Which Cast is Better? Cast Member Comparison, 1957 vs. 1997

1) Martin Balsam vs. Courtney B. Vance: I liked Vance better. Balsam seemed overwhelmed and unsure of himself. Vance exuded calm and control.

2) John Fiedler vs. Ossie Davis: Another win for 1997. Fiedler's characterization is seemingly of a man lobotomized. Davis plays him as a slightly befuddled senior, and is more believable.

3) Lee J. Cobb vs. George C. Scott: Cobb by a mile. Scott, in one of his final roles, overacts so much it almost becomes a parody. Check out his line readings when discussing the woman with the eyeglasses. The final "Not Guilty" scene has him chewing the scenery into submission as well.

4) E. G. Marshall vs. Armin Mueller-Stahl: Both are excellent performances. Marshall plays the role of someone who simply thinks he's smarter and better than everyone else in the room. Stahl plays him more as someone who's lived a long time, been very successful, and so may BE smarter than everyone else in the room. Both are perfectly valid readings of the source material. Call it a tie.

5) Jack Klugman vs. Dorian Harewood: Except for the scene with the switchblade, Klugman fails to assert himself, maybe due to the actor's nervousness around heavyweights like Cobb and Fonda. Harewood wins.

6) Edward Binns vs James Gandolfini: Again, I liked both. Gandolfini is more forceful, but this actually works against the character: he's supposed to be a mild-mannered house painter. Binns wins a close one.

7) Jack Warden vs. Tony Danza: Danza excels as a whiny Yankees fan, but his characterization is one-note. Warden displays more range, and thus wins it.

8) Henry Fonda vs. Jack Lemmon: As good as Lemmon was in virtually everything he ever did (except for Branagh's Hamlet: Shakespeare was not his forte), it still goes to Fonda. Lemmon should have been #9, with a younger man playing this pivotal role. He's just a little too meek and retiring, where Fonda shows strength; you believe he would convince people of the man's innocence. A tough loss for Jack.

9; Joseph Sweeney vs. Hume Cronyn: The second tie. Both play their characters as wizened old men with keen observation, which is exactly how the role is written.

10: Ed Begley Sr. vs. Mykelti Williamson: Except for one hilarious moment of overacting when Williamson devolves into almost animal howls, he gives a decent performance, but Begley gives a great one. 1957 wins again.

11: George Voskovec vs. Edward James Olmos: Accents can be hard to pull off while acting, and I never bought Olmos', for some reason. He gives a good performance, but Voskovec gets the nod.

12: Robert Webber vs. William Petersen: Both play the roles as written: a super-shallow advertising guy who goes with the crowd because he can't form his own opinions. The final tie.

Final score:

1957: 6 (Cobb, Binns, Warden, Fonda, Begley, Voskovec)
1997: 3 (Vance, Davis, Harewood)
Tie: 3 (Marshall/Mueller-Stahl, Sweeney/Cronyn, Webber/Petersen)

Direction: 1957, no contest. Lumet injects real artistry into the proceedings, while Friedkin, while doing a competent job, ultimately just films the play.

Summary: Both are worthwhile and should be watched, but it's the 1957 version that's remembered, and with good reason.