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

Marlene Dietrich as the Cockney Woman


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!

reply

I wish I could say she fooled me (it would have made the movie MUCH better), but she didn't---not entirely. I knew it was her from the start, but then started to doubt myself because of the plot twists, only later to see that I was right in the first place.

I cut it some slack because of the decade in which it was made, but Dick Van Dyke fooled me when he played the old man/bank boss in MARY POPPINS. So, why the heck couldn't they use better make-up on Marlene?! That's my main beef with old movies.

Please excuse typos/funny wording; I use speech-recognition that doesn't always recognize!

reply

I am so glad that I did not drop by the message board before I watched this film. To blatantly give away such a spoiler in the title of a thread really angers me. You've had all these years to correct it and chose not to. Marlene should go look for that kitchen knife again.

I understand. Thank you for telling me. -The masked bandit

reply

Watching it a 2nd time, I really find it hard to believe it's still Marlene; and she did a magnificent job.

Also, what added to the illusion was that in her other shots, they photographed as a tall, regal, slim woman. But as the Cockney woman, she slumped and photographed it slightly above the shoulders of the 3 characters, to make her appear "smaller."

reply

I knew it was her the moment she spoke on the phone. It was a great mistake to have Dietrich do a scene like that when she had that pronunciation problem. The disguise was all right, but the voice had already given it away.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

It's clearly Dietrich--despite every effort to distort her face and body-- and it ruins the film. It's her voice, too. Wilder took a chance, and so did Marlene, but she was simply too distinctive to be utterly disguised.

reply

My first thought was, "Is this a man in drag?" My second thought was, "Wait, is that Marlene Dietrich?" My third thought was, "What a horrible performance of a Cockney woman."

I wonder how audiences in the US in 1958 perceived the Cockney woman actor's performance, i.e., did they think it was genuine or did it look like bad acting?

Secondly, it would be interesting to hear opinions from UK people who saw the film in their theaters when it was released regarding this scene. I assume it would have been obvious to them that this was not a genuine British actor, much less Cockney actor, and after asking themselves, "Why on earth such an awful Cockney impersonation?" would that thought lead them to likewise speculate that it is in fact Marlene.

reply

You people who are saying it's obvious that the cockney woman was marlene dietrich, I don't know how you could come to that conclusion. The character is very odd and she has a strange accent, but there is no foreshadowing that would lead you to conclude that it was her. I certainly didn't recognize her under all that makeup and mannerisms.

reply

I didn't believe it was Dietrich. It did look like a man in drag, and I paid special attention to "her" hands. They were large and very manish, as were the facial features.

reply

I can't tell if you're joking. In a movie full of campy acting, that was one of the worst scenes. Laughably bad. What the hell kind of accent was that supposed to be, anyway? Don't get me wrong - I love this movie, but you can't take it that seriously 60 years later.

reply

Dietrich was obvious underneath the make-up but her hands were very mottled and haggard.

reply

I am sorry but I thought it was obvious

reply