MovieChat Forums > Witness for the Prosecution (1958) Discussion > Marlene Dietrich as the Cockney Woman

Marlene Dietrich as the Cockney Woman

posted 15 years ago by Absalon_MacNair
57 replies | jump to latest

I still watch that scene over and over again and I cannot believe that is her. Is there any real evidence that the Cockney Woman is in fact played by Marlene Dietrich? The transformation is amazing. It isn't just that she looks nothing like her, it is that she looks nothing like her, but still looks like someone else. Take Eddie Murphy in "The Nutty Professor" for example. I at first didn't know he played all of the Klumps, but now that I do I can see it. Also, with the great Lon Chaney, he looks horriyingly brilliant in all of his roles, but I can still tell it is him. With this Cockney Woman, I would have sworn they hired another actress for it.

It is astonishing!

[–] telegonus 13 years ago

I watched the film last night, had already seen it two or three times before, so I knew everything that was going to happen, and the scene with Marlene as the Cockney woman was highly effective, worked for me, if for no other reason that she was downright spooky looking and sounding,--and some people are--so she didn't strike me as unbelievable. After all, this woman is supposed to be selling letters to a barrister involved in a murder trial, so to put it IRL terms she'd probably make herself look a bit strange, maybe affect a weird accent. The entire scene with Dietrich in disguise gave off weird vibes. It was different from the other scenes in the movie; in a strange place, a public place, where people move around a lot. Plus, Dietrich really sold the sinister aspect of the character she was acting, came off as a floozie with odd speech patterns and mannerisms. When she repeated her accent in the courtroom at the end, showed Laughton her scars for a second time, the effect was startling, almost horrifying. I nearly gasped even as I was expecting it. Billy Wilder was a great director. He knew what he was doing, made a very good film.

(As to Tyrone Power, I think he was fine, his non-Britishness aside. There was a delicate, more European than American quality to him that worked in his favor throughout, which made him come off early on as near dainty; later on, as sympathetic. His behavior in the courtroom was over the top but then sometimes people act like that in real life. I mean, who else would you want to see in the role,--Barry Sullivan? Michael Rennie? Wendell Corey?--I don't think a cooler actor giving a more "composed" performance would have helped the movie at all. Power's work in the film is alright by me.)

[–] maybe730 12 years ago

According to TCM it's her and it's not dubbed. Orson Welles helped with the fake nose and scar and Charles Laughton with the cockney accent.

[–] rekcilorf 12 years ago

I, too, was completely fooled by this scene. I recently saw a stage production, but they did not disguise her well enough. My wife asked me right off "Isn't that the wife?" I said, "yes, but you were not supposed to notice." It's a hard thing topull off, for sure. There was a TV version (maybe in the 80's, I have to check) with Diana Rigg in the Deitrch role, she couldn't pull off the scam either.

[–] FranLovesBetteD 11 years ago

It's certainly hard to believe, since the makeup is very good to cover up her beautiful facial features, but it was Marlene. This was just another proof of how good an actress she was, much better than she usually is given credit for.

Is there any real evidence that the Cockney Woman is in fact played by Marlene Dietrich?

Maria Riva, in the wonderful biographical book she wrote on her mother, stated that "Witness for the Prosecution" was the only movie Marlene really wanted to take part in, and one of the main reasons was the she would be able to play a double role, being the second a very unusual one and proper to show her talents beyond the femme-fatale she usually played.

I, too, find hard to believe that the woman in question was Marlene, but once more, I guess it was a good makeup work more than anything else, and of course her often underrated acting talent.

Animal crackers in my soup
Monkeys and rabbits loop the loop

[–] Jimothy3 11 years ago

I must admit I never knew it was the same actress. However the attempted cockney accent was pretty atrocious, and considering who it was in the presence of; this great barrister who is an expert at picking up even the more insignificant of details, it made it all the more unfortunate.

[–] puirt-a-beul 11 years ago

My feeling too, Jimothy.

So hard to believe that Laughton's character wouldn't twig immediately to her real identity (I certainly did, even the first time I saw it), and particularly to believe that he wouldn't see such radical makeup for artifice, especially when he was standing a mere foot or so away.

So I love the movie for all sorts of reasons, but I find it a bit distracting to have to accept this conceit and pretend it's real. It's a distinct flaw.

You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

[–] OldFilmLover 11 years ago

I think the voice was dubbed. I have only looked at the scene once -- tonight for the first time -- and it seemed to that the movements of the mouth and the soundtrack were not always perfectly matched. I knew it was Dietrich playing the Cockney woman, and was surprised she could do such a good British accent, and then started to wonder, so I looked more closely at the mouth and it seems to me that this gives it away. I would think also that the interview with Billy Wilder, cited by someone else, would settle the matter, unless Wilder was old and senile when he gave the interview. If the director says the voice was dubbed, then it was dubbed.

[–] luverofmovies 11 years ago

I agree with you. I've always felt that was Dietrich acting the part of the Cockney woman, but the voice was dubbed in. Do think she did a great job in her part throughout the film, just possibly not able to perfect that accent.

[–] joedonato234 11 years ago

The voice wasn't dubbed (by that I think the implication is it wasn't her voice), but I do think certain lines were looped, which is a term for dropped-in dubbing, usually because there is a problem with sound levels, but here I think it was done to try and perfect the accent in certain lines without retaking the whole scene. Because Dietrich did have trouble with her "r"s.

[–] weekes-sw 10 years ago

In the final reveal in the courtroom you can see that to do the cockney accent Marlene has to move her mouth in a very particular way. I think that's also why they had to dub the lines in the other scenes, so she could use more natural mouth movements.

[–] wearyourlove 11 years ago

Am I the only one who thought it was Tyrone Power at first? I'm not even kidding...

[–] bootblack987 10 years ago

You're not the only one. I thought the face looked to mannish to be a woman's face, although compared to Marlene Deitrich, maybe a lot of women's face seem mannish. So then I thought, "they can't be introducing a new character this late in the movie"...so then I thought it was Tyrone Power, and his character had a split personality, and the other personality was who committed the murder. But then I thought, surely they would keep him in prison during the trial? So I didn't know what was going on. 

[–] mxzt 11 years ago

To be honest with you, I was fooled. Marlene was completely unrecognizable to me. What a chameleon like performance. I still look at that scene and believe it was someone else than Marlene.