Wonderful character development!

Really Surprised!

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

A court case ensues when four youths are on trial for the murder of a man at a garage, and theft of monies.The film is incredibly clever, the case is given for both prosecution and defense, with witness cross examined throughout. The film cleverly gives both sides of the argument, it asks the question 'can you judge a book by its cover?' Does the fact that someone looks a certain way mean that they'll behave in a certain way? It is such a clever film, one that makes you think and question all the way through.Fantastic production values, and superb performance, Richard Todd was excellent, but the show stealer for me had to be Robert Morley, a commanding and charismatic performance, he was superb.I was surprised by the level of quality here, 9/10

The writings of Charles Dickens are known, apart from their obvious entertainment value, as chronicles of the times in which he lived highlighted by over-the-top characterizations and true-to-life environments. So it is with this movie.I won't dwell on the plot - suffice it to say that it's presentation is sufficiently original to hold the viewer virtually spellbound in an emotional roller-coaster (big dipper to you Brits!) Rather, the value of this movie is the tantalizing peek it affords us to a Great Britain in general, and a London in particular, immediately pre-Beatles.This movie is a "must see" for those who wish to visit or re-live the London of 1962! It's a gritty, no holds barred look at the time between Harold (You-never-had-it-so-good) Macmillan's nineteen fifties and the Swinging Sixties.

Four working class boys are accused of stabbing a night watchman at a garage for the money in the cashbox. It starts slowly as a courtroom drama, with lawyers and witnesses apparently attempting feeble comic turns. Where's the director? you wonder. Surely lawyers don't behave like this. The only good bits in this preamble are the flashbacks to the witnesses' encounters with the boys.Then Robert Morley as the boys' defence lawyer visits them in the cells and zap! the film comes alive. Perhaps because Morley's in control? He was a great actor, not to mention writer and director.The guys playing the boys are excellent too. They slouch in their chairs while Morley lays into them for not giving him anything to go on. He tells them how he was always taunted at school for being fat and gains their confidence.Then the boys go into the witness stand one by one and tell the story from their point of view. Yes - it's the Rashomon plot. We see their poor homes and parents, some antagonistic, some sympathetic. They tell the story of their attempt to have fun 'up west' in London's entertainment district, foiled by their lack of cash. See it if you want to know if they're guilty!There are some great British character actors including the lovely Betty Marsden, but the prosecuting lawyer is miscast - he looks about as dangerous as a kitten. Roy Kinnear is an embarrassment, but he's given the impossible task of trying to convey a witness with concealed and unspecified 'mental trouble' - something the British public were even more ignorant about back then.Dudley Sutton stands out as the gang leader. I believe he became an alcoholic and recovered and since the late 70s has popped up on television playing charming old buffers. xxxxxxx

Four young men in 1962 London stand accused of murder. The story of the night in question unfolds through the evidence they give in court, in segments of flashback. The film is not a drama about lawyers. Instead, the drama happens Memento-style as we revisit each event on the night from a different perspective, and build up a solid picture of what they are like. This made it strangely, unexpectedly compelling, especially since we never know which side to believe. It was also interesting to see 1962 life, how these young men dress more formally and behave more politely than we do now, but are also more aggressive and rough.