User Reviews (96)

Add a Review

  • Warning: Spoilers
    In 1924 Nathan Leopold and his friend/lover Richard Loeb were two wealthy young Chicagoans, from Jewish American families, who were extremely well educated. Both were believers in the theories (somewhat twisted) of Friedrich Nietzche regarding the idea of the superman. They believed that supermen could regard certain laws as being only meant for "little people", not supermen. One thing they felt they could ignore was the criminal code...and this included murder. They decided to commit a perfect crime for the thrill of it. They would kidnap and kill a child, demand a large ransom, and leave a trail of clues that would befuddle the police. To do this they did do some things that showed careful planning (like stealing a typewriter so they could send untraceable letters). Finally they kidnapped a cousin of Leopold, Bobby Franks (age 14), killed him in their car, mutilated the body with acid and knives, and hid him in a deserted park culvert. Unfortunately for these two geniuses, Leopold dropped a pair of eyeglasses at the site where Bobby was deposited. It was the eyeglasses that led the police to Leopold and then Loeb, and the two supermen were fairly fast in caving in and confessing. The criminal historian, Jonathan Goodman, once wrote that if he ever planned to commit a murder and would ask infamous criminals for advice, he would certainly choose Burke and Hare (the Edinburgh body snatchers, who were not caught until they killed 16 people) over Leopold and Loeb.

    They did not hang. Their families hired America's greatest attorney, Clarence Darrow, to defend them. He pleaded guilty for them, but requested a bench trial (just a judge) for the sentencing. His theory was that a jury would never be able not to divorce the cruelty of their actions from consideration of their punishment. For Darrow, a lifelong opponent of the death penalty, was unwilling to risk losing two guilty clients to public hatred.

    He gave a classic discussion of the death penalty, and how it would not do what the public wished - stop further crime as a warning, and bring back (or closure to the family of)Bobby Frank. And the Judge did decide to not order the execution of Leopold and Loeb. They were sentenced to life plus ninety nine years (the sentence was later used as the title of Leopold's autobiography). But Richard Loeb was murdered in prison in 1936 (he made a homosexual advance on a fellow prisoner who slashed him to death - and was not punished for it). Leopold was released in 1958. He married, moved to Puerto Rico where he worked as a nurse, and died in 1971.

    COMPULSION is based on a novel by Meyer Levin (a best seller in the late 1950s), that was based on the case, changing the names of Leopold and Loeb to Artie Strauss and Judd Steiner. The film only goes through the crime and the trial, culminating in the performance of Orson Welles as Jonathan Wilkes (a.k.a. Clarence Darrow). Dean Stockwell plays a sympathetic, confused Leopold (an issue among criminal historians - how really weak was Leopold - was he Loeb's sex slave?) and Bradford Dillman as a more aggressive Loeb. Martin Milner plays their college friend (and Leopold's rival for a girl in the class), who also finds the eyeglasses. E.G.Marshall is District Attorney Horn (and gives a very effective performance as an intelligent adversary of the two criminals as well as Welles). Diane Varsi plays the girl both Stockwell and Milner love. For some reason her performance is considered weak - actually while not fascinating it was more than competent.

    The film does show the crime in it's aftermath (unlike the other film version of the Leopold-Loeb Case - ROPE - this movie does not the actual murder). It shows the increasing nervousness of Leopold, while Loeb keeps his cool (even "helping" the police investigation by suggesting some possible suspects of pedophile leanings). It is (unlike ROPE) shot as a period film, in the 1920s, but the film is in black and white - so the period costumes and accessories are not detracting from the action.

    It is a well done film, but Welles appearance is only in the last half hour, culminating in the speech before the judge and his effective parting shot at Stockwell, who feels there is no God ("Perhaps it was God who made you drop your eyeglasses."). Welles performance of the speech was so effective that it was recorded on a record and was a best seller that year. And it is beautifully done.

    But the film misses one point. Darrow did not win the sentence he sought by convincing the Judge of the impracticality of the death sentence. The Judge actually dismissed this argument of Darrow's. But Leopold and Loeb were under 21. He felt they were too young to be hanged.

    It has been suggested that COMPULSION and ROPE could be shown together, but it would equally be possible to view COMPULSION with INHERIT THE WIND, to compare the performances of Welles with Spencer Tracy as Darrow/Henry Drummond in the latter film. There is also a peculiar type of movie loop in COMPULSION and INHERIT THE WIND. COMPULSION has a scene where Welles, is in his hotel room, when he sees some Ku Klux Klanners light a cross outside his window. In INHERIT THE WIND Tracy answers his hotel door room to see Gene Kelly (as H.L.Mencken/E.K.Hornbeck)wearing a hood and saying "Boo" as a joke. This is a reference to Darrow's agnostic/atheistic reputation, which was disliked by many people in his day. And early in INHERIT THE WIND when Kelly announces that Dick York (as Bertram Cates - John Scopes)will be defended by Tracy, one of the townspeople says, "He just got those two child-murderers off the other day."). It is rare for two films to have such mutual references in them, when they are not sequel films.
  • The film deal with two young men (Bradford Dillman , Dean Stockwell) who murder a pal . They are law students and followers to Nietsche theories . They are investigated by an astute prosecutor (E.G.Marshall) . He's growing suspicion but there isn't one perfect crime . As the relentless justice to be executed and they go on trial for killing . A famous lawyer (Orson Welles) will defend them on the accusation of murderers and under death penalty . A young girl (Diane Varsi) will testify for them .

    This highly interesting film is inspired on real events about Nathan Leopold-Richard Lob killing case in Chicago of the 1920s . Although the story was obviously a thinly-disguised recreation of the known murder case , the legal department of 20th Century Fox was still concerned about a possible lawsuit from the still-living Leopold . In fact , a great effort was made not to mention Leopold or Loeb in the film , press releases , and interviews . The film contains suspense , drama , tension , illicit love with intertwining triangles , emotion , courtroom trial and complex intrigue maintained throughout . Besides , superb performances by main roles (Dillman , Stockell , Varsi, Welles) and supporting casting (Martin Milner , Robert F. Simon , Gavin McLeod , among others). Special mention for Orson Welles who displays a terrific acting and explaining a significant speech into criminal court . The movie is visually magnificent with an excellent black and white cinematography by William C. Mellor . Evocative and adjusted music by Lionel Newman . The motion picture was wonderfully directed by Richard Fleischer .

    This is the second of four film adaptations of the Leopold-Loeb murder case , other versions about same events are the famous ¨The rope¨ (1948) by Hithcock with John Dall (in the character of Bradford Dillman )and Farley Granger (in the role of Dean Stockwell), ¨Swoon¨ and recently ¨Murder by numbers¨ by Barbet Schroeder with Michael Pitt and Ryan Gosling . Indispensable and fundamental seeing for court genre enthusiasts and Orson Welles fans . It's one of Richard Fleisher's best. Rating : Above average .
  • Warning: Spoilers
    In many respects, I thought this was a movie that was far ahead of its time. In some ways, it's a psychological study of why some people turn to evil without any apparent remorse. It's also an anti-capital punishment argument in a time when capital punishment was both accepted and non-controversial. It deals with subject matters that I wouldn't normally expect to see in a movie of this era, and it's a very taut psychological thriller that wouldn't bore anyone.

    Dean Stockwell, in my opinion, was the clear highlight of the film. He offered an amazing portrayal of Judd Steiner, the seemingly emotionless one of the murderous duo (the other was Bradford Dillman as Arthur Strauss.) Steiner and Strauss are basically rich, spoiled kids who decide to take up killing for the fun and excitement involved. The movie revolves around the investigation into the murder of a young boy, and then the trial of the two. Stockwell and Dillman made an interesting combination. In the beginning, Strauss is portrayed as the one in charge, with Steiner uncertain and nervous. By the end, Steiner is transformed into a hard as nails and cold as ice monster. The evolution of that relationship is fascinating.

    There were aspects of the story that didn't work for me. Ruth (Diane Varsi) came across as far too forgiving of Judd after her encounter with him, and frankly, the rather long-winded speech by Orson Welles (playing attorney Jonathon Wilk) to the judge at the end of the movie was too long-winded, even though I agreed with some of it. (Modern studies of capital punishment would call into question Wilk's statement that only rich kids would die for this kind of crime; in fact, it's overwhelmingly the poor who are sentenced to death.) I thought the movie also opened with a musical score and what we would call today fonts for the credits that were entirely inappropriate, and which seemed to almost set this up as some sort of comedy. It's not. It's deadly serious, and very good. 7/10
  • Watching this 1959 Richard Fleischer confirmed something I've always known. Dean Stockwell is a superb actor and an extraordinary presence on the screen. So, I think it's strange that he's not regarded as one of the greatest actors that ever lived. He started as a kid. He was Gregory Peck's son, twice. He was in musicals with Gene Kelly and Frank Sinatra. He was directed by Elia Kazan. He made allegorical movies like "The Boy With Green Hair" directed by black listed Joseph Losey. He was Edmond in "Long Day's Journey Into Night" sharing the screen with Katharine Hepburn, Ralph Richardson and Jason Robards. No to mention his work in "Sons and Lovers" or the movies with Wim Wenders and David Lynch. Here, in "Compulsion" his performance is worthy of an Oscar and in fact he go the accolades at the Cannes Film Festival sharing the acting honors with Orson Welles and Bradford Dillman. But, looking at it now he is the one that comes out as the one who passed in triumph the test of time. His performance is so rich so perfectly modulated that you go straight into the human center of his sick, appalling character. "Compulsion" deserves to be rediscovered and Dean Stockwell's performance should be the main reason.
  • Seeing "Compulsion" again after a very long time, it amazed me how well I remembered it. In fact I remembered every tiny little turn in Dean Stockwell's eyes. He is superb in the part of the young semi genius with a weakness for the shallow Bradford Dillman. The Leopold and Loeb case was the base for this thrilling Richard Fleischer film. It won acting awards for Stockwell, Dillman and Orson Welles at the Cannes Film Festival but with the benefit of hindsight, Dean Stockwell emerges as the winner against the famous test of time. Dillman seems a little bit too everything. Welles is great fun to watch and E G Marshall is terrific as the man determined to unmask the "powder poofs". Stockwell fainting at the trial, something that could have been so over the top, is in fact, shattering. The Leopold and Loeb story was also the base for Hitchcock's "Rope" and the wonderful Tom Kalin's "Swoon" Another version was rumored in 1991, directed by Martin Donovan with River Phoenix in the Stockwell part.
  • The real-life Leopold-Loeb murder case, which inspired Alfred Hitchcock's "Rope," among other films, is the basis for this story of a couple of rich young men committing a murder just for the thrill of trying to pull off the perfect crime. Stockwell and Dillman are well cast as the cold-blooded killers. The first half of the film, focusing on the strange relationship between the two men, their crime, and their arrest, is quite interesting. Then Welles shows up as the defense attorney and the film loses momentum. Welles seems to be sleep-walking through this one, and his final speech seems to take up about a third of the film.
  • I don't know why I'm so attracted to this vulnerable weirdos. From Anthony Perkins as Norman Bates in Psycho to Colin Firth as Adrian Leduc in Apartment Zero, darkness and a fragility that is part of the unbearable suspense. Maybe I'm in need of professional attention but I don't think so. What attracts me is by the undeniable innocence behind the horror and that has a lot, if not everything, to do with the actors playing them. Look at Anthony Perkins in Psycho! 57 years ago and it still looks and feels kind of revolutionary or Colin Firth in Apartment Zero, the character is so unique and real that you can see it a thousand times and always find some new extra something, then Dean Stockwell in Compulsion. He plays a monster, a sick, pathetic prince of a man. Yes all of that. The humanity of the actor makes the monster human and we can't dismiss him, he doesn't allow us. Orson Welles has a great entrance into the film and E.G Marshall is superb as per usual, it is the rest of the cast who seem a bit dated, specially when sharing the frame with the extraordinary Dean Stockwell
  • Compulsion is directed by Richard Fleischer and adapted to screenplay by Richard Murphy from the novel written by Meyer Levin. It stars Dean Stockwell, Bradford Dillman, Orson Welles and Diane Varsi. Music is by Lionel Newman and cinematography by William C. Mellor.

    Based upon the real life Leopold and Loeb murder trial of the 1920s, Compulsion finds Artie Strauss (Dillman) and Judd Steiner (Stockwell) as two well to do young men attempting to commit the perfect crime - murder! But it wasn't so perfect after all and they soon find themselves on trial for their own lives. Enter famed attorney Jonathan Wilk (Welles), who fights to keep them from the death penalty.

    Healthily rated in some quarters, it's a film that actually does divide opinions, which when all is considered is unsurprising given the capital punishment core of the story. The story builds superbly, brilliantly photographed and paced by cinematographer and director, and performed with imposing skills by Dillman and Stockwell. Then the crux of the film arrives in the form of Welles, who late in the play has the unenviable job of turning the piece into a soapbox anti capital punishment advertisement.

    It's also a performance from Welles that has drawn major pros and cons in critical circles. Whatever your thoughts on capital punishment, Welles makes a telling acting mark. The sound mix could have been fine tuned, as Welles is prone to mumble during his speeches, but it remains gripping on court room drama terms, even if there's a little deflation - a feeling of anti-climax - after the build up had been so good. Not really capturing the notoriety of the real case, it's nonetheless a compelling piece and well worth seeking out. 7/10
  • If "Compulsion" is still such a powerful film is, totally, Dean Stockwell's merit. What a sensational actor! I'm writing this the day after the announcement of Dennis Hopper's death and while I was looking for a Dennis Hopper movie to watch a came across "Compulsion" Not Hopper but Stockwell and I settled for that anyway. I was riveted by Stockwell's performance because everyone else (with the natural exception of Orson Wells and E G Marshall) seems so dated and acted that Dean's every moment is sheer magic. He doesn't shy away from the awfulness but makes his young monster totally human, provoking in us that element that Orson Welles's closing argument tries to bring to the forefront. If you love great acting, you can't afford to miss Dean Stockwell in "Compulsion"
  • We can add Welles to Wilde, Monroe and others who we never respected until they were gone. His pleading for the lives of those crazy boys (as Clarence Darrow did) is an eloquent plea for the ending of the death penalty. Funny, how a barometer like the death penalty tells us so much about a society's relative civility. The US had backed away from it, but is now swinging back toward even public executions (which I would much prefer, as they show all of us how barbaric we have become).

    Note that the movie dwells on their 'craziness' and 'richness', not the Jewishness or the homosexual relationships that evoked the wrath of the public in the real case. Both Dillman and Dean Stockwell do an excellent job of drawing out your anger until you find yourself one of the mob yelling for blood. To stem the tide, in comes Orson Welles. Welles' phrasing and meaningful looks struck me again with what a magnificent actor he was, as well as director.

    Now I have to go read 'Compulsion', the novel around which this movie was made, to determine what was left out and if it would have contributed to some of the obviously omitted details that make this movie a little choppy. This movie performs the task that great art must take on itself: to provide us insights into life and how it should be lived. That can be done either negatively or positively, by point or counter-point.

    Of course, unless you had some excellent writers and actors of the stature of Welles, you wouldn't come up to the quality of this movie. Definitely, black and white contributed to the brooding quality of the film. Color would have detracted, and you'll seldom 'hear' me say this.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    In 1924, in Chicago, the wealthy and psychotic nihilist law students Judd Steiner (Dean Stockwell) and Arthur Strauss (Bradford Dillman) believe that they can be above the law and commit minor infractions. Their college mate Sid Brooks (Martin Milner) that works for the Chicago Globe is assigned to go to the morgue to see a drowned boy found in Hegewisch Park. He discovers that the boy is actually Paul Kessler, the son of a millionaire that had been kidnapped for ransom. Further, Sid discovers a pair of the glasses with the boy that becomes a lead to the police since it does not fit the victim. When Judd finds that his glasses are evidence for the murder case, he prepares an alibi using his activity of ornithologist and tells that he was picking up girls with Artie driving the Stutz Bearcat of his family. However the astute District Attorney Harold Horn (E.G. Marshall) investigates the case and lures Judd getting his confession. But the Steiner and Strauss families hire the cunning defense attorney Jonathan Wilk (Orson Welles) to defend the perpetrators of the hideous crime. In the beginning of the trial, Wilk surprisingly changes his plea from "not guilty" to "guilty".

    Movies of trial are usually engaging and "Compulsion" is not an exception. The dark story based on a true murder case is supported by magnificent performances, highlighting Dean Stockwell and Bradford Dillman in the roles of arrogant and psychotic millionaires that expect to commit a perfect crime and Orson Welles in the lesser but relevant role of a smart lawyer. My vote is seven.

    Title (Brazil): "Estranha Compulsão" ("Strange Compulsion")
  • Leopold was paroled after years of being a model prisoner, planning all kinds of prison reforms, and when released did philanthropic work in Puerto Rico. Interesting that Meyer Levin, author of book on which this film is based said, this amazingly redeemed man just a few times gave Levin a chill as it became clear that this character of 'St. Leopold' was just another creation of a true psychopath. The mocking narcissistic smirk was still there under it all.
  • For those who complain about the closing speech being too long.... The closing speech (about 15 minutes?) is excerpts from Clarence Darrow's actual closing remarks at the Leopold & Loeb film. The actual closing statements took 12 hours over two days (so be thankful it wasn't longer!) For that bit of historical inaccuracy I can forgive all the other stuff they weren't allowed to explore indepth in the film. It's also a good anti-capital punishment film. We know the boys are guilty so it's now a question of is it right to kill them as punishment?
  • Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb were two intellectually gifted, extremely wealthy young men of 1920s Chicago--but they were also highly neurotic. In 1924 their twisted relationship exploded into one of the most infamous crimes of the era: largely in order to demonstrate their supposed intellectual superiority, they kidnapped and murdered fourteen year old Bobby Franks. But their "perfect crime" was not quite as perfect as they had thought: it quickly unraveled, and with the celebrated Clarence Darrow appearing for the defense the court case became as legendary as the crime.

    The 1959 film COMPULSION, based on the Leopold-Loeb case, had a great deal going for it. The cast was superior and included a Hollywood legend; director Richard Fleischer was a rock-solid craftsman; production values from cinematography to composer to costumer were in experienced and capable hands. But the film ran afoul of two issues: censorship codes of the day, which effectively prevented a no-holds-barred re-telling of the case, and the fact that Nathan Leopold was still very much alive.

    The result was a script that transformed Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb into characters named 'Judd Steiner' and 'Artie Straus' and which renamed Clarence Darrow 'Jonathan Wilk'--and which can only imply in vaguest possible terms aspects of the case that most find particularly fascinating. With so much detail thrown out, the result is a film that divides into two rather awkwardly joined parts.

    The first half of the film focuses on Steiner and Straus. The cast is indeed exceptional, with Dean Stockwell and Bradford Dillman extremely effective and receiving memorable support from the likes of Diane Varsi and Martin Milner. Still, it is more a matter of implication rather than specification, and even the crime itself is somewhat glossed over. The second half of the film brings in Orson Wells as attorney Wilk and unexpectedly shifts focus away from the killers and their crime, leaving Wells to dominate the screen with a series of powerful speeches. The ending of the film is remarkably abrupt and fails to tie the film together.

    When all is said and done, COMPULSION never quite manages to live up to its potential. The memorable performances and stylish look of the film make it more than worth seeing, but any one who is familiar with the Leopold-Loeb case will be disappointed--and even those who aren't will likely consider that one viewing is enough. At present the film is only available to the homemarket on video in a pan-and-scan version that doesn't help it along. Recommended--but only just.

    GFT, Amazon Reviewer
  • Two highly intelligent, wealthy young students attempt to get away with "the perfect murder". This intriguing drama was also filmed as "Rope" (1948) and "Swoon" (1992). Loosely based on the true story of Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb, this version stars Dean Stockwell (as Judd Steiner) and Bradford Dillman (as Artie Straus), with Orson Welles (as Jonathan Wilk). "Compulsion" is one of the best Hitchcock films NOT directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Oddly enough, Hitchcock did direct the inferior, albeit interesting "Rope"; the film's subject matter has Hitchcock written all over it.

    Director Richard Fleischer is at his best, combining material from both Hitchcock and Alex Segal, director of the original play; still, he makes his version of "Compulsion" distinctive. If Mr. Stockwell's glaring glasses and the birds in his room seem like they could be coincidental Hitchcock touches, the dissolve during Mr. Dillman's "Mae and Edna" interrogation scene is a dead giveaway; it was Hitchcock's calling card, in "Rope". From the 1957 play, Stockwell continues as "Judd" (the "strange bird"). But, Roddy McDowell is replaced by Dillman as "Artie"; in hindsight, this may seem like a grievous error - but, thankfully, Dillman excels in the role.

    Stockwell, Dillman, and Mr. Welles shared the "Best Actor" award for 1959, at the Cannes Film Festival; and, Fleischer was nominated for "Best Director". Welles' contribution, nominated on its own for a "New York Film Critics" award, was more like an extended cameo, however. Welles dominates the last act, with a grand, blustering impression of Clarence Darrow. Yet, Stockwell and Dillman deserve the "Best Actor" recognition; and, prosecutor E.G. Marshall (as Harold Horn) isn't given a comparative closing argument (the film's main flaw). Welles and Diane Varsi (as Ruth Evans) receive star-billing; but, Ms. Varsi plays an inarguably supporting role. She and Martin Milner (as Sid Brooks) are certainly good, though.

    Varsi's character adds depth to the confused sexuality present in Stockwell's character. Note, Hitchcock's "Rope" portrayed "Leopold" and "Loeb" as more homo- than heterosexual. Probably, this film intentionally sought to tone down the same-gender sexual attraction; but, the effort only served to make "Compulsion" sexier, with Stockwell torn between his subservient role with the male Dillman ("You wanted me to command you") and the female Varsi, whom he aborts raping (possibly giving away his preference). The scenes with Dillman in Stockwell's bedroom are sublime; in one, he literally "comes out of the closet."

    ********* Compulsion (4/1/59) Richard Fleischer ~ Dean Stockwell, Bradford Dillman, Orson Welles, Diane Varsi
  • I had never even heard of this movie until today.WHERE in the world are the historians?This is on par for courtroom drama with Lionel Barrymore's great dissertation at the end of, "A Free Soul"-1931.This, also, was a fact based portrayal of Adele Rogers St.John's father's career.

    I have to concur with Ms. Brown, and ask the question as to why this movie is not shown more often;i saw it on AMC. The bottom line is the line by Mr. Darrow:"You don't stop killing human beings by killing human beings".Mr. Welles was never in finer form, than when he gives this speech... i understand this speech is verbatim of the transcript of the trial.
  • It's 1924 Chicago. Rich law students Artie Strauss (Bradford Dillman) and Judd Steiner (Dean Stockwell) steal from their fraternity. Artie orders Judd to run over a drunk in the road. He misses. Artie wants to continue with his crime spree and Judd begs to join him in a well thought out dangerous plan to gain infamy. Judd is a bitter intellectual and Artie is a brash extrovert. They commit the 'perfect' crime killing a boy but their acquaintance rookie investigative reporter Sid Brooks finds Judd's glasses at the crime scene. Artie pushes Judd to attack Ruth Evans but he stops in time. Their crime unravels with the mounting evidence and the boys talking. Their families hire famed defense attorney Jonathan Wilk (Orson Welles) to battle D.A. Horn (E.G. Marshall).

    These two guys are compelling characters. At times, their obsessive relationship hints at homosexuality while other times, it is all intellectual psychopathic banter. They could have heightened the bloody violence a bit more. Orson Welles doesn't show up until after over an hour. He does an interesting performance but it is the young men that are the most fascinating.
  • jotix10018 May 2005
    "Compulsion" was one of the most important American films of the late 50s. Based loosely on the famous Leopold and Loeb case, the movie still packs quite an impact because of the excellent work by the three principals. As directed by Richard Fleischer, this is a disturbing look at two criminal minds who thought they were above and beyond the law because they had the perfect crime planned. The film was greatly adapted for the screen by Richard Murphy from the Meyer Levin book and stage play.

    Even for those clever enough to carry on a murder, there is always a possibility that a minor mistake will give the culprit away. The two young men at the center of the story, Judd Steiner and Artie Straus are homosexual lovers. At the time, being gay in America must have been one of the worst things in a more puritanical and pious society. These two men hide their sexual preference well because of the circles they both move. Coming from upper class families, in a way, made it easier for these men to formulate a plan to satisfy their idle existences.

    After committing a heinous crime, just because they thought they could get away with it, the two friends begin experiencing the guilt associated with what they have done. Judd's reaction is different from Artie's. Where Judd tries to lay low, Artie tries to help the police in a bold move that will end up badly. Judd suddenly feels abandoned by Artie when he realizes Artie might be getting too close to the people investigating the murder.

    As careful as these men had been, something that apparently seems innocent, ties them to the crime. The principal investigator, Sid Brooks, turns the men against one another by playing his cards right. This is the moment that Jonathan Wilk, the famous trial lawyer enters the picture. Unfortunately, even a star lawyer can't save people that have talked too much because they thought they were above the law.

    Star lawyers have always been at the center of all famous trials throughout the history. In a way, it's ironic that only one man, the great Jonathan Wilk is the only person in court to defend Steiner and Straus. Had it been today, these two men would have had a battery of expensive lawyers making the case for them. The figure of Wilke is based on the real lawyer of the Leopold and Loeb case: Clarence Darrow, a man larger than life.

    Dean Stockwell and Bradford Dillman made an invaluable contribution to the success of the film. Mr. Stockwell, a child actor that grew up in front of the camera, makes a compelling Judd Steiner. Mr. Stockwell gets under Steiner's skin because he seems to know what made this young man do what he did. Mr. Dillman was a relative new face to the movies, but his performance as Artie Straus has a profound effect on the viewer. Neither man makes a likable person, but maybe that was the message the author of the play wanted to leave the viewer with.

    Orson Welles made a splendid appearance as the defense lawyer, Jonathan Wilk. Mr. Welles' physical presence dominates most of the court proceedings. In fact, is a tribute to his genius that he towers over everything around him whenever he is in front of the camera. E. G. Marshall has some good moments as Sid Brooks, the investigator who unearths the truth in this case. Ed Binns, Martin Milner, Robert Simon, Richard Anderson make contributions to the film. Diane Varsi, as the Ruth Evans is the only female that has an opportunity in the film.

    The film moves at a quick pace and will, no doubt, satisfy those viewers seeking intelligent entertainment.
  • I won't blame the misstep of the 1959 film Compulsion on director Richard Fleischer, nor on the screenplay writer Richard Murphy for the shallow storytelling of the actual events surrounding the 1924 real life murder of 14 year old Robert "Bobby" Franks at the hands of his own second cousin Richard Loeb (age 18), and his accomplice Nathan Leopold Jr. (age 17).

    All three boys came from very wealthy families and lived privileged lives. Loeb and Leopold became front page news in Chicacgo coined as "The Trial of the Century" for the better part of three (3) months while their famous renowned lawyer Clarence Darrow tried to defend them by initially pleading guilty to the charge of murder with extenuating circumstances in an effort to save the two (2) boys from being hanged to their deaths.

    To avoid any lawsuit the producers chose not to use any of the real names of the victim (Bobby Franks), his perpertrators (Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold Jr.), and/or neither the real names of the defense attorney (Clarennce Darrow) or the prosecuting attorney (Robert E. Crowe).

    The film did maintain much of the evidence that was used to find Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold Jr. guilty of the murder, and the actors who played the two young men (Bradford Dillman and Dean Stockwell) did an exemplary job in delivering a bone-chilling "guilty" verdict on their performances alone, but what was lacking was any evidence of the crime being commtted and how it evolved. This film focuses more on the cat and mouse game between Bradford Dillman who plays the alpha murderer Arthur A. Straus, and Police Lt. Johnson (Robert E. Simon).

    The film ends on a rather dull note with the boys defense attorney Jonathan Wilk (Orson Welles) giving a rather real yet very boring closing argument in defense of his two (2) clients to be spared the death penalty.

    The film left me feeling more like I was watching a dramatic film (based on Orson Welles eloquent, yet boring closing argument) rather I would have preferred to be watching a more factual account of the murder investigation, eventual arrest, and subsequent trial and conviction of the real life 1924 Bobby Franks Murder.

    As such, I can only rate the film a 6 out of 10.
  • Compulsion (1959)

    Orson Welles gets top billing but he only shows up near the end--just as he did in The Third Man--and he changes the tenor of the movie a lot. I like Welles as an actor, but he dominates the two young men who made the film click earlier. At first, it seems that the movie is about a pair of brainy (and slightly cold) college students who intellectualize their way into a nasty crime. The tension between them, the hints of doubt and the overcoming of guilt, and just about the townspeople and how they handle the crime and the investigation. It's not a perfectly smooth exploration, but it's interesting and even edgy at times, and has a great late 1950s black and white clarity to the filming that makes everything stark.

    With the lawyer played by Welles we are shifted into a more conventional courtroom drama, a good one, but with some common tactics (the courtroom scene in Lady from Shanghai blows it away for originality, if you want one comparison), and with a long long long capstone speech by our man Orson. It's easy to like, very easy from start to finish with some nice visual clarity and lively soundtrack, but it does stutter enough to keep you aware of what might have been done differently.

    And what about the idea of crime as a mental exercise, of a person being so superior he or she rises above culpability? Well, it's not a new idea, and Hitchcock's Rope from a decade earlier goes there in a similar way (Rope is a curious film, and Jimmy Stewart acts his heart out, but Compulsion actually has more life to it because the two young men are more interesting). Both probably owe something to the sensation 1924 Leopold and Loeb killing, and of course to other murder mysteries that go into the psychology rather than the gore (from Dostoyevsky to Highsmith). It's tantalizing stuff.
  • The film should be seen in conjunction with Hitchcock's experimental "Rope." Hitchcock as usual has a greater gift for character and its poetry, and a more gainful employment of women, than his opponent, but the "hack" film has certain advantages: aside from being in sharp black and white rather than 40s (cheezy, proto-colorized) color, it also has a much more appealing, commanding and charismatic leading sociopath in Bradford Dillman than Rope with oily, unctuous John Dall, and a more complex junior-sociopath in Dean Stockwell than Hitchcock's wraithlike Farley Granger. Orson Welles, lest you need be informed, is utterly compelling in everything he does.
  • Twice in one week I watched a film based on the infamous real-life murder case of Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb. They were two wealthy and superiorly intelligent students from Chicago who wanted to show the world how they could commit the "perfect murder". The first, "Murder by Numbers", was very loosely inspired by the case, whereas this "Compulsion" is a truthful re-telling of what happened.

    The names of the two murderers and their defense attorney are different, but for the rest everything is very factual. The film takes place in 1924, Judd and Artie choose an innocent 14-year-old kid as defenseless victim, Judd is an amateur ornithologist and Nietzsche fanatic, and the boys' charismatic legal counselor used the media-hyped trial to plea for the uselessness of the death penalty.

    "Compulsion" is worth tracking down thanks to the intense acting performances, notably from Dean Stockwell and Orson Welles, and the uncanny atmosphere during the courtroom. Sadly it's also an extremely slow-paced and talkative film that requires full concentration, and there are hardly any moments with action footage or humor to put everything into perspective.
  • Deserved the acting awards for the three male actors that the Cannes festival bestowed. Orson Welles is amazing while delivering his lines--almost whispering and yet being heard. His performance makes Marlon Brando's famous roles look artificial and contrived.

    I liked the visual play of the director with the spectacles several times in the film, each time in a different manner. Director Fleischer who impressed me with his film "Barabbas" continues to impress me here. Probably, in this film it was the final line of theism versus atheism.

    Finally. this is an important example of a film that argues against the death penalty.
  • The murder committed in the 1920s by two young men, Leopold & Loeb, has been story fodder for years. There was, of course, Hitchcock's ROPE, the independent film SWOON, and a musical, THRILL ME, which recently played at the York Theater in New York.

    This version stars Dean Stockwell and Bradford Dillman as the killers who believed that they were supermen as described by Nietzsche. Though their homosexuality can only be hinted at, it's pretty apparent. Stockwell likes Dillman to order him to do things, and at the beginning, the Dillman character orders him to run someone over. He does it. They move on to kidnapping and murder next. They have no emotional attachment to their crime, no sense of morality, and no remorse. As brilliant as they believed they were, they're caught pretty quickly. Clarence Darrow is brought in to defend them. They get a life sentence instead of death by hanging. Loeb was murdered by another inmate in 1936; Leopold died in 1971. The two remained very much attached to one another.

    "Compulsion" is a fictionalized version of this story. Though set in the '20s, it somehow has a modern feel to it - perhaps it was the dialogue, the demeanor of the young men, but I never bought for a single second that we were in the '20s. The cast is uniformly excellent. Bradford Dillman is sharp, cocky, energetic, and totally unlikeable as "Arthur Strauss," the brains of the operation, and Dean Stockwell is excellent as the submissive genius Judd. E.G. Marshall plays the district attorney, and Martin Milner gives a good performance as a reporter. Diane Varsi is Milner's love interest who takes pity on Judd. She is not very effective.

    Orson Welles shows up as the Darrow character, renamed here as Wilk, toward the middle of the film. He gives a powerful performance and has a huge speech to the judge at the end. Apparently, Welles only cooperated up to a point. Everything was fine until the IRS took his salary. He left before the looping for the film was finished, and the director, Richard Fleischer, had to put the missing part of the speech together from other parts of the movie, using words and even syllables. Welles was probably as detached from "Compulsion" as the characters were to their crime, but he has the technical ability to be very convincing in his role.

    "Compulsion" is an unsavory story, but the acting is good and the film won awards at Cannes. It's worth watching.
  • This film is bad, very bad. Badly directed, badly acted,badly constructed and exceptionally badly written. If I did not know any better I'd say the film was financed by the millionaire families of Leopold- Loeb (the real-life killers on whom the film is based) in an attempt to lessen what was in reality nothing less than the cold blooded murder of a 12-year-old boy by two spoilt rich kids who thought their so-called superior intellects put them above the law. Orson Welles plays the two boys' lawyer whose closing speech to the court is truly awful - so over the top that one thought he was talking about the imminent demise of humankind. How Welles is viewed as an exceptional actor - only by Americans it has to be pointed out - I'll never know. He's on a continuous ego trip in every film he's been involved with. It is said Welles fled the country after the film over tax debts. Personally, I think he did a runner out of complete embarrassment over having anything to do with such a crass film.
An error has occured. Please try again.