MovieChat Forums > Anatomy of a Murder (1959) Discussion > Bad actor: The Judge

Bad actor: The Judge

posted 17 years ago by rios_119
64 replies | jump to latest

I enjoyed this movie immensely -- especially, Jimmy Stewart's character. But, the character of the judge did not seem right. At first I thought they had chosen a really bad actor to play the judge because he seemed to be reading his lines. But, then I concluded that they had probably chosen a real judge to play the judge, in the mistaken belief that the real judge's quirky, humorous, folksy self would translate well to the screen -- but it did not. I was close. According to IMDb, the part of the judge was played by the real attorney who represented the Army during the Army-McCarthy hearings. They should have hired a real actor.

Did anyone catch Jimmy Stewart's "I'm only a humble country lawyer" remark? I believe this remark was later stolen -- and made famous -- by Senator Sam Ervin, the Chairperson of the Watergate Hearings.

[–] ignis_fatuus33 16 years ago

Mr. Welch was wonderful in this movie. Absolutely natural and very sympathetic.

Why be dull?

[–] matthewwave-1 16 years ago

Just saw the film for the first time yesterday, in a theatre.

Whoa. I totally disagree with a lot of folks here. In a film filled with incredible acting -- Scott nearly steals all his scenes, great roles for Arden and O'Connell, and Jimmy Stewart, fer cry-aye! -- I thought Welch and Remick took top acting honors!

Matthew

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 10 years ago

He just about steals the movie! I'm with you in being dumbfounded that anyone would actually single him out as a bad thing about this movie.

--------
My top 250: http://www.flickchart.com/Charts.aspx?user=SlackerInc&perpage=250

[–] CrabbyJack 10 years ago

Just watched this flick on Netflix... and couldn't disagree more. Halfway through I commented to my wife on how stiff and artificial the judge was. When I found out who he was and that he was not actually an actor I wasn't at all surprised.

What does surprise me is that ANYONE would think his acting was natural.

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 10 years ago

To me, he doesn't seem like he's "acting" at all. Just being a judge.

Now, does this mean I think he'd do a good job playing a Louisiana bluesman, or a Chicago parish priest? No, I'm sure not. But as a judge, another type of lawyer he's spent a great deal of time around, he is great.

The professional film critics are on my side. I haven't seen a single one of them say anything remotely negative about Welch's acting. Those who commented on him at all either way are uniformly positive (though if I've missed someone, please enlighten me). Examples:

New York Times: "On the bench as the judge, Joseph N. Welch of Boston, the lawyer who distinguished himself in the Army-McCarthy hearings, does an unbelievably professional job. He is delightful and ever so convincing. Mr. Preminger scored a coup in getting him."

Variety: "Joseph N. Welch, Boston attorney, is tremendous as the trial judge."

Time Out: "No one entirely means what they say, except the presiding judge played by Joseph Welch, whose impassioned censure of Joseph McCarthy during the Army-McCarthy hearings hastened the senator’s downfall – though here his immortal ‘Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?’ becomes ‘Now, Mr Dancer, get off the panties – you’ve done enough damage.’ Perched on his bench, avuncular and wearily tolerant of his charges’ calculated histrionics, he sits atop a lonely moral high ground."

The Observer (UK): "Duke Ellington wrote the jazz score, appears briefly and is given one marvellous period line ('You're not splitting the scene, man?'), and there's a splendidly pawky performance as the presiding judge by Joseph N Welch, the middle-aged Boston attorney who destroyed Joseph McCarthy on television in 1954."

So it's you and the others who agree with you in this thread who hold the opinion that stands out as eccentric.

--------
My top 250: http://www.flickchart.com/Charts.aspx?user=SlackerInc&perpage=250

[–] CrabbyJack 10 years ago

Those contemporaneous reviews must be viewed in the light of the era when they were written. At the time Welch was hugely popular in the entertainment press for having discredited Senator McCarthy, who had targeted Hollywood communists alongside government infiltrators. In that climate Welch could have recited Mary Had a Little Lamb and been hailed as the greatest orator since Cicero.

Eccentric? Hardly, the opinion that Welch's performance was stilted at best and downright amateurish at worst is widely held. Some of his scenes in this film were absolutely cringeworthy. Glad you enjoyed it, but others of equal credibility did not.

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 10 years ago

Like who? You need a citation, otherwise I don't buy it. I just watched the film the other day, had no idea who Welch was until after the movie was over, and found him delightful. Though I loved many aspects of the movie, my overriding intent when heading for this board was to sing the praises of the character and the actor.

--------
My top 250: http://www.flickchart.com/Charts.aspx?user=SlackerInc&perpage=250

[–] gbromberg 15 years ago

As someone noted earlier in this thread, I came to this particular message board for the sole reason of learning more about the character who played the judge in this movie. What a terrific thread!

This is the reason why IMDB is extremely valuable to movie fans like myself.

So, having said that, I was blown away by the performance of the judge, played by Joe Welch. I'm not an actor and it seems that some of those who have posted in this thread are actors. They seem to have strong opinions about the choices Welch made in constructing the essense of his character.

Granted, Welch played it straight and maybe he wasn't "acting," but I think that decision was very appropriate for this role. To me, I couldn't take my eyes off of him, and that's a credit to him considering that James Stewart and George C. Scott were in the same room.

I'll close by saying this is one of the best court-room dramas I've seen. It's right up there with "A Few Good Men."

[–] dbb79 15 years ago

I liked his performance, nothing wrong with it. Now that you told me he is actually a real judge, I respect his performance even more.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] maawan 14 years ago

I agree with the original poster. The actor who played judge was quite horrible. His role should have been edited better.

[–] MrPie7 14 years ago

If you want to see a great amature performance check out James Dickey's performance in "Deliverance". He was just perfect as the sheriff at the end who told the guys not come back. I was shocked to find out that he was the author of the novel because he was so GOOD.

[–] Molly-31 12 years ago

I sat through The People vs. Larry Flynt twice before I recognized Flynt was playing the judge. He was great!

You've got me?! Who's got you?!

[–] tad58 12 years ago

I did, too. The fact that he was the one who finally put an end to Joe McCarthy should shut the mouths of his detractors.

[–] liscarkat-2 12 years ago

"The fact that he was the one who finally put an end to Joe McCarthy should shut the mouths of his detractors."

His encounter with McCarthy has nothing at all to do with whether his performance in "Anatomy of a Murder" was good or not.

That being said, I am not one of his detractors. I like him in the movie.

[–] puirt-a-beul 12 years ago

I agree he should be lauded for the way he responded to McCarthy, but that's irrelevant to his performance in this movie.

I have mixed feelings about Mr Welch's performance here. I really like his screen persona, and thought his folksy and clearly intelligent humour added enormously to the tone of the movie.

On the other hand, most of the time he speaks he's clearly reciting lines he's learned, and that does put a slight obstacle in the way of simply accepting his character as part of the narrative. It's exacerbated by the script, which gives the judge some lines that seem meant to be throwaway humour but are simply too wordy.

I can imagine an accomplished actor like Burl Ives or Spencer Tracy handling such lines lightly and with aplomb, but the less-experienced (as an actor, at least) Mr Welch doesn't know which lines to de-emphasise, as in natural speech, and as a result many of his lines come out as a bit laboured.

Where I felt this mattered is that, especially in the first half of the movie, his delivery frequently throws the pacing of a scene off. On several occasions, it feels like a scene comes to a lumbering halt while he gets his line out, and then has to pick up momentum again.

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

[–] jimmye184 12 years ago

A very good movie could have been better if they had chosen Burl Ives or Spencer Tracey over this actor who's previous acting experience was all in real court rooms (including the Army/ McCarthy hearings).

let's go and say a prayer for a boy who couldn't run as fast as I could

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 10 years ago

McCarthy was already done before Welch uttered that line (in June 1954) though. In May 1954, McCarthy's Gallup approval/disapproval numbers were "underwater" at -14, when they had been +21 in January of that year.

--------
My top 250: http://www.flickchart.com/Charts.aspx?user=SlackerInc&perpage=250

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Razzbar 12 years ago

I sure disagree with you on the effective acting of ... Welch???

I actually looked up the movie on IMDB after watching it, to see who played the judge. I thought the guy was a natural, but I didn't recognize him.

The only experience I have with Senator Welch was seeing him portrayed by Burgess Meredith in "Tailgunner Joe", a movie about McCarthy.

Frankly, I think Mr. Welch did a better job as judge in this movie than Burgess Meredith would have done. -- only because I would have "recognized" Meredith as Welch...

[–] PopperTheKungFu-Dragon 11 years ago

I disagree. I thought he did very well and was very surprised to learn that he wasn't actually an actor. He turned in a very good performance IMO.

[–] oldmotem 11 years ago

imdb lists this person as an actor and gives little indication he was ever anything else (except two blurbs at the bottom of page giving his famous quote).

I believe he should have received an Academy Award nomination for best support for this picture and the fact he did not is PURELY CRIMINAL.

Between him and E. Varden (aka Eve Arden) this picture was made much better than it otherwise would have been.

Too bad they left out Leo G. Carroll. He could've added a lot too.

[–] timoirish-135-390886 10 years ago

I really like Welch's presence in the film. I've been to a few criminal trials and, take it from me, trial lawyers are very theatrical personalities. They are often excessively hammy. This film is as much about a contrast in two styles of acting (the seemingly laid-back manner of James Stewart vs. the high-pitched theatricality of a young George C. Scott) as it is about the clash of courtroom styles and approaches to whatever we mean by "justice". Welch is deliberately non-theatrical. As a superior court judge and an older practitioner, he has seen it all many times and his witticisms are often delivered monotone and with weariness--like those of an elderly professor who's grown tired. I do like when he does become a little excited when he discovers the fishing fly which Stewart has (not so accidentally) left in the book he hands him.

Judges, I have found, are in general not very entertaining personalities. I think casting an actor with the screen weight of Burl Ives or Spencer Tracy would have given either actor too great an opportunity to steal the film from the actual principals. Anatomy of a Murder never fails to catch my interest. If I start watching it, I must always watch it to the very end.