User Reviews

What I shame that I appear to be one of the few people out there (well, at least on IMDb) that have seen this very credible little film. I viewed it on a VHS double bill with another Richard Attenborough film, the better known "Brighton Rock", and found it well worth the time. Attenborough find himself accused and on trial for the murder of a little girl. He is innocent, but all circumstantial evidence points against him. Only his sweet, devoted wife Cathy O'Donnell and his stand-in lawyer, Derek Farr, are willing to believe him.

I thought that this film captured the trial scenes particularly well, and they feel real. Richard Attenborough, a fine choice for the role, does well in conveying his character's fear and confusion at a situation he never expected to happen. The murder of children was not a subject touched very often in American films in those days, and this must be one of the first post-"M" (Fritz Lang's brilliant, groundbreaking German film with Peter Lorre as the whistling pedophile)films to deal with the subject. The film is neatly directed and edited, and it really is worth checking out. Hopefully this won't be the only comment that this film ever receives!

Highly watchable courtroom drama set in London during Coronation year. In fact the trial that takes up the bulk of the film's running time begins on 8 June 1953 (shown in a close-up of the Court listings), a week after the Queen was crowned. Occasional glimpses of ornamental arches celebrating the event can be seen in the background of the film's many location shots. The film also gives an insight into post-war Britain - a land where young married couples (Attenborough and O'Donnell) live in cramped lodgings whilst waiting to qualify for their own house; where children play truant on derelict bombsites; and where the legal system looks down on - or at best, patronises - the lower orders. The plot veers to the melodramatic in the closing minutes, but entertainingly so. However, the detailed portrayal of court procedure is fascinating to watch. It probably hasn't changed that much, either....

Watching this film from the 1954, was an unexpected enjoyable movie,Richard Attenborough is very good in this film, while not a film to mark out on his long film career, it certain should not be forgotten. Cathy O'Donnell has an accent which is not Canadian.

The Film is like a moment of the 1950's caught on film. The film deals with whole criminal investigation of the UK criminal justice system from the discovery of victim to investigation, collecting witness statements, including forensic investigation, jury selection, arrangement, and the actual trial, the film has a good story line than most crime dramas on TV's.

At the time that this film was made there was a fierce debate about capital punishment.In the early fifties Timothy Evans was wrongly hung for murders committed by Christie.Then Derek Bentley was hung for a murder he did not commit,merely present when the actual murderer fired the weapon.The actual murderer went to jail as he was too young to hang.So this film sets up a perfect set of circumstances where an innocent man could be convicted of murder.It is only because of the theatrical contrivances that in fact Attenborough goes free.The trial in the film is fairly brief in that it appears to last a couple of days.frighteningly that is the way it was.At times it was all about "pour encourage les autres" rather than justice being seen to be done.A thoughtful film with sincere performances.

A North London cab driver, Tom Manning (Richard Attenborough), agrees to help a little girl find her doll on a bombsite, but it turns out she is playing an April Fools on him and she runs away. He chases after her with the intention of "giving her a talking to" but she outruns him and he goes off to work thinking nothing more of it. However, the following day he is arrested as the child has been found murdered on the bombsite and there are witnesses who saw him with her and chasing angrily after her. In addition, the police have found his handkerchief that he gave to the child beside the body. Tom's loyal and devoted wife, Jill (Cathy O' Donnell), wins the sympathy and services of Junior Counsel Peter Tanner (Derek Farr) who agrees to defend her husband when the attorney scheduled to do it falls ill. He proves to be a first rate lawyer, but the prosecution's case seems rock solid and he will need a real lucky break to save him from the gallows...

Minor courtroom thriller with a plot that may well have been cutting edge at the time, but now seems unremarkable since it has been done several times and a lot better since. Nevertheless, director Lance Comfort keeps it well afloat with a good emphasis on character and, at times, the anxiety, anguish and tension seem really genuine and the performances of Attenborough and O' Donnell are superb as the newly married couple whose lives are put through sheer hell as they fight to clear his name. There is a really powerful scene where Attenborough sees the prison doctor who points to a flying accident he once had and implies that he may have had a blackout and committed the crime but had no recollection of doing so. "They try to make excuses for you; try to find reasonings for things you never thought of at the time and you begin to wonder if you really did do it", he tells O' Donnell as she visits him in jail. His thoughts and feelings seem realistic to us, the viewers, and we can sympathise with his plight since it seems that the police in the film do not really care if Manning is innocent or not and are solely interested in getting a conviction and that's it even if it means the real killer may remain at large and the wrong man goes to the gallows for it. The film does, however, get static in the courtroom scenes and they carry very little in the way of suspense. In addition, I was disappointed in the battle between the prosecution Counsel, Ian Hunter, and the defence attorney, Derek Farr, since in the story they are playing father and son and are opposing each other at the bar and that was not as well developed nor as effective as I thought it should be.

This is something of a mish-mosh all round, not least with a title that leads a potential audience to believe it is about a condemned man waiting to take the eight o'clock walk to the gallows and whilst it is true that the protagonist is accused of and stands trial for murder he is in fact acquitted. Director Lance Comfort made a handful of interesting films like Hatter's Castle, Bedelia and such but laid a colossal egg when entrusted with Portrait of Clare and was somewhat persona non grata ever afterward, mostly making do with TV fodder and the odd title like this one. For some reason Dickie Attenborough had a penchant for importing US actresses to appear opposite him; in The Angry Silence it was Pier Angeli and here it is Cathy O'Donnell. In fact the cast is one of the most interesting aspects of this with appearances by Kynaston Reeves, Victor Maddern etc plus in-vogue Derek Farr improbably unmasking the real killer a la Perry Mason. Worth a look as a curio.

Didn't seem to have anything to do with an eight o'clock walk, more like 8.50 - the time the children were out in the street playing April Fool's jokes on everyone. Little Irene Manning is no exception, waylaying local cabbie Tom Manning (Richard Attenborough, goes without saying he turns in his usual solid performance) and, tearfully telling him her dolly is lost, she leads him onto an abandoned bomb site. When she is later found dead suspicion quickly mounts against Tom as witnesses testify that he was seen shaking his fist at the little girl - but it was all in fun!!!

This is a typical wrong man in the wrong place with an innocent person being caught up in damning circumstantial evidence type of film that the British do so well. American Cathy O'Donnell who had never struck me as a particularly exciting actress, really rang true with her low key demeanour as Jill, who never for one moment doubted her husband's innocence. Once the legal eagles come into it, she finds no one really cares about seeing that Tom gets a fair trial - all except junior partner Tanner (Derek Farr), who when he hears Jill's impassioned plea decides to really delve into the matter and comes to the conclusion that Tom is completely innocent.

Hovering in the background is the real killer, the shadowy man in the bowler hat, so obviously a local.

I was so looking forward to seeing this film again as I hadn't seen it for over 20 years (and like another reviewer am very surprised that there are only a couple of reviews) and while it was not as thrilling as I remembered it, is a dependable and solid story. Nice to see an older and even more stiff upper lip (if that's possible) Ian Hunter as Tanner Snr. ,who is the prosecuting lawyer, also nice "slices of life" of the jury members and various women witnesses trying to keep their kids in line while waiting for their turn on the bench.

Just because you see a grown man chasing a little girl doesn't mean that he killed her, even though he was the victim of an April Fool's Day prank, and she was discovered later a victim of murder. Academy Award Winning director to be Richard Attenborough plays the wrongly accused here, and wife Cathy O'Donnell is frantic. So frantic that she goes off on his defense attorney Derek Farr, immediately regretting it. But in a weird twist, the prosecuting attorney is Farr's own father, veteran actor Ian Hunter. It's surprising that this type of personal relationship would be permitted in court with the type of conflicts it could create.

Fans of the "Willy Wonka" stories will be fascinated to hear a reference to "Gobstoppers", obviously a real type of British treat. The kids involved in the prank obviously went out of their way to harass complete strangers, and in the case of cab driver Attenborough, nobody saw him leave after the young victim managed to get away from him. The shadow of a man wearing a hat is seen ominously at the listings of the day's cases, giving a hint to the possibility that he was the perpetrator.

Scenes of the jurors indicate that they aren't going to come to a conclusion very easily as to guilt or innocence, and of course the foreman is an obviously pompous blowhard who has an entitled retort to every argument. He even comments on the quality of the free meals provided to the jury! It's a great look into the British legal system of the time, rather pretentious and uppity with its pomp and circumstance, giving a guilty look to the accused as he walks up to the court from a sinister looking staircase. It's an outstanding script with a lot of fantastic detail that subtly makes a mockery out of recent cases that are referenced in the background of this film. Attenborough gives a gentle, worried performance, totally convincing. O'Donnell, Farr and Hunter (who worked more in Hollywood than he did in London) are great support. A very good legal drama that will keep the viewer transfixed, especially in hoping that the real killer of a child will be caught.

I probably enjoyed this movie for all the wrong reasons. I love a courtroom drama, and this one gives unusual glimpses of the court's "cast" waiting in the wings. The jury waiting to be selected (or not). Court officers dishing round papers. Cleaning ladies polishing the marble floor. The judge and his supporters gathering in the corridor. The clerk handing His Lordship the traditional nosegay (Sweet Williams).

And I love a glimpse at London as it used to be - there are good scenes of people just wandering about the streets. Mr and Mrs Manning lodge with Mrs Hart, whose house hasn't been updated for about 50 years. I always wonder what the furniture would fetch now. And that teashop where "the fish is off" and there's only one sausage left! For your information, "buck rabbit" is Welsh rabbit (cheese on toast) plus an egg.

There's a tendency for working-class characters to be played for laughs, and to come across as thick. Meanwhile the lawyers are all awfully nice chaps. There are some excellent scenes in the jury room, with a gross, wiseracking foreman (whose jokes are actually funny), and a rather precious lady who rapidly forgets her objections to capital punishment. Richard Attenborough as Manning portrays a cheerfully vulgar bloke, while Cathy O'Donnell as his wife comes across as more winsome than Bambi. It was a bad year for fashion, with those long droopy skirts. Poor girl has to wear a hat and gloves with a summer dress.

Manning's defending counsel is off sick - but his junior takes over. He just happens to be the son of the prosecuting counsel. This is where the film loses touch with reality. Prosecuting counsel is allowed to get away with obvious insinuations that the jury accepts as truth, while defending counsel goads a witness to confess. Where are the objections?

The judge has troubles of his own - his wife is in hospital for an operation that she doesn't survive. Despite receiving this awful news he is kind and fatherly towards a very young witness. (Though he abandons his poor daughter, sobbing off-stage.)

Despite flaws, it is definitely worth a look.

EIGHT O'CLOCK WALK is another British drama that offers an acting showcase for a quietly understated Richard Attenborough, playing another of his ordinary men. This time he becomes embroiled in a Hitchcockian 'wronged man' style drama when he's falsely accused of child murder and forced to clear his name in the courts - or face the death sentence. The story that follows is quite familiar - seemingly every British male actor was accused of some heinous crime or other during the 1950s - and slows down when it becomes a court procedural, but fans of the era or stars involved will enjoy it regardless.