Catangro After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Portia Hilton Blistering performances.

Ezmae Chang This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Retired508 From the beginning, the plot, character development and suspense are first rate. In fact, the movie goes very well in every respect, except that the whole movie turns on the remembrance of Mark on the witness stand at the end of the movie And even this is acceptable except for the fatal flaw: Mark gives absolutely no explanation as just why he switches jackets with the man he just beat up.As a matter of fact, if the reason was to pretend that, when found,the body would be that of a British Major and not his own, why in the world wold he put on a jacket which was probably spotted with blood, hardly the action of a sane man. Try as I might, I cannot think of a reason for the switch, and even the prosecutor fails to ask the reason for this action. Without a satisfactory answer to this question, the entire testimony is worthless.After all, it is in this jacket that the trinket that his wife gave him is discovered which then causes to prime witness against him to recant his testimony, and thus proves his innocence.

Spikeopath Libel is directed by Anthony Asquith and adapted from Edward Wooll's play by Anatole de Grunwald and Karl Tunberg. It stars Dirk Bogarde, Olivia de Havilland, Paul Massie, Robert Morley, Wilfrid Hyde-White, Anthony Dawson and Richard Wattis. Music is by Benjamin Frankel and cinematography by Robert Krasker.A shell-shocked ex-WWII prisoner of war with amnesia is accused of being an impostor by one of the guys he was imprisoned with. This sends him spinning into the middle of a Libel court case that could destroy everything in his life.A splendidly stylish mystery/drama that offers up two Dirk Bogarde's for the price of one. The big question throughout is if Bogarde, in the shoes of Sir Mark Sebastian Loddon, is actually a doppleganger that he was in the war with called Frank Welney. Loddon has the riches, the estate and a beautiful loving wife, Welney was a struggling actor and something of a mischievous imp. The big narrative thrust is that Loddon is not sure himself, he can only remember certain things, thus we are never sure either as the plot twists and turns and the court case simmers away with dramatic force.Bogarde is great in his dual role, with a voice change for each character and different hair styles to help the viewers differentiate. In the court we have a trio of classy character actors, with Hyde- White and Morley as the opposing lawyers (wonderful to witness this) and Watiss as the judge presiding over the trial. Havilland isn't asked to do much until late in the day, but then she shines bright and puts some emotional punch into proceedings. The great Krasker photographs it in crisp black and white, while Asquith directs with a smoothness that undercuts the coincidences and conveniences that exist in this sort of story.All the highlights of a court room drama are here, and it's a cracking mystery to boot. 8/10

blanche-2 I unabashedly admit that Dirk Bogarde is one of my favorite actors, so naturally, two of him is better. In "Libel," directed by Anthony Asquith, he has a dual role - that of a baron, Sir Mark Sebastian Loddon, and Frank Welney, an actor and a lookalike in his barracks during World War II. When Mark returns from the war, he can't remember a lot of his past life and is haunted by images of events during the war that he can't connect with. Another soldier sees the baron on television and believes that he is really Frank Welney, and the story is published in a tabloid. Mark's wife (Olivia de Havilland) insists that for the sake of their young son, he sue for libel. He does.This is an often-told story, but I enjoyed it anyway. Bogarde is excellent as the uptight, insecure Mark and the cocky, nosy Frank, and while there is a strong resemblance between the two men, Welney's coloring and hairstyle is different, as is his manner. De Havilland turns in another marvelous, emotional performance as a woman who starts out believing her husband is indeed the man she loved before the war... and then having her doubts.Well directed and holds one's interest.

denscul This movie employs good actors, particularly some of the great English character actors of the time. However, the premise of the plot- one person changing identities with another, ruined the movie for me. What I don't understand, and wish some other movie buff could explain, how do writers get paid for stories when they show an complete lack of basic understanding of the military. Even way back in WWII, English soldiers were fingerprinted, and most soldiers wore their dog tags religiously, particularly those who served in combat. I would imagine a baron would be particularly concerned that his remains arrive back in the family plot. These two facts of military life were never explained. The final insult to our intelligence came when a uniform of a near comatose patient is presented in the court room. Since the war ended in 1945, and the setting of the movie was contempory (1959), 14 years had elapsed. What happened to the soldier's identification tags? What efforts had been made to notify the patient's family? In real life, the question of responsibility would have generated a search to determine whether the patient was a British soldier. The two main characters were captured at the evacuation at Dunkirk, often referred as the Miracle of Dunkirk because 400,000 soldiers did excape. The number of majors captured at Dunkirk would have been relatively small, and if a hospital was stuck with a patient for long term care, it stands to reason a serious effort would be made to determine who their patient was.