Reconsidering: On the Waterfront

This post is dedicated to Renee H., who gently persuaded me that this film is worth giving a second chance.

"On the Waterfront" is one of those movies that I did not not love at first sight. Once upon a time I had an aversion to: Marlon Brando, 1950s black and white movies with jarring, jazzy scores, and movies that are relentlessly downbeat and ultra-ugly-real. So, you can see how I might not have been enchanted with this film.

And then there is Elia kazan and that whole House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) naming names thing.

I am not one to analyze the nuts and  bolts of a film. I'm not expert at dissecting the mechanics. For me, the measure of a great film is how lost in the story I become, how much I care about the fates of the characters, and how much it might speak to something deep inside of me. In this respect, I wholeheartedly reverse my position and say this is a great film, but I do have reservations.

The Cast
From every main character to every uncredited performance this film is expertly cast.

Marlon Brando as Terry Malloy, the bum/longshoreman who could have been a contender, but now contents himself with doing the bidding of corrupt union leader Johnny Friendly, is quite perfect. I still don't come easily to him, but there is no denying the sensitivity beneath the brute. His Terry Malloy is a complete person.

Eva Marie Saint as Edie, the sister of the whistle blower who is lured to his death by Terry, is an angel of the slums. It is hard to believe that a few years later she would be out-sexing any of Hitchcock's blondes in "North By Northwest." She is the heart of the story, the innocence and righteousness that has not yet been corrupted by life on the waterfront.

Karl Malden as the re-energized activist priest Father Barry is my favorite character and my favorite performance in the film. The death of Edie's brother gets him out of his church and into the faces of his parishioners. Malden's Father Barry is warm, compelling and brave. Once he believes in his cause, he is wholly committed and there is no turning back. He is, after all, on the right side of justice.

Rod Steiger plays Terry's older brother, Charley. Poor Charley. He is the saddest character in the film. He sold his soul and his kid brother for a place at Johnny Friendly's side. His later regrets cost him his life.

Lee J. Cobb as Johnny Friendly is a powerhouse - so charming when you do things his way, so deadly when crossed.

The Score

Okay. It's perfect. It's Leonard Bernstein. That's all.


The Story

The screenplay by Budd Schulberg, is based on a real life whistle blower who courageously exposed corruption within the Longshoreman union. It is a story of power, conscience, courage and the dignity of work. And this brings me to thing that has always bothered me about this film. Terry Malloy is hailed as a hero who named names. He was certainly a hero, because he sought to bring justice to those with no voice and to take his one chance to right some terrible wrongs (and avenge the death of his brother and Edie's brother).

Here's where that pesky back story creeps in. Kazan and Schulberg were both friendly witnesses to the HUAC, but it was that committee that was the real-life Johnny Friendly whose favor resulted in employment. The Communist party never controlled who worked and who didn't, but the blacklist that emerged as a result of the hearings sadly did. Lives and careers were ruined because those whose names were named were denied the right to shape up and get that precious job ticket. Those who did not name names may object to the film's phrase of "D&D"( deaf and dumb) when questioned by the Feds. Those who refused to testify might have thought otherwise.

At the end of "On the Waterfront" the men go back to work and now only the boss is standing between the men and a day's pay. But the boss is never kind and benevolent. He is the reason for the need for the labor union in the first place. Who will speak for those men now?

"On the Waterfront" is a delicious, complex, confounding and beautiful film. Taken at face value, it is a tale of personal conscience and heroism against a mob. Scratch the surface and we ask: are Schulberg and Kazan condemning HUAC? Are they assuaging their guilt? Are they justifying their actions? Only the viewer can decide. That is why I will have to view this film again.

Thanks, Renee!