I Used To Love This

Wow. Lottsa good points. Some of em I have to tack up to 'artistic license' on the part of the director.

Pop returning to work to pay for his kids funeral didn't bother me so much as his stoic attitude at his son's body. Not a tear or anguish. I felt that the guy must be tough as nails.But it was unbelievable.

Joey's jacket was given to Dugan and when he was murdered, the black dockworker retreives it and gives it back to Edie. That's why it shows up on Terry later.

Steiger and terry defenately have two different lifestuyles. Steifger is dressed in '$150 suits' while Terry has torn worn clothes.

I also noticed that Terry lives in a 1 room cruddy apartment with a hotplate towards the end. We don't see where Charlie lives but I gather it was a lot better than Terrys room. When Terry says to Charlie that he shoulda looked after him a little more that was an understatment.

The fact that John Friendly hangs in a floating union headquarters is pretty funny but than again he has to be located where he conducts business to keep an eye on things. Also what better way to launder money than to have a bar? That made sense.

Your right about the church meeting. It didn't make sense to break it up and it made even less sense for Johnney to get mad at Terry because he didn't know Dugan was going to rat. Why would Dugan or anyone else confide in Terry when everyone knew he only attended as a spy for Johnny?

Johnny 'Friendly' is a great nickname. I've heard worse. Guys get nicknames for lottsa reasons. It could be he picked up the name because he owns the 'Friendly Bar'.

As I said before the other points you mentioned are all plot holes but movies have to skip obvious parts so as to move the story along. Scorsese once said that movies have to move twice the speed of life.

You should DEFINITELY not watch this film anymore.

I especially agree that the motivations of the character Edie don't make any sense. The whole plot is predicated on her starting to fall in love with Brando but why in the hell would she even talk to him. She clearly knows he's somehow involved in the murder. And she isn't just using him for information. She dances with him and puts her head in his shoulder on that first date.

Doesn't add up.

I agree with many of the things you said, chiefly Brando's two big confrontations with Saint and Brando's testimony.
Earlier in the film Saint said she suspected his involvement in her brother's death but still talked to him - suddenly he admits his (limited) involvement and she wants nothing to do with him anymore? It's really just so they can have an equally rushed reconciliation just a short time later, which was also not very believable.
A bigger flub is the testimony scene - not just the part with Brando that you mentioned, but the whole thing. The union flunkie who claims the financial records got stolen is so obviously lying that you have to wonder how the bunch of them have lasted this long without being jailed. They would have to be a lot better at covering up than they are here; as well, Cobb's attack on Brando also lends all the credibility to his testimony that it didn't have before.
The biggest mistake of all, I think, is one that you didn't mention: the ending. I know that unhappy endings were much rarer in those days than they were twenty years later (or even now), but the last eight minutes or so of this film (starting with Brando's final shouting match with Cobb) I found completely phony.
My final problem is one that I'm probably almost alone on: Brando's character. Perhaps it was because of the movies he'd done up to that point and the image he'd gotten from them, but I think they went too far in playing up the 'soft' side of the character. The filmmakers must have felt that the audience would immediately accept the aggressive tough-guy side of him because they give only a few moments that show that side; looking at the movie now, given all the other roles Brando has had since, and I simply didn't believe him as a stupid ex-champion prizefighter; instead, particularly during the first ten or fifteen minutes of the film, Brando looks so bored I half expected him to fall asleep.

Having said all this, I do think it's still a good film. The locations give a sense of believability to the story, and the ensemble work still holds up quite well. The speeches given by Malden, which could have come off as insufferable in a Stanley Kramer movie or something like that, are still especially strong.
What perhaps impresses me the most is that a film like this, with a political point of view so different from what usually comes out of Hollywood, was made at all and got so much acclaim. Like a lot of films from the 1950s and 1960s that were primarily designed to make a Significant Point about an Important Subject, a lot of it comes off as heavy-handed when you watch it today, but most of it still plays pretty well.