmudgeonly barrister "Sir Wildred Robarts" with oodles of charisma and style. Marlene Dietrich portrays the evil, manipulative "Christine Vole" marvellously and even Tyrone Power, more the matinée idol than the serious actor, delivers as required in Billy Wilder's outstanding rendition of the Agatha Christie story about a man accused of murdering an elderly lady who has just happened to leave him a great deal of money in her will. Elsa Lanchester is suitably annoying/scary/lovable as the nurse trying to keep her ailing charge from keeling over mid-trial and a slew of other capable British actors - including a wonderfully charismatic turn from Una O'Connor in the witness box - fill in the supporting roles well. It is one of those very rare occasions where everything just gels perfectly and it really is fun to watch. Some of Laughton's wry asides and put-down lines are genuinely laugh out loud too. Had it not come up against "Bridge on the River Kwai" then I'm sure it would have garnered at least one Oscar!

**Why don't they make THESE movies anymore?**

Apart from being a **GREAT** courtroom drama_(which some people don't think this movie is)_, this movie is so much **FUN** and **ENTERTAINING** to watch.Especially because of the characters of _Charles Laughton_ and _Elsa Lanchester_. But _Tyrone Power_ and _Marlene Dietrich_ were convincing too in their portrayal of an _innocent, afraid for his life man and a disloyal, unloving, poker faced wife_ respectively.

Some people might say that they predicted the ending half way down the movie but i am not quite sure as to how they predicted the **ACTUAL ENDING** before it really unfolded before their eyes?

This movie is great not only in the part played in court but also in the scenes shot in _Sir Wilfrid Robarts's_ office(also due to _Miss Plimsoll's caringly lovably irritating character!_).

Perhaps the people(the minority I'd like to believe) who don't think this movie deserves the high ranking and rating that it's got saw this brilliant piece of art as more of a suspense thriller.But I loved this movie as a delightfully ENTERTAINING, MYSTERIOUS, DRAMA !

I rate this 10 just because I haven't seen any other CLASSIC courtroom drama that was intense throughout(barring some light hearted scenes with Sir Wilfrid Robarts) and yet in the end I somehow felt light-hearted and had a smile on my face rather than a thought provoking look on it.

The commentary in the ending credits was innocently adorable for our times of social networking _"The management of this theater suggests that for the greater entertainment of your friends who have not yet seen the picture you will not divulge to anyone the secret of the ending of Witness for the Prosecution!"_

And mind you I am a _big fan of 12 Angry Men and How to Kill a Mockingbird!_ But this movie too is equally good in a different way altogether!

I think this is a generally good movie. The problem is, by this point, it's been copied many times over. Another movie that popped immediately into my head was [spoiler] High Crimes with Ashley Judd, Jim Caviezel, and Morgan Freeman. [/spoiler] However, there are many others. This is a common problem with classics and it's unfortunate because I'm sure at the time this was a great hit. But now it's been said and done so many times, it just feels like a run-of-the-mill courtroom drama. And especially in our current time, when the curtain of idealism about criminal justice has been pulled back to reveal the harsh (and unfair) reality, the shock and cynicism of this movie simply falls flat. Still, that's not to say it wasn't an enjoyable watch. Tyrone Power, Charles Laughton, and Marlene Dietrich all gave great performances. Laughton, in particular, is very convincing and humorous as a crotchety old lawyer. Of course, as with many classics, there's the usual sprinkling of misogyny and xenophobia. And there's ample amounts of exposition. I'm beginning to think it can't be a classic without a heap of that. Overall, if you like courtroom dramas, mysteries, or just classics in general, this is definitely worth a watch. If not, it's still probably worth a watch but expect it to feel very familiar.