Too Many Flaws to be Considered a Great Film

I quite agree with you, to a point, about this being a highly flawed film.

I mainly feel that way because I compare it to the original novel. First, the music: I thought it was alright. It was repetitive, but it didn't bother me too much.

In regards to the Willie/May romance subplot. I totally agree that in the film, it was a complete waste of time and showed a lack of acting ability in the two principals. However, in the original novel, it was a major part of the storyline and Willie's relationship with May was a crucial part of Willie's maturing process. Don't forget that the book wasn't centered around the court case. It was centered around Willie Keith's character development.

Secondly, the court case. Again, that reflects back to the book. In the book, Greenwald is discussing the case -before agreeing to defend Maryk- with the Judge Advocate. He says that a charge of mutiny -as recommended by the Board of Inquiry- is absurd. He says that there's no hint of violence or disrespect. He says that Maryk was very careful to stay within the legal ground of Article 184, even he misapplied it. He goes on to say that the toughest charge that could stick is Conduct to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline. The Judge Advocate thinks that Greenwald's opinion of the mutiny charge completely concurs with his own opinion and his, initially poor, first impression of Greenwald takes a sharp turn upward. He reminds Greenwald that it's only a recommendation to charge mutiny. He, the Judge Advocate, is drawing up the formal charge, and it, in fact, IS going to be Conduct to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline. (It's described in the book as a catch-all charge that is used on grey area cases like Maryk's). So, in the book, he's not charged with committing a mutiny. He's charged with misapplying Article 184 to the detriment of good order and discipline. It's a serious charge, but not nearly as serious as mutiny would be.

Greenwald's speech at the end is indeed annoying. But again, it's straight out of the novel. It's made more annoying here by Jose Ferrer's delivery style which always came across as arrogant and condescending. The gist of it, in the book, is that the officers didn't back up Queeg from the start as they should have for the simple fact he was the captain. If they had, the relief would never have happened, since Queeg would have known he had the support of his wardroom and not been driven to his worst extremes. Thus, he would have functioned better under stress and Maryk wouldn't have had to relieve him. It comes from Herman Wouk wanting to have it both ways in the novel. He wants to show Queeg as a bad captain, yet also show that he should be commended for serving in the regular Navy before the war when all of them were pursuing more lucrative civilian pursuits.

So, I agree with your points, however I think they are mainly due to the fact that film is a very poor adaptation of the novel. The novel was really more suited to a miniseries than a film, due to its length. Trying to squeeze it into a film format results in things like the romance plot being truncated and seeming as shallow as it did. As well, the ending was totally anti-climactic compared to the book. (In the book, Willie returns to the Caine and, when executive officer, ends up saving it when they're hit by a kamikaze at Okinawa. At the end of the war, Willie is given command of the ship and is the one to sail her back to the United States to take the Caine in for decommissioning and the scrapyard. It's far better than Willie going to a new ship where he finds himself under Captain DeVreis again.

[deleted]

Aciolino makes some good points, although I can't agree with everything he says.

I found the music okay. I like the overall theme, although at times it was too repetitve and annoying. I think aciolino is partially, but not completely correct on this point.

Aciolino makes an excellent point about the "two-plot non-sense." The fault lies mainly with the writers, the director, and the "actors" playing Willie Keith and May Wynn. The original novel, despite its title, is really a coming of age story about Willie Keith, who becomes both an officer and a gentleman, thanks to the positive influence of both the Navy and May Wynn. Wouk didn't handle this part of the novel as well as he did the parts dealing with life on the Caine under Captain Queeg, but he succeeded in making his characters reasonably interested, if somewhat hackneyed and cliched. The film's writers, however, provided for no character development, and made no effort to relate the love story to the rest of the film. As I've noted elsewhere, the love story could have been deleted from the film without damage to the plot. Moreover, partly because of poor writing, and partly because of stiff acting, the love story is even more boring and pointless.

I thought Wouk didn't play altogether fair with the reader. On the one hand, he described Queeg's breakdown during the typhoon in frightening detail; on the other, he concludes the novel with the assertion that Queeg was not mentally ill and should not have been relieved. Greenwald's speech in the film accurately reflects the scene in the novel, as well as Wouk's own thoughts. The problem here is that in neither the novel nor the film does Greenwald's speech arise logically from the material. This weakens its impact and justifies the questions Aciolino raises.

Aciolino's comments about Robert Francis's "acting" are justified. But was his poor work in this film because of poor writing, poor direction, or simply a lack of talent? We'll never find out. Nor will we ever know the extent to which Francis could have evolved into a competent actor had he had the chance to do so. Whatever one's opinions of Francis as an actor, his premature death is a tragedy.

Two things. It's been discussed on other threads that the romance and getting away from 'mother's' influence was a large part of Willie's going from a mama's boy to a responsible naval officer.

aciolino makes good points as to flaws. I don't feel they are as bad as all that, but irritating, yes--the overdone music, the unimportant romance plot scenes, the lack of stress during the trial re the reckless danger Queeg put the ship in, and the strange scene with the half-drunk lawyer at the end, who didn't seem to have noticed Queeg's extreme mental condition as evidenced when he was on the stand in front of his own eyes. Like the others were somehow responsible for Queeg's condition?????
All the acting was fine, IMO.


"Did you make coffee...? Make it!"--Cheyenne.

Absolutely agree with OP points.

In defense of Wouk, The novel was not about Queeg it was about Keith going from being an adolescent mama's boy to manhood. This becomes a somewhat redundant subplot in the movie. After Queeg is removed from command, Keefer becomes the Caine's captain and Keith is his executive officer and loses his hero worship for Keefer and is a bit more charitable toward Queeg. The final voyage of the Caine, destined for the scrape yard, is commanded by Keith the man who also claims his girl without concern for what mama thinks.

Yes, Greenwald was a total egotistical ass. As you pointed you and as Maryk said, you weren't on the bridge. Greenwald retorts that none of the other ships had to be saved by a mutiny. A totally idiotic statement. Did it ever occur to Mr. Greenwald to ask how many other ships stayed steadfastly on the fleet course as was insisted on by Queeg or did they break with the fleet course as did Maryk to save their ships?

The problem with films about the military is that they have to keep them happy and make the service look flawless. This results in crippling compromises to the script.

Another example is the end of From Here to Eternity. There is supposedly an investigation about his treatment of Pruitt that results in Holmes being forced to resign. How could there be such an investigation when Pruitt is AWOL and being carried on the roster by Warden. This was just a CYA insisted on by the Army.

I love the music in this film.