VALUTAZIONE IMDb
5,9/10
169
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaSir Roderick Strood is on trial for the murder of his wife.Sir Roderick Strood is on trial for the murder of his wife.Sir Roderick Strood is on trial for the murder of his wife.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Recensioni in evidenza
Tom Conway is on trial for the murder of his wife. The facts seem to suggest a degree of responsibility, if not, indeed, culpability; he gave her sleeping pills which resulted in her death. However, did he know that? Was the overdose accidental? Did she commit suicide? A jury has to decide whether he will hang, even as Parliament debates the end of the death penalty.
It's an interesting story, because of the ambiguities in the handling, and Terence Fisher has never done better. I would like to extend some of the credit to Maurice Elvey, who is credited, along with the author of the book it is based on, with the adaptation.
The last two minutes of the movie make no sense to me.
It's an interesting story, because of the ambiguities in the handling, and Terence Fisher has never done better. I would like to extend some of the credit to Maurice Elvey, who is credited, along with the author of the book it is based on, with the adaptation.
The last two minutes of the movie make no sense to me.
Terence Fisher is famous for directing dozens of popular genre films, notably the Hammer horror classics, but his ponderous, very boring treatment of this stupid courtroom drama is incompetent. I nearly dozed off early on.
The screenplay is at fault, with several flashbacks and telegraphed clues that bog things down, and even at 71 minutes of running time this B-level British feature from Columbia seems padded. In particular, showing the family life of the jurors as they receive their court summons is totally extraneous footage.
For such a nothing movie it has 35 credited roles, mostly flatly performed, especially Tom Conway's walk-through as the lead. The unconvincing final plot twist is asinine, more appropriate to a Z-level exploitation movie than a major production that has a misleading subplot about capital punishment on the verge of being abolished (hence the title), yet that did not occur until it was suspended for murder nine years after the film was released.
The screenplay is at fault, with several flashbacks and telegraphed clues that bog things down, and even at 71 minutes of running time this B-level British feature from Columbia seems padded. In particular, showing the family life of the jurors as they receive their court summons is totally extraneous footage.
For such a nothing movie it has 35 credited roles, mostly flatly performed, especially Tom Conway's walk-through as the lead. The unconvincing final plot twist is asinine, more appropriate to a Z-level exploitation movie than a major production that has a misleading subplot about capital punishment on the verge of being abolished (hence the title), yet that did not occur until it was suspended for murder nine years after the film was released.
As reviewer John Howard Reid has pointed out, there is a section in the film too close for coincidence with the entirely famous and superior 1957 "12 Angry Men! where one juror holds out against the rest
This is a film of two halves, so different in quality as to be quite mystifying. The first half features the rather wooden Tom Conway who is really not up to interpreting his rather poorly scripted role but fairly essential viewing to understand the second half, the murder trial at the Old Bailey. This is well done by nearly all concerned - far better written, acted and directed. This is the engrossing part, the first half just a make weight. Quite a good cast including an impressive young Anthony Newley
This is a film of two halves, so different in quality as to be quite mystifying. The first half features the rather wooden Tom Conway who is really not up to interpreting his rather poorly scripted role but fairly essential viewing to understand the second half, the murder trial at the Old Bailey. This is well done by nearly all concerned - far better written, acted and directed. This is the engrossing part, the first half just a make weight. Quite a good cast including an impressive young Anthony Newley
Directed by Terence Fisher, The Last Man to Hang from 1957 stars Tom Conway as a man accused of killing his wife Daphne (Elizabeth Sellars).
As others have pointed out, this was an okay film until the ridiculous twist at the end which made no sense. At all.
Conway plays Sir Roderick Strood, introduced to a soprano (Eunice Grayson) who is singing Lucia on the radio. He falls for her and wants to divorce his wife. At one point, he and Daphne fight and she pulls a gun, evidently to kill herself, which he wrestles away from her. The gun goes off, bringing the maid (Freda Jackson) who hates Strood. No one is hurt.
Strood gives Daphne sleeping tablets, and he is accused of killing her, since the maid had given her a sedative and claims he knew it.
We see the jurors receiving jury duty summons. One of them is Anthony Newley. You think it's going to be a story about the jurors.
This movie is all over the place. The end is terrible.
As others have pointed out, this was an okay film until the ridiculous twist at the end which made no sense. At all.
Conway plays Sir Roderick Strood, introduced to a soprano (Eunice Grayson) who is singing Lucia on the radio. He falls for her and wants to divorce his wife. At one point, he and Daphne fight and she pulls a gun, evidently to kill herself, which he wrestles away from her. The gun goes off, bringing the maid (Freda Jackson) who hates Strood. No one is hurt.
Strood gives Daphne sleeping tablets, and he is accused of killing her, since the maid had given her a sedative and claims he knew it.
We see the jurors receiving jury duty summons. One of them is Anthony Newley. You think it's going to be a story about the jurors.
This movie is all over the place. The end is terrible.
A very wooden, ageing Tim Conway, looks totally disinterested in his part and also makes little effort to engage the audience about his feelings towards his murdered wife. Since he seems to show little emotion about his own circumstances of being on trial for his life, and the fact that he 'wanders' through the film almost tight lipped, the film becomes lifeless and aimless! The only real interest comes in the courtroom scenes. Give this film a miss. A wasted opportunity of what could have been a dramatic and nail biting film. Instead it induces sleep!
Lo sapevi?
- Quiz[Foreword] This film contains scenes that some viewers may find distressing.
- BlooperWhen Mrs. Tucker identifies the dead body of Daphne the body is breathing.
- Citazioni
The Jury At Home: Lucy's Mother: Oh - I wish your father had killed me and not left me here to die all alone!
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 15 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was L'ultimo uomo da impiccare (1956) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi