Copyright 1955 by Loew's Inc. An M-G-M picture. New York opening at the Radio City Music Hall: 13 October 1955. U.S. release: 7 October 1955. U.K. release: January 1956. Australian release: 7 February 1956. Sydney opening at the St James. Running times: 110 minutes (Aust), 108 minutes (UK), 105 minutes (USA).NOTES: A four-minute scene with Arthur Kennedy in which some mild criticisms are made of the U.S. legal system was deleted from American prints but retained in the U.K. and Australian versions.Arthur Kennedy was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor, losing to Jack Lemmon in Mister Roberts.Number 7 on the Film Daily's best films of the year list, as voted by over five thousand American film critics.COMMENT: Tremendously popular in its day, Trial is yet another movie that has disappeared from public view. True, it's a film with a number of major deficiencies, but it also offers Arthur Kennedy in what is undoubtedly the most charismatic performance of his career. As a rabble-rousing fund-raiser he really comes across with a force and vitality that's absolutely rivetting. In fact, the rally scene is the most vividly realised in the film, brilliantly directed on a level of wondrously-sustained hysteria, abetted by exceptionally skilful special effects.Unfortunately, the other principals don't quite match Kennedy's expertise. Yes, there are some enthralling support portrayals by the likes of John Hodiak and Juano Hernandez, but Glenn Ford and Dorothy McGuire don't enter into their roles with quite the required zest. Their performances could be justly described as little more than routine. Of course they are not helped by the irrelevant, predictable and thoroughly cliched romantic interest that the script so artificially stirs up between them.Alas, the most damning indictment against this legal drama is the very illegality, naivety and incredibility of some of its legal arguments. The "solution" is a real cop-out. And as for Armstrong's so called "devastating" cross-examination which is actually so weak and unconvincing... True, Trial has something to offer in the way of engrossing entertainment, but, in all, misguided emphases both in script writing and direction, rob it of the power and high-voltage interest it should have generated. Robson's approach is always slick, but often superficial.

A self-doubting law professor wants to prove himself by defending a Mexican boy accused of murder. In the process, however, he gets mixed up with powerful political forces seeking to use him and the trial for their own narrow purposes.As I recall, the movie got a spread in Life magazine, probably because of its topical theme and serious intent. In the mid-1950's, race was becoming a major political topic, 1954's de-segregation ruling being a chief catalyst. Clearly, the movie wants to frame the emerging issue in generally liberal terms, vilifying both bigots and McCarthyites on the political right and communists on the left. In contrast, Glenn Ford's idealistic attorney stands in for what the movie hopes will be an emerging consensus, one that endorses a principled justice for all races. Making the judge (Hernandez) a Black man also suggests that our institutions can work well regardless of skin color.Now these are worthy topics, but even the best screenplay would have difficulty blending them into an effective 100-minutes. Unfortunately the result here tries to cover too much and ends in little more than an awkward dramatic mix. Also, the usually low-key Ford is too low-key in the movie's pivotal role. Thus the many disparate elements lack a unifying center, drifting more or less from one thread to the next without needed coherence. Notably, however, the film manages to avoid the cartoonish communist stereotypes of the period, making that key Cold War element more believable than most. For example, Kennedy's attorney (Barney) may be a schemer but he's also recognizably human, along with his boisterous fund- raising crowd. And when he admonishes the crowd to not trust anyone, I had to re-run to make sure I'd heard the un-Stalinist sentiment correctly. All in all, it's a well-intentioned film, but lacks the dramatic impact, for example, of the similarly themed 12 Angry Men (1957). Moreover, the sprawl is simply too loose to provide an effective "think piece" platform.

****SPOILERS**** Powerhouse court drama that shows how a deceitful defender with a secret agenda is more then willing to send his innocent client to the gallows in order to further his cause.Being accused of the murder of 15 year-old Mari Wiltse 16 year old Mexican-American Angel Chavez, Rafael Campos, is in desperate need of a top defense attorney to keep him from ending up on death row because of not having a proper defense. It seems obvious from the start that Angel is innocent of Mari death with the fact that she was suffering from rheumatic fever since childhood and her death was caused by it. The fact that Mari is white and Angel is Hispanic and he was making out on the beach with her at the time of Mari's death, which is considered statutory rape, is far more a strike against Angel then actually murdering Marie in the eyes of the people in town and who will eventually be on the jury.Law professor David Blake, Glen Ford, needing court experience to keep his job at the local collage is looking to handle a court case and approaches the attorney who's handling Angels case Barney Castle, Arthur Kennedy. David to his total surprise is accepted by Castle to be the lawyer, with Castle doing all the leg work,defending Angel. Castle who to David's ignorance is a local Communist instigator and is using him to further his fellow commies agenda of fomenting hatred and violence between the races. When that goal is achieved Castle plans to exploit the racial hatred and violence to further his cause and attract new members; Mostly from the Mexican/American communityWorking with David is Castle's assistant Abbe Nyle, Dorothy McGuire, who's a card-carrying Communist but is also wise to what Castle is trying to do. Abbe's loyalty to the movement, or Communist cause, has waned over the years to where she's now a commie in name, or party membership card, only. It's during the course of the trial that David and Abbe not only break away from Castles almost Svengali-like control but also fall in love with each other.With David handling the Angel Chavez murder case he shows uncanny skills in the jury selecting process throwing off potential jurors who can prejudice the verdict. But David also get's Castle very angry in the possibility of him getting Angel off which is exactly what Castle doesn't want. Castle want's Angel to be convicted and executed and become a martyr to the cause. Castle is so conniving and skillful in doing that that he convinces Angel's mother Consuela, Katy Juredo, to go along with his maniacal and cold-blooded scheme.Very intelligent court drama that's miles ahead of the many anti-Communist propaganda movies that were released back during the hight of the Cold War in the late 1940's and early 50's. "Trial" showed how many naive Americans were duped into becoming members of the Communist Party and work for it's ultimate success. Without even realizing that they were working against their, and their fellow Americans, best interests in doing so! In the end they would suffered greatly in losing their jobs and means of making a living as well as doing jail-time and in some cases even losing their lives, through the stress that they go through that in many cases lead to suicide, in doing it.Being used by Castle to get funds for the Angel Chavez Defense Fund David finally realized what a fool he is by attending a large rally for Angel in New York City with him being the main speaker. David sees first hand how the Communists work in exploiting thousands to support their cause like Castle exploited David in his defense of Angel. David also learns later that the hundreds of thousands of dollars collected at the rally, as well as the rallies before and after, were funneled into the pockets of high Communist officials, like Barney Castle. That money is not used in defending the person that they, the duped contributors, were given to understand, by Castle, that it was intended for: Angel Chavez.As the trial proceeds David just about convinced the jury of Angel's innocence but it's then that Castle steps in and dismisses David as Angel's attorney and shows his true colors "Red" by putting the young and confused teenager on the stand, against David's objections. It's then where the State District Attorney John J. Armstrong, John Hodiak, prosecuting the case tears him apart and cause Angel to implicate himself not in Mari murder but in him having sex with the 15 year-old girl! That in the eyes of jury was even worse then murder.With the verdict a forgone conclusion and Angel now facing the death penalty David makes a last desperate attempt to save the young man's life by getting to show the judge Theodore Motley, Juano Hernandez, as well as everyone in the courtroom just what a slime-ball and phony the "Great Defender" of the downtrodden and working class Barney Castle really is. It's then that David gets Castle to lose his composure in David's plea for mercy in saving Angel from the rope. Castle, with a sure-fire guilty verdict slipping away from him, now completely loses it and exposes himself as the conniving and lowlife swine that he really is. David's last and desperate "Hail Mary" attempt to save Angel's life worked in getting him found Innocent. Castle in now trying to make himself a martyr, a live not dead one like Angel, to salvage his already damaged reputation as a "Man of the People" quickly fell by the wayside. judge Motley's decision in not giving Castle the jail-time that he now so desperately wanted to become a martyr destroyed his entire scheme in salvaging the case that he secretly wanted David to lose.

A tepid tale of race, court-room tactics, communism, crooked lawyers, and desperate educators. Sound convoluted? It is. Somewhere in this mixture there was a great story, but it got lost in an attempt to expose too much. Considering the cast, writer, and director this one should have been great. Somehow we never really care much about the central characters, and the story rambles on to a conclusion that is unrealistic, at best.