At 2:40 minutes was worried about the structure and pacing of the movie. Pacing, acting and story was great.

Classic courtroom drama thanks to a superb cast and straight forward direction that keeps you on the edge of your seat. The actors are excellent, with Jimmy Stewart superb as a defense attorney with some shades of gray (he outright tells his client to come up with a defense for his reason to commit murder) while still staying charming throughout. He gets great support from the rest of the cast, especially George C. Scott as a dogged prosecutor who matches him in the courtroom. Behind the camera, Otto Preminger delivers a superb courtroom drama that is more matter of fact but with plenty of twists and turns. Best of all, you never sure if the defendant is guilty of murder or not, and even leans towards him being guilty. Despite that, you still root for him and his attorneys, making for legal drama at its very best.

It may seem crazy for me to root against Jimmy Stewart and instead look at George C. Scott as the hero of the story. Alas, that is the way I see the story. That isn't what the filmmakers had in mind, but I can't help but see it that way. All the evidence the audience is given in the movie seems to imply that the two people Stewart is defending are guilty. I guess that is the way lawyers work. They are not always defending innocent people, more often than not, they will have to defend the guilty. I knew that this movie was controversial for its time but looking back it is pretty tame by today's standards. I found it amusing to hear the crowd scoff and awe by the mention of the word "panties". As well as hearing the late 50's jargon for "tight" and "masher". Good ol' Jimmy is charming as always, even in his best attempts to be a hard-nosed no-nonsense lawyer. He does a good job, and it is his plight to run a successful law firm that keeps me engaged through the story. Because the people he's defending are definitely guilty. The whole premise of the story is that Fredrick Manion is accused of murdering someone...which he did. But Stewart's defense is that Manion was getting revenge for his wife, so that makes it OK. The rest of the court case is distracted by trying to prove whether or not his anger was justified. Laura Manion claims the victim raped her. I guess they figure if they can prove that he did, the murder is therefore justified...which it isn't but that is what we're going with. The trial is still an interesting one. The lawyers have a fascinating back and forth, and you really get the idea that it is like a verbal chess match. All the actors do a good job at making memorable and interesting characters. I just find it hard to ignore the fact that I don't get behind the main conflict of the story.

Still stunning as it entertaining 60 years since it was first reased. James Stewart is explosive and takes the viewer throughout the journey with precise realism.

A great court room drama. It may be a little dated in the “hip “ style but overall a very good movie. Older movies can sometimes suffer from pacing problems, this might be guilty in the set up to the courtroom scenes but not overly and it does not go to far. Jimmy Stewart and George C Scott battling in the court room is so good.

Great courtroom drama with a superb cast. Its a rarity in that it actual gets most of the law right. Smart engrossing with a great twist at the end that will leave you thinking.

Rating: 8/10. 81/100

Classic and accurate courtroom drama by Otto Preminger with great performances by James Stewart and George C. Scott in his first notable role

As good as any courtroom drama out there. Still great and relevant.

The beginning is a little drawn out and the movie could've been shorter for sure, but otherwise it's a perfect courtroom thriller! The courtroom scenes are all so captivating, with the two equally clever lawyers taking shots at each other non-stop. The case is fairly complex too and all the characters are well written.

Anatomy of a Murder was directed by Otto Preminger and released in 1959. It made my must-see 2023 film list because it is often cited as being one of the best American courtroom dramas ever made. The film starts off with a jazzy upbeat score by the legendary Duke Ellington. The music's lack of intensity and drama establishes a mood that will run throughout the film. You see, this movie isn't really about who's innocent or guilty, this film is about the spinning of narratives that our legal system is predicated upon. While the viewer is firmly vested in finding out what the final verdict will be, the true story is the "sport" of the courtroom. Lieutenant Frederick Manion (Ben Gazzara) is accused of murdering an innkeeper named Barney Quill. Manion had been told by his wife Laura (Lee Remick) that Quill had raped her. District Attorney Lodwick (Brooks West, the only one-note actor in an otherwise outstanding ensemble) wants to convict Manion of first-degree murder. The State of Michigan sends big-city D.A. Claude Dancer (George C. Scott in one of his earliest film roles) to assist Lodwick. Lt. Manion hires a lawyer named Paul Biegler (Jimmy Stewart) to represent him. Once Biegler accepts the challenge of Manion's case, he's determined to fight for Manion's plea of temporary insanity and for the win. Presiding over the game, oops, I mean trial, is Judge Weaver, our referee. (As an interesting side note, Judge Weaver is played by the real-life Judge Joseph N. Welch who was known by many for taking on Senator Joseph McCarthy in the Army-McCarthy hearings.) Anyone having served on a jury knows that real trials do not play out with the same speed and lack of repetition that a movie trial does. But setting that aside, this is a fascinating spectator vantage to the dual of legal machinations. Preminger doesn't make Manion a particularly likable person, so you aren't automatically rooting for him. Laura's rape is never shown so the viewer, like the jury, is left to decide if it was a real event. Most of the central characters (much like each viewer) have differing positions of what is right or wrong given the facts presented. Ethics, showmanship, sportsmanship and credibility are what this legal battle comes down to… not justice. The intensity of this case (based on actual events), through Preminger's guidance, was extremely compelling and immensely rewarding. So much so that one barely notices that the film's full run time is 160 minutes. This movie fully lived up to its reputation and deserves the accolades it still receives.

Anatomy of a Murder is a gripping courtroom drama thanks to its realistic depiction of a trial and Jimmy Stewart's performance.

It's a courtroom classic, lengthy. James Stewart looks too nice for this character!

There are some truly great courtroom dramas ("Witness for the Prosecution" "The Verdict" "To Kill a Mockingbird"), but I would argue that Otto Preminger's "Anatomy of the Murder" is the best cinematic courtroom drama of all time. Jimmy Stewart plays a lawyer in a sleepy resort community in the upper peninsula of Michigan who's hired to defend serviceman Fredrick Manion (Ben Gazarra in his only second film appearance) for gunning down a local bar owner who he believes raped his wife, Laura (Lee Remick in only her fourth film appearance). There's no mystery who did the murder, but the case hinges on whether Gazarra was in his right mind at the time or was in the grips of an "irresistible impulse" at the time of the murder. "Anatomy" features an amazing cast of young actors. Stewart, Arthur O'Connell, and Eve Arden are veteran Hollywood actors of the group, and besides Gazarra and Remick you also have a young George C. Scott in his second film role and also early roles for Kathryn Grant, Orson Bean, and Murray Hamilton. Perhaps the most interesting casting is of Joseph N. Welch as the trial judge, who's best know as the real-life lead counsel for the Army in the Army-McCarthy hearings where he uttered the famous line "Have you no sense of decency, sir?" This was Welch's first and only acting role, but he's terrific. The folks behind the camera are just as impressive. Produced and directed by Hollywood veteran Otto Preminger ("Man with the Golden Arm" "Advise & Consent" "Laura"), Saul Bass ("Vertigo,"Ocean's 11" and "Goodfellas") made an ultra cool title sequence, how can you not love the knockout jazz score by Duke Ellington. Ellington even makes a cameo as "Pie-Eye" during a dancehall scene. There's a lot that sets "Anatomy" apart from other courtroom dramas. I'm no lawyer, but I've read multiple times how this film is one of the more accurate representations of courtroom proceedings, taking it's time to go through pre-trial research, interviews, and investigations, jury selection, and getting into the minutia of nitpicking objections or manipulating juries throughout the trial. It takes its time to show the court proceedings from start to finish and is almost the entirety of the film. That immersiveness is only part of what makes this film such a classic. The verbal sparing between Stewart, who plays himself up as a simple country lawyer to the jury (when he's anything but), tying fishing lures throughout the trial, setting himself up as the little guy going up against big city prosecutors, the most formidable of which is the great George C. Scott. Their back and forth are simply magic to watch. These courtroom scenes make it the kind of film where if your'e flipping channels and happen upon it, there's no way you can turn it off. And the verbal sparing is not limited to the courtroom. The dialogue between characters outside the courtroom is just as riveting, which gets at what the film is really about, how people endlessly play games with one another. There's always something beneath the surface, or an agenda, or even outright lies in just about every interaction. Sometimes it's just playing around with one another, like when Stewart plays coy about what's he has in a brown bag (it's booze) with a colleague, or Remick flirting with Steward in order manipulate him, or the more consequential moments whether Gazarra was gripped by an irresistible impulse or if he was committing pre-meditated murder. This cynical theme of "don't trust what anyone says or does at face value" is given emphasis when Stewart's Paul Biegler states, "As a lawyer, I've had to learn that people aren't just good or just bad. People are many things." This is a must see film that everyone should watch at least once.

Brilliant movie, one of the more if not the most realistic courtroom drama ever made, and with a great cast who all give great performances, what's not to love! This movie is an absolute must see, believe me, you will not be able to look away from this gripping and engaging courtroom epic! I give Anatomy of A Murder a 10/10.

this is one of the best old court room dramas i've seen along with 12 angry men

great courtroom movie set in Michigan.

Perfect is the only word that can do justice to a film of this kind. Otto Preminger's Anatomy of a Murder seem to be just perfect, not a hair out of place and not a word interchangeable with another. The performances, fantastic. Duke Wellington's score, delightful. The cinematography, sharp, slick yet not overly polished, not synthetic, simplistic yet not lazy. The script is just a beautiful, ambiguous, masterpiece that leaves the audience torn, dumbfounded yet deeply understanding of the character, the situation at hand and the law as practiced in it. The film's ending, beater-sweet almost melancholic yet cheerful somehow, inconclusive yet ties all that we know by the end of the film seamlessly together.

I would use this movie as a lecture on courts. It was just amazing..

"How can a jury disregard what they've already heard?" "They can't, Lieutenant. They can't." This movie might unironically hold the record for the number of the mentions of the word 'panties' in its script. "Simple country lawyer" Jimmy Stewart (always wondered where that phrase actually came from) and city suit George C. Scott clash in an early courtroom drama that combined much of what would come to be standard practice in not only legal films but their television counterparts - unsure circumstances, a range of characters with checkered or mysterious pasts, an investigation in the field, and a hotly contested legal battle. The film is almost split in half, between the focus on the crime itself as its own little thriller, and the dramatic proclamations of the courtroom. Hard to deny that the film is solidly put together and sustains itself reasonably well through solid performances and just enough breadcrumbs to prevent the audience from nodding off, but it's pretty darn protracted at 2 hours and 40 minutes, and reflecting back relatively little is actually much of a revelation throughout the case. Fortunately, Preminger takes more of a cynical look at the legal system than a Jimmy Stewart character would have if he were back to working with Frank Capra; the similarities between the practices of Stewart's supposedly noble Biegler and Scott's stuffy prosecutor Dancer are notable and could easily be interpreted as an indictment of the legal profession as a whole. There is also some great, simple characterization at play that can easily go unnoticed, as in the case of Brooks West's DA Lodwick; "Look at this, a real genuine Picasso print". Immediate establishment as obsessed with the superficial and the appearance of intelligence and taste, good stuff. Funny to have Duke Ellington in a film in 1959 (after he had already been famous for decades), a film that literally calls out a character's unusual love of jazz, and not even give him a credit. (3.5/5)