SCORE
-4 out of 5-
CREDITS
Terry Malloy: Marlon Brando
Karl Malden: Father Barry
Eva Marie Saint: Edie Doyle
Lee J. Cobb: Johnny Friendly
Directed by Elia Kazan
STORY
This is a well-known film (it's from this film that we get "I coulda been a contender!") but I hadn't seen it. I'm not entirely certain what makes it so strongly remembered, but it is a great film.
The film is about Terry Malloy, who was once a prizefighter but is now a longshoreman. One of the most interesting parts of this film is its blue-collar focus, and immensely helping with that feel is the use of many actors who all seem to be average-looking people. It may be perception, or even the fact that the film is in black-and-white, but it seems that older films had lots of good actors around who looked like normal human beings, rather than the luminous Greek-sculpture people we see in every role in newer films.
In many ways the film is far more effective for its small focus on a group of dockworkers. The docks are run by a petty tyrant, Johnny Friendly, who leads the dockworkers' local union. He decides who gets to work, who gets the good jobs, and who needs to be brutalized back in line. Terry's brother is one of Friendly's lieutenants, and Terry has been conditioned to accept this as "the way things are." He goes along to get along, enjoying the privileges of his position but not really being involved in the seedier side of the arrangement he benefits from.
At the start of the film, Terry is used to lure a man to his death. Terry didn't know that he was leading the man to his death, and while it bothers him a bit it doesn't weigh heavily on his conscience until the man's sister, Edie, comes into his life looking for her brother's killer. As this is going on, Father Barry, the new local priest, is seeking men to stand up to Friendly's murderous racket.
The film is a study of Terry, a man who has been neutral between good and evil for a long time. Terry has been able to benefit from the evil committed by his brother and his brother's cronies without having to do anything unseemly himself, and until murder becomes a part of it he had gotten used to strongarm tactics as a way of doing business. Because it gets him the good and easy jobs, he has been willing to go along.
However, as things progress and the evil of Friendly's group becomes clear to Terry, he finds that he isn't willing to do what's asked of him. Unlike Friendly's men he has not chosen Friendly's side, he was merely resting on his brother's laurels. When the time comes where he must make a choice, he chooses to stand up to Friendly, with the help of Edie and Father Barry.
There are a lot of things to like about this film. The small focus keeps the film grounded -- how many films are there where the hero saves the universe, but it all feels insignificant because of the impersonal nature of the proceedings? In this film a scene where a man walks across a dock is given incredible tension and importance.
The performances are all very good. In some ways I hesitate to discuss how good the acting is, because it doesn't seem like there is any of it, but then I guess that's the best kind. Everyone in this films seems simply to be who they portray, and that may be the highest compliment for a group of actors.
I think the smallness of the film's events -- the miniscule nature of Friendly's authoritarian kingdom -- allows it to stand in for any such situation, no matter how small or large. Friendly is a man who values his power over everything; he could be ruling a third-world country and he would be exactly the same man.
The portrayal of organized crime in this film is refreshing. Filmmakers often get caught up in the mystique of "codes of honor," "honor among thieves," and all that sort of thing. That can make for interesting films, but I suspect that the thuggish tinpot dictator represented by Friendly is a far better reflection of those who engage in mob tactics. All that "honor" and "code" is used by Friendly to use his subjects' own consciences to keep them from standing up to him and doing what's right.
In the same way, Terry's struggle is our own. How many of us have gone along with a system or group who was no good, either because we benefitted or because of the pressure of our peers to accept a corrupt arrangement? We are reminded here that wrong is wrong, "code" or no "code."
Finally, it's great to see a positive portrayal of a man of faith. In a new film, Father Barry would have a terrible secret, or hidden motives; in this film he is a good man serving God the best way he can. He believes wholeheartedly in deposing Johnny Friendly because he sees the suffering in the eyes of his congregation and he can't stand it.
PROS: On the Waterfront is a very moral film, a film about how a man can't be neutral between good and evil. And as is the way with many great films, it does so without the use of vulgarity or gore. There are some deaths, but the film is confident enough in itself to not need to make them overly grotesque to make its point. Terry is a very fallen man who learns, better late than never, to stand up for what's right, that there can be no accommodation with evil without becoming evil oneself. We all need to be reminded of that.
CONS: This isn't a film for children; its themes get intense, even if it is not vulgar and doesn't contain gore. There are several deaths and a brutal beating late in the film, though the makeup is not as ugly as it would be today. I thought it was unfortunate that while Father Barry supports Terry, Terry doesn't consider where this strength might come from. There is no hint that Terry sees anything in Father Barry but a good man, though there may be hope for that in the future after the events of the film.
Final Thought: It's easy to see Terry as blind, having ignored the evil all around him for so long, but aren't we all the same? Don't we all go along with evil, at least partway? Who would fight against a system that benefits him, at least until it asks something of him he doesn't want to do? Who hasn't walked many miles on the road to Hell while ignoring the road signs indicating the destination?
This film is valuable to remind us that whatever we think of ourselves we're no better than Terry, and we need the Lord's help to do good. And just as Terry inspires those around him, if we choose to serve the Lord and not the world, we can inspire others around us as well.
Bottom Line: 4/5
This is a well-known film (it's from this film that we get "I coulda been a contender!") but I hadn't seen it. I'm not entirely certain what makes it so strongly remembered, but it is a great film.
The film is about Terry Malloy, who was once a prizefighter but is now a longshoreman. One of the most interesting parts of this film is its blue-collar focus, and immensely helping with that feel is the use of many actors who all seem to be average-looking people. It may be perception, or even the fact that the film is in black-and-white, but it seems that older films had lots of good actors around who looked like normal human beings, rather than the luminous Greek-sculpture people we see in every role in newer films.
In many ways the film is far more effective for its small focus on a group of dockworkers. The docks are run by a petty tyrant, Johnny Friendly, who leads the dockworkers' local union. He decides who gets to work, who gets the good jobs, and who needs to be brutalized back in line. Terry's brother is one of Friendly's lieutenants, and Terry has been conditioned to accept this as "the way things are." He goes along to get along, enjoying the privileges of his position but not really being involved in the seedier side of the arrangement he benefits from.
At the start of the film, Terry is used to lure a man to his death. Terry didn't know that he was leading the man to his death, and while it bothers him a bit it doesn't weigh heavily on his conscience until the man's sister, Edie, comes into his life looking for her brother's killer. As this is going on, Father Barry, the new local priest, is seeking men to stand up to Friendly's murderous racket.
The film is a study of Terry, a man who has been neutral between good and evil for a long time. Terry has been able to benefit from the evil committed by his brother and his brother's cronies without having to do anything unseemly himself, and until murder becomes a part of it he had gotten used to strongarm tactics as a way of doing business. Because it gets him the good and easy jobs, he has been willing to go along.
However, as things progress and the evil of Friendly's group becomes clear to Terry, he finds that he isn't willing to do what's asked of him. Unlike Friendly's men he has not chosen Friendly's side, he was merely resting on his brother's laurels. When the time comes where he must make a choice, he chooses to stand up to Friendly, with the help of Edie and Father Barry.
There are a lot of things to like about this film. The small focus keeps the film grounded -- how many films are there where the hero saves the universe, but it all feels insignificant because of the impersonal nature of the proceedings? In this film a scene where a man walks across a dock is given incredible tension and importance.
The performances are all very good. In some ways I hesitate to discuss how good the acting is, because it doesn't seem like there is any of it, but then I guess that's the best kind. Everyone in this films seems simply to be who they portray, and that may be the highest compliment for a group of actors.
I think the smallness of the film's events -- the miniscule nature of Friendly's authoritarian kingdom -- allows it to stand in for any such situation, no matter how small or large. Friendly is a man who values his power over everything; he could be ruling a third-world country and he would be exactly the same man.
The portrayal of organized crime in this film is refreshing. Filmmakers often get caught up in the mystique of "codes of honor," "honor among thieves," and all that sort of thing. That can make for interesting films, but I suspect that the thuggish tinpot dictator represented by Friendly is a far better reflection of those who engage in mob tactics. All that "honor" and "code" is used by Friendly to use his subjects' own consciences to keep them from standing up to him and doing what's right.
In the same way, Terry's struggle is our own. How many of us have gone along with a system or group who was no good, either because we benefitted or because of the pressure of our peers to accept a corrupt arrangement? We are reminded here that wrong is wrong, "code" or no "code."
Finally, it's great to see a positive portrayal of a man of faith. In a new film, Father Barry would have a terrible secret, or hidden motives; in this film he is a good man serving God the best way he can. He believes wholeheartedly in deposing Johnny Friendly because he sees the suffering in the eyes of his congregation and he can't stand it.
PROS: On the Waterfront is a very moral film, a film about how a man can't be neutral between good and evil. And as is the way with many great films, it does so without the use of vulgarity or gore. There are some deaths, but the film is confident enough in itself to not need to make them overly grotesque to make its point. Terry is a very fallen man who learns, better late than never, to stand up for what's right, that there can be no accommodation with evil without becoming evil oneself. We all need to be reminded of that.
CONS: This isn't a film for children; its themes get intense, even if it is not vulgar and doesn't contain gore. There are several deaths and a brutal beating late in the film, though the makeup is not as ugly as it would be today. I thought it was unfortunate that while Father Barry supports Terry, Terry doesn't consider where this strength might come from. There is no hint that Terry sees anything in Father Barry but a good man, though there may be hope for that in the future after the events of the film.
Final Thought: It's easy to see Terry as blind, having ignored the evil all around him for so long, but aren't we all the same? Don't we all go along with evil, at least partway? Who would fight against a system that benefits him, at least until it asks something of him he doesn't want to do? Who hasn't walked many miles on the road to Hell while ignoring the road signs indicating the destination?
This film is valuable to remind us that whatever we think of ourselves we're no better than Terry, and we need the Lord's help to do good. And just as Terry inspires those around him, if we choose to serve the Lord and not the world, we can inspire others around us as well.
Bottom Line: 4/5
This review makes me want to see the movie. I love Brando, and I like older movies anyway. So what is a 5/5?
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the flick, and if you watch it I hope you do as well. It's hard to tell the effect some of the reviews will have on people when you write them -- somehow my Lakeview Terrace review made John want to watch it.
ReplyDeleteThe numerical definitions are laid out in the movie reviews index, which you can find to the left below the "About Us" link.
The 5/5 criteria are very high here -- the film has to be the standard of excellence for the genre, or to invent a genre of its own.
I'd be tempted to go 5/5 for both this film and A Man for All Seasons for being excellent films, but I'm not sure they're necessarily the standard for their respective genres.
So in some cases a 5/5 film could be less objectively good than a 4/5 film, since it is partially related to its genre as a whole. It's not how everyone does it, but I think it's a useful standard.