Erivo’s Prima Facie film gambles on voice-over, loses theatrical intensity
Developing story first seen 2 hours ago
New detail has emerged on how Cynthia Erivo's film adaptation of "Prima Facie" translates Suzie Miller's acclaimed one-woman play to the screen, revealing that director Susanna White and screenwriter Miller rely heavily on voiceover to preserve the interior monologue that powered Jodie Comer's award-winning stage performance. The technique is described as a gamble that struggles to recapture the theatrical version's power, reinforcing earlier critical concerns raised at the film's Toronto Film Festival premiere about the adaptation's shift into a more conventional courtroom drama format.
The film follows Erivo's character Tessa, a criminal barrister who specialises in defending men accused of sexual assault, as she begins a relationship with colleague Julian (Daniel Ings) that turns non-consensual one night after she becomes ill following heavy drinking. Tessa reports the assault to police, and the narrative jumps forward years later to the trial, where defence barrister Hugh Dalton KC (Simon Russell Beale) suggests she fabricated the claim and repeatedly stresses the earlier consensual nature of their relationship. Comer, who won an Olivier and a Tony for the original stage production, did not reprise her role for the film; reviewers had already noted that while early scenes work well, the film loses momentum once it shifts into the courtroom.
- New details reveal heavy use of voiceover in the film adaptation
- Erivo's Tessa is assaulted by colleague Julian after a consensual relationship
- Trial scenes see defence barrister challenge her credibility and motives
New here? Start with this
Barrister Tessa (Cynthia Erivo) defends men accused of sexual assault, until an encounter with a colleague turns non-consensual and she must decide whether to report it and later face trial as the complainant. The film is based on "Prima Facie", a one-woman play by Suzie Miller that became a major stage hit, most famously in a London and Broadway production starring Jodie Comer, who won an Olivier and a Tony for the role but is not part of the film.
Adapting a solo stage show, where one actor plays every part and speaks the character's inner thoughts directly to the audience, is unusual for cinema, so director Susanna White and Miller (who also wrote the screenplay) have used voice-over to carry that interior perspective onto the screen. The film also expands the story into a fuller courtroom drama, adding a cast including Daniel Ings and Simon Russell Beale.
This matters because the play was widely praised for how its format put the audience inside the experience of reporting and prosecuting a sexual assault, and the film adaptation is being watched to see whether that same impact survives the shift from stage to screen, following an earlier premiere at the Toronto Film Festival where critics had already raised questions about the approach.
Full account
A film adaptation of Suzie Miller's acclaimed one-woman play Prima Facie has reached screens, with Cynthia Erivo taking on the role of Tessa, a high-flying British barrister whose career and worldview are upended after she is raped by a colleague she had been seeing. Miller, who wrote the original stage work, also adapted the screenplay, while Susanna White, known for the television series Generation Kill and the film Our Kind of Traitor, directs. The stage version, a solo performance by Jodie Comer, was a considerable success, winning the Olivier Award for Best New Play and Best Actress in 2023 before Comer went on to win a Tony Award for the same role on Broadway. Comer does not appear in the film version, which expands the story from its single-actor format into a more conventional ensemble courtroom drama.
At the centre of the story is Tessa, a barrister from a working-class background who won a place at Cambridge and has built a reputation defending men accused of sexual assault, often exploiting the legal principle that consent need not have existed so long as the accused genuinely believed it did. Her professional life becomes entangled with her personal one when she begins a relationship with Julian, a fellow lawyer played by Daniel Ings, and the pair's romance appears to progress smoothly through an initial sexual encounter at the office. On a later evening, after a dinner date and considerable drinking, Tessa becomes unwell; when Julian later finds her recovering in the bathroom, he presses her for sex again despite her reluctance, and continues regardless. Distressed, she leaves in the night and reports the incident to police as rape, forcing both her personal relationships and her professional convictions about the justice system into direct conflict.
Reviews of the film have focused heavily on the decision to translate the play's introspective, voice-driven monologue into a heavy use of internal voice-over narration for Erivo's character, a technique intended to preserve the intimacy of the original stage performance. Coverage suggests this choice has proved divisive, with the accompanying visual style — including symbolic imagery such as horses to illustrate Tessa's comparison of her colleagues to thoroughbreds, and impressionistic effects like blurred focus and shattered glass to depict the assault itself — singled out as overly literal or heavy-handed. Despite this, the supporting performances, including Ings' turn as Julian, and a central section of the film dealing directly with the assault and its aftermath, have been noted as high points amid an otherwise uneven production.
The two accounts of the film differ in emphasis rather than in the basic facts of the plot. One review is considerably more critical in tone, describing the film as a near-total disappointment relative to its source material, taking particular aim at the director's visual choices, clunky exposition and what it regards as a preachy conclusion, while still crediting the film's underlying message about justice for rape victims as important and timely. The other account is more descriptive and measured, focusing on laying out the narrative in greater detail — including the specifics of the evening leading to the assault and Julian's reaction upon learning of the rape allegation — and frames the voice-over technique as a considered gamble by the filmmakers rather than a straightforward failure, without rendering as firm a verdict on the film's overall success.
Where outlets differ
One review is markedly more critical overall, calling the film a 'near-total muddle' and a major disappointment compared to the stage play, while the other is more neutral and descriptive, presenting the plot in detail without as strong an editorial verdict.
The critical review focuses on directorial and stylistic choices (literal imagery such as horses, blurred focus, shattered glass, voice-over) as key flaws, while the more descriptive account spends more time recounting plot specifics, including the lead-up to the assault and Julian's reaction afterward.
The critical source frames the voice-over and visual symbolism as evidence the director 'trusts the audience' too little, whereas the other source frames the same voice-over technique neutrally as 'a gamble' without fully endorsing or condemning it.
Coverage