The Winslow Boy [Import anglais]

So, when a 13 year old boy was accused of theft in Osbourne Naval College on the Isle of Wight, and summarily dismissed, the family had little recourse. And only one hope.

The King can allow a suit to go forward, essentially by an act of grace, by proclaiming that despite the legal immunity and presumption of infallibility (and you thought only the Pope claimed infallibility!) that there is a just cause at stake. So, he can let the case be examined and tried, using the proclamation: ï¿Let Right Be Done!ï¿

--The Case--
George Archer-Shee was the accused. Despite the suspicion of several cadets, Archer-Shee was the only one expelled. This was in 1908. His father, Martin Archer-Shee, a Liverpool banker, believed his son's insistence of innocence, and pursued the case through legal and political channels to the extent that his influence would permit.

It became quite a celebrity cause, complete with all of the trinkets, hats, shirts, etc. that one more recently would ascribe to the antics surrounding the O.J. Simpson trial. People waited impatiently for the latest press reports, and the final verdict in favour of the boy sent the public into cheering.

--The Play--
This movie is based on a play by Terence Rattigan, which opened first in 1946. It was previously made into a film (in 1950), and has enjoyed periodic resurrection on the stage, most recently in 1994 as a West End production by Wyn Jones.

Rattigan changed details, not least the names involved: he changed the sister and brother, both ardent Conservatives, into liberal and, in the case of the brother, less than diligent personages. He moved the date forward, and the age of the boy back, and dropped the religious aspect, to try to make this a tale more involved with justice against the Crown (representing any unfeeling, uncaring, faceless authority).

David Mamet, best known for movies such as Glengary Glenross, The Spanish Prisoner, and Homicide, adapted the play. 'In adaptation, at first it would seem like the other fellow's doing all the work,' says Mamet. 'But when you get into it, you see it's not true. The previous work exists in its own right and for very good reasons, but you have to make changes to adapt it to the medium of the screen. But to the degree that this succeeds, it's because it's a great piece of dramaturgy on the part of Rattigan.' The play actually takes place completely within the confines of the Winslow drawing room.

--The Film--
Mamet of course did not confine the movie to the confines of one room. Also, he changed the dialogue around such that much of it occurs in a rat-a-tat-tat fashion much of the time. Mamet is not one for a great deal of action in a physical sense, but keeping track of the dialogue can be positively tiring.

Sir Nigel Hawthorne, best known currently as the star of the title role in ï¿The Madness of King Georgeï¿, for which he was nominated for an Oscar. He brings his quintessentially British character and presence to this very English family. In the role of the lawyer (Sir Robert Morton), Jeremy Northam (perhaps most recently seen in ï¿An Ideal Husbandï¿) brings an insight into the cost of career and the distance created from an image of greatness, while maintaining the basic humanity of the character who cares for justice. Rebecca Pidgeon, who worked with Mamet earlier in ï¿The Spanish Prisonerï¿ plays the pivotal role of the accused boy's sister, Catherine, who sacrifices her marriage to the cause (for the husband-to-be wants a less controversial life, er, wife). In this picture (and play) Catherine is a dedicated Suffragette (Rattigan finally got the real sister to accept his revision of her life -- remember, she was an ardent Conservative).

The acting is superb, seems to be a bit slow at times but that is due more to the intentional style rather than any fault of acting. This is a cinematic style of presenting an essentially dialogue-based play that becomes a bit laboured. Much better in the theatre (either as a play or a film) than on home video, where the minor distractions of the home make it more difficult to concentrate. This film requires concentration.

--Epilogue--

In the end, the case is won. In the film, no discussion is made of the aftermath, for this is a single-pointed story ï¿ ï¿Let Right Be Doneï¿. Of course, right can be defined in different terms. Despite being acquitted, the young Archer-Shee never got much benefit of this. He was killed shortly afterward serving in the military in 1914, near the beginning of World War I. His older brother (portrayed in the film as a slacker-student) in fact became a Conservative Member of Parliament, and pressed the case to win back for the family a compensation of £3000 (a princely sum in that time) plus court costs. However, the Admiralty never issued an apology and never rescinded the charges.

Such a minor case. Such a major issue.

A pity so few will ever see this film. Be part of an exclusive set who do.