I had recently read "Anatomy of a Murder" (but have not seen the film) which I'm sure diminished this film for me. Many things are left unanswered, and the story feels thin, like a bad TV episode. It lacks drama and suspense. I think it's good only as a platform to present the argument against capital punishment.
shareIf you really think that way, I would ask you to to view the movie and think again. This is one of the great movies of the 20th century. This movie is neither shallow nor flawed.
shareAny film which focuses on the supposed immorality of the death penalty while ignoring the suffering of those murdered by thrill killers--as this one does--is indeed shallow and flawed.
shareThen apparently you weren't paying attention to the whole speech that Wilk gives towards the end of the film.
The point is that the film doesn't ignore the suffering of victims or their aggrieved families. What is does do is state that we, as a society represented by our court system, need to be better than those who have no regard for human life.
Unfortunately now in our day, we have returned to being a society that is fed daily by a mass media who stirs up the masses for the profit of the rich & powerful corporations who own them.
We need to be better than this. This film's point, made in a very powerful---and human---way, is therefore is every bit as applicable today as it was in 1959 when it was made...and as well as in 1924, when this trial took place.
"a society that is fed daily by a mass media who stirs up the masses for the profit of the rich & powerful corporations who own them"
Well, we know where you're coming from, don't we, Comrade?
If you are implying that I am a Communist, then you're 100% wrong, not to mention very simple-minded.
As a Capitalist society, we were once better than we are now.
We have slipped very far in the past 20 years, thanks to the NEOCON agenda!
Most people in America don't like it and would like to change it.
Hopefully, after this year, we will!
The way this country has slipped in the past 30 years has nothing to do with so-called "NEOCONS". It in fact has EVERYTHING to do with the far left liberal progressive agenda. They are the ones who somehow gained control of the media, the judicial system, education system and entertainment establishment. That's why you have so many brain dead people in our society being led around like they have a ring in their nose. Oh, excuse me....they do.
shareNeocons, liberals. Can we all just agree that it's all your fault and move on?
Jeesh.
It's always one idiot side pointing the finger at the other idiot side of the same coin, never realizing that the system itself has become highly corrupt and that both extremes are guilty.
- - - - - - -
Whose idea was it for the word "Lisp" to have an "S" in it?
we, as a society represented by our court system, need to be better than those who have no regard for human life.
"Life in prison is a much, much harder punishment. You spend the rest of your life knowing that you'll never be free again. That's as brutal as it gets."
Except that in reality Leopold was freed after 33 years.
I don't get it.....
This is a film that ultimately stands against the death penalty, but it shows two of the most loathsome criminals in history. I mean, the argument can be made that they deserved the gallows.
Now, don't get your panties in a knot; I'm not a huge fan of the death penalty myself, but you would think they'd use a more sympathetic pair of hoodlums to wag their fingers, wouldn't you?
"But it shows two of the most loathsome criminals in history".
Even though these two don´t rank anywhere near the "most loathsome criminals in history", that should essentially be indeed the point - it´s so easy to advocate the abolishment of death penalty when dealing with some poor schmuck who´s committed a murder out of some semi-understandable sense of justice borne of economic hardship or whatever. Where it gets tough, is the true remorseless psychopaths who take pleasure in murder (of course, that cuts the other way, too - it´s easy to cheer on capital punishment and vigilante justice when specimens presented are such as the Scorpio killer in Dirty Harry. Now, who wouldn´t just ´love´ to put a bullet in the deranged brain of a "punk" like that?)
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
Except that in reality Leopold was freed after 33 years. >>> Which is still a hell of a long time, the whole time thinking that it will indeed be for the rest of your life.
- - - - - - -
Whose idea was it for the word "Lisp" to have an "S" in it?
"Leopold was freed after 33 years. Which is still a hell of a long time, the whole time thinking that it will indeed be for the rest of your life."
No, that isn't right. Under Illinois state law at the time, Leopold was actually eligible for parole after serving just 5 years of his sentence.
Richard Speck murdered 8 Chicago nurses in 1966 and had his death sentence changed to a 400 to 1,200 year prison sentence. Nevertheless, he started having parole hearings in 1976.
Justice was partially (because belatedly)served when Loeb was killed in prison in 1936 by another inmate. Not so with Leopold. He was released after 34 years in prison and led quite a nice life thereafter until his death of old age in 1971. He even expressed an intention of bringing suit for defamation against the makers of Compulsion, despite his confession and guilty plea, which indicates that his chutzpah remained intact. Funny how virtually all convicted murderers prefer the "much, much harder punishment" of life in prison to execution, although there isn't much difference between the two sentences, given the fact that prisoners on death row stand a far better chance of death by natural causes than by execution by reason of the multi-decade delay between sentence and execution, during which the murderer enjoys his three squares per day, television, books and magazines, computer use, exercise, free medical and dental care, etc. Some "hard, hard punishment." Chris TC, does TC stand for "terribly confused?"
shareGive me a break. You still have a life. You can read a book. You have friends.
Artie should have killed himself at the first chance if he really believed that.
Actually the fact that one of them, I think it was Loeb, only spent 33 years in prison, and then got out and married and worked in a Catholic hospital for the rest of his life, PROVES how ridiculous and immoral Welles/Darrow's argument was, as that DOES NOT CONSTITUTE JUSTICE for the murder of that child. Only execution would have been a just sentence. The boy they murdered didn't have a chance to grow up and marry and work anywhere - they snuffed him out like a bug. The film is almost unbearably shallow in the courtroom scenes, and in the ridiculous scenes with Diane Varsi as the world's most forgiving rape (almost) victim.
Both of these degenerates should have been hanged then, those who commit these crimes should be hung NOW, and Darrow was WRONG.
That´s no "justice", that´s just pointless, barbaric lust for blood and vengeance. And although I generally think offenders who´ve committed a premeditated murder, should get a life sentence, it´s obvious that in some cases, it is not by all means necessary as far as protecting the society is concerned.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
I agree 100% with you.
I just saw this incredibly powerful film for the first time.
I have always been very much of a "law and order" type person, and God knows I have gone back & forth on the death penalty many times in my life, but I agree that this film goes very deep into understanding of the mob-mentality social mindset, peeling back the flawed layers of society, and finally makes it very clear that the simple answer is that there are no simple answers.
Anyone who thinks that questions of life & death are simple has simply not thought about the subject...and is indeed guilty of being shallow.
By the way, how this film received no Oscar nominations is beyond me---especially for the magnificient Orson Welles (who in my opinion should have just been given the damn thing).
[deleted]
~ I thought Orson Welles did deserve an oscar for this role. He delivered an outstanding performance as Wilk the lawyer. Especially that long speech he gave in his final closing statement. Even though I didn't quite agree with it. He made it great.
*~~*
i gotta say i loved this film, just saw it, but didnt like welles! he was two steps away from that masson commercial!!! his part was very well written, but his delivery was tired for no reason!! no flair.. sorry welles was the only bog here,,, but i do usually love him..
shareMy understanding is that Welles did that final speech in one take.
shareThe closing statement made by Wilk in the movie was not created for Welles by script witers, but rather is a condensation and edited version (Darrow spoke for more than 12 hours) of Darrow's actual summation at the Loeb and Leopold trial. If you read the trial transcript, you'll find every word Wilk spoke in the words of Darrow. Darrow fought his whole life against what he saw as injustice and capital punishment, for most of his life, was his most ardent cause. In his later years he became a champion of civil rights (see his defense of Ossian Sweet.)
shareyoure saying this movie is flawless
come on, it was fairly boring
better film for platform against capital punishment is In Cold Blood
I'm not so sure. I thought the two rats in that film got exactly what they deserved. Then again, my empathy for cold-blooded murderers is probably no greater than would have been that of the Clutters had they been asked the question, ahhh . . . at a time when they had the opportunity to provide an answer, that is.
share[deleted]
I'm not anti-capital punishment, but one film that brought me close was "The Hoodlum Priest" (1961) with Don Murray (also based on a true story).
shareI am fairly politically active and have very strong political opinions. Some movies just cry out that they are supporting one political view or another, and spend a good deal of the time bombarding the viewer with it (either with full-on attack or with frequent, veiled references that assume that all viewers of course agree with the movie-maker's views --whether they actually do or not).
However, I just enjoyed this movie for the movie, and wasn't drawn into any political sentiment at all from watching it.
Also, I think Orson Welles was incredibly talented.
However, his portion of the movie was anti-climactic for me and his speech did not change how I already felt about L. & L. and their actions -- either one way or the other. I liked the earlier part of the film more (the relationship between L. & L. as depicted -- I thought that Dillman and Stockwell played very well off of each other), Martin Milner's scenes (Sid), the scenes with Bradford Dillman (Artie) trying to 'help' the investigation, and when E.G. Marshall (D.A.) had Dean Stockwell (Judd) trying to enact the glasses slipping out of his pocket.
Although some movies as constructed just naturally stimulate political discussion, and despite the well-known, albeit extremely abbreviated, defense speech portrayed at the end of this movie, I was more interested in watching the movie for the story in general and for the acting, and I was not the least bit disappointed.
I think sometimes we might not appreciate the forest for the trees and that a lot of us have become oversensitized to seeing messages in everything, and to making so much of the personal political. Again -- yes -- the defense speech against capital punishment in this trial is fairly well-known in the annals of crime and punishment, but, in my experience, most people who know of this case know of it more in regard to L. & L.'s relationship and the how/why of the murder than of the capital punishment debate-except maybe for those who are really into that issue....or legal scholars.
"I can't stand a naked light bulb, any more than..a rude remark or a vulgar action" Blanche DuBois
Not exactly the most complex film ever made about the murderous mind - or criminality, the issues of crime and punishment in itself, for that matter - but after the somewhat awkward & forced start, Stockwell/Dillman do get their act more or less together and present a rather believable, if a bit uneven, picture of their characters. The dialogue could have been more natural sometimes and the supporting performances by Varsi and that blond reporter guy could have been less terrible, but all in all it´s a reasonably thoughtful picture concluding, rare as it is, with a truly effective, powerful courtroom scene. Not softening the murderers´ characters after Welles´s emotional plea for their lives was a particularly nice touch. Also worth a mention that, for a change, this Hollywood "journeyman" director Richard Fleischer´s direction is rather impressive this time around, filming in stark, shadowy black & white, frequently utilizing unusual, off-kilter angles to bring us closer to the twisted, out-of-whack world of the delusional killers. I think Compulsion is actually better than Anatomy Of A Murder (the movie, that is) with its rather unengaging, tedious courtroom yammering sessions. 7-7,5/10.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
"I think Compulsion is actually better than Anatomy Of A Murder (the movie, that is) with its rather unengaging, tedious courtroom yammering sessions...."
This may be the most idiotic thing I've yet seen on IMDB. Anatomy of a Murder is one of the 20 best films ever made. Compulsion? Not even one of the 20 best of 1959.
Please think before you post.
Remember When Movies Didn't Have To Be Politically Correct?
How old are you? Go to kindergarten yet?
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
I essentially agree with you. The film seemed like an amateurish attempt to make money by sensationalizing a real-life event from the past. No real effort here at all. The underlying message, the argument against capital punishment, is also annoying. I personally am not in favor of the electric chair. Too inefficient. I would prefer electric bleachers. More productive per shock.
I wasn't impressed.
Remember When Movies Didn't Have To Be Politically Correct?
[deleted]
Are you talking about Anatomy of a Murder(which I am watching now) or compulsion(which I just finished watching) You give no specifics as to why so why do you feel its a shallow movie
I'll give you a reason why I liked the Movie. it's Wells Performance and I love Courtroom dramas
Oh GOOD!,my dog found the chainsaw