Movie Review of Pierrepoint: The Last Hangman (2007)

Pierrepoint picks up as Albert makes the list as one of Britain's executioners. This is 1932 and the young assistant at a Pentonville hanging is destined to become the country's most well-known hangman.

Yet the man that we are introduced to is shy and self-effacing. He ties himself up in knots of awkwardness simply trying to ask a woman out.  The sub-plot of the relationship between Albert and Annie continues through the rest of the movie.

She knew his occupation (both as grocery delivery man and executioner), but didn't mention it for years. She was waiting for him to tell her himself.

However the main focus is on Albert Pierrepoint's personal journey as a prolific hangman. Until 1957, he escorted over 650 people to the gallows. His utter professionalism earned him a grim reputation, but he dispatched his victims with efficiency and speed.

His record, which is depicted in the movie, was seven and a half seconds between entering the condemned cell, and the man dead on the end of the rope.

Yet things happen to erode Pierrepoint's mental well-being, as a person doing his civic duty. Pressures from the State erupt into a situation, where he doesn't feel that the right procedures were followed.

Following the Second World War, when he is called to hang Nazi war criminals, the press learn his name. Public response is overwhelmingly positive; but it means that they still know his name, when the abolition movement gains popularity a decade on.

Finally personal issues blur the distinction between Pierrepoint the man and Pierrepoint the executioner. The result is a heart-breaking decision, which affects the rest of his career.

I first saw Timothy Spall as the bumbling Barry in Auf Wiedersehen Pet back in the 1980s. Since then, I've watched his career progress through such roles as Peter Pettigrew in the Harry Potter movies.

A great comic actor, he most certainly is; but this was a straight role with slightly sinister undertones. I admit that I wrinkled my nose somewhat, when I realized who was playing the lead. It didn't seem his sort of vehicle at all.

I stood corrected. My respect for Timothy Spall as an actor went through the roof after watching Pierrepoint. Not only was he utterly believable, but his portrayal was compelling in every scene.

If you watch the movie for nothing else, then it would be a travesty to miss him play this part. Bravo on all counts.

I'm an historian, therefore it's always a little dodgy letting me watch movies set in the past. Deep anachronisms jar me out of the plot and leave me sneering, "That didn't happen!"

Pierrepoint passed muster, just about, because while some minor details were subject to artistic license, it did retain the context of the story it was telling. I could understand why historical accuracy had been expedited in some scenes, in order to maintain the narrative flow.

For example, Dorothea Waddingham is hanged near to the start of the film. Ruth Ellis is hanged close to the end of it. The two stories book-end the story and provide a contrast accordingly. This works for the movie. 

And the inaccuracy?  It was Thomas Pierrepoint, not Albert, who executed Dorothea.  This is the level of deviation from fact, which I could accept without being jolted from the plot.

The only time I did feel uncomfortable was during the section of the movie when Pierrepoint executes those found guilty in the Belsen Trials. 

In reality, while the thirteen Belsen guards were executed in one visit, Pierrepoint returned several times over the next four years to hang 202 more Nazi men and women.  In the movie, it all occurs wholesale during a single fortnight. In reality, the hangings took place upon a prison gallows.  On celluloid, they are killed in a converted warehouse.

The director obviously didn't want repetition, but the historian in me did wince. Then again, I am overly critical of such things.

Only one other aspect made me raise my eyebrows.  In the US release of the movie, the title Pierrepoint was expanded to include the context The Last Hangman.  He wasn't. Albert Pierrepoint resigned his position in 1957.  The last people were hanged in Britain in 1964.  Other executioners were very much current at the time.

The young man looks up as Pierrepoint enters the condemned cell.  In a beautiful Welsh accent he professes his innocence, pleading with the hangman to believe him. 

Seconds before the noose goes around his neck, the man proffers a name. He thinks that Christie might have done it.

And that's the totality and end of Timothy Evans. I don't recall his name even being mentioned. In order to even link this man with one of the most contentious cases in British history, some prior knowledge is needed from the viewer. 

Pierrepoint hangs him. Blink and you'll miss it.  The narrative doesn't even tell us that the Welsh man really was innocent.  It's not telling his story.

As a vehement opponent of capital punishment myself, I was left with the feeling that this film was neutral bordering upon pro hanging. I've since read a comment on a forum from a supporter of capital punishment.  He felt that it was anti the same.

In my opinion, a big deal had to be made of Timothy Evans, Derek Bentley and Ruth Ellis for that to be true. I've already covered Timothy; and I didn't see Derek in the movie. 

Ruth was presented unsympathetically. She smirked on the gallows. We didn't even learn her name until immediately afterwards, when a brief camera shot of the protesting crowds outside revealed it on their placards.

I still don't think that the movie set out to draw a judgement on the morality (or lack thereof) of capital punishment. It was telling Albert Pierrepoint's life-story as a hangman. He similarly made a point of not having an opinion about the individuals whom he was executing. He was not their judge and jury; and they paid their price once they were dead.

The commentator declaring the movie an anti-capital punishment film supported his assertion by pointing out that we don't know anything about the victims of the noose. He wanted their stories to justify Pierrepoint's actions.

I would counter that by stating that nearly thirty years passed during the course of this narrative. If every felon's tale had been told, then the movie would have gone on forever. The reason for their hanging was not important, because it wasn't important to Pierrepoint.

And if the stories had been told, then Timothy Evans would be amongst them. That's not one for pro-hanging people to want publicized.

Is the movie for or against capital punishment?  Neither.  It's just the perspective of one man, performing his duty as he saw fit, without that impacting upon the wider issues. Nevertheless, it's a fascinating insight!

There is one more consideration to factor in though - does this movie pass the Bechdel Test? 

That's a simple, three question criteria designed to assess the role of female characters in any film.  The questions are as follows:

1. Are there two or more named females in this movie?
2. Do they have a conversation with each other?
3. Is it about something other than a male?

Pierrepoint: The Last Hangman passes on the first point. In fact, there are several named women in this movie.  However, none of them exchange words about men nor anything else. The script allows for them only to converse with or via male characters.

Oops.