Winslow Boy, The

Winslow Boy, The

On a very strong recommendation one day I snapped up this film on impulse while it was selling on video ex-rental for just a couple of bucks. I thought to myself, "One day when you’ve got nothing to watch lets bust this out."

Well bust it I did, eventually, and it was a massive disappointment coming from Mamet and an overall boring film which had only barely a resemblance to a story. Or maybe I just didn’t get it?

From what I know it is a well-known British tale. My only guess as to why a film would purposefully be made this bland is that he was attempting to tell a new side of the infamous tale...by not showing us any of the actual saga. This film was not about The Winslow Boy but instead One Way A Stuffy British Father Shows His Affection For His Son, or, A Feminist Chick In Victorian Times And Her Possible Suitors.

After we first find out about how the boy was kicked out of military school, the next shot is of a newspaper headline about the case, then shots of umbrellas and coffee mugs with messages about Saving The Winslow Boy. Absurd. This whole film took place in a vacuum where no one outside of the principals seemed to exist (I guess it was based on a play...) – meaning we hear about how the city has latched onto the saga - but never see this, and the result is that it has no impact whatsoever in convincing us of how huge this case was.

The few tidbits we get thrown mean we never get a clear understanding of the case so if we're not watching for that, what are we watching? Mamet also disappoints with his totally unremarkable take on the period piece. I was hoping he would bring a freshness to the genre that would make me forget my dislike for the clichéd-ridden films, but instead we find the old jokes about going to tea and the audacity of a man wearing brown boots. Goodness!

Of course I wasn't expecting Mamet to modernise the period with his usual rapid-fire witty deliveries, but even in most other period pieces will you find smarter dialogue than this (in fact most period pieces seem to have a wit to them that reminds me of Mamet pieces). Did I just not get this? Was it too subversive for me? Is the film assuming I should know everything about the case and thus cleverly draws my attention to other oft-ignored aspects of the story? I would love to have my ignorance pointed out if I am wrong.