Following the incredible pleasant surprise that was “A Streetcar Named Desire” I had high hopes that Elia Kazan and I were going to have one of those we-are-going-to-get-along-fine-in-spire-of-our-ideological-differences relationships, not unlike the one I have with John Ford or Sammy Hagar. However, much for the same reason I don’t buy into mainstream media or organized religion, I don’t appreciate being preached to- I prefer to have my cinematic morals rammed down my throat in the form of subtle allegory and veiled metaphors.
Almost instantly, the poorly conceived symbolism takes shape. Shots of the wide open Atlantic Ocean are interrupted with a very simple “duh-duh-duh” kind of dark music as the scenery transitions to the dark and depressing waterfront and it’s dark and depressing dockworkers. Without any intelligible words it is clear that one of the laborers, Terry (Marlon Brando) and a man who is clearly a mobster due to his suit and goonish entourage, ironically named Johnny Friendly, are making some sort of shady deal. He leads the gangsters back to his apartment building and directly to a fellow dockworker, Joey, who is planning to testify against Friendly and his crooked union.
The bait Terry uses in order to lure Joey out to his doom is one of Joey’s stray pigeons, a bird the two men share an affinity for and perhaps the worst metaphorical device I’ve ever seen employed in a film. The obvious comparison of honest guys to pigeons, as in “stool pigeons” is silly, tries too hard, and is actually pretty out of place. For Terry to just happen to have a hobby of pigeon collecting while inhabiting a tenement building makes this a completely forced plot device that is clearly only employed to foreshadow Terry’s own character.
The mobsters throw Joey from the roof of the building to a grizzly death. At this point it is firmly established that Terry is the protagonist, as he professes ignorance to the severity of the gang’s intentions and seems genuinely shocked by the outcome. Despite the fact that Terry’s character is supposed to be dumb and easily manipulated, later scenes in the film make it evident that Terry has been working with Friendly and his cohorts for some time in one capacity or another. Hence, he either had a pretty good idea he was basically signing Joey’s death warrant or he is literally the dumbest character in the history of cinema. Sadly, his protagonist tag in this film relies entirely on the latter which I just don’t see.
Joey’s death also serves as a means of introducing other main characters into the narrative. Father Barry (Karl Malden) is the street priest who ministers to the laborers. We’ve seen this character numerous times before (Father Connelly in “Angels with Dirty Faces”) and since (Father Carmine in “Rocky”). Joey’s father and sister Edie (Eva Marie Saint) are also among the spectator/mourners, with Edie eventually (predictably) becoming Terry’s love interest.
“Boys, this is my church! And if you don't think Christ is down here on the waterfront you've got another guess coming!” (Father Barry, “On the Waterfront”)
One positive thing I will say about the film is the transformation of Terry’s character. It is hard to feel sorry for him early on when he is more or less an accessory to murder and even spies on his friends who hold secret meetings with Father Barry with the intention of reporting the rumblings back to Friendly. However, he needs these realistic faults in order to be taken even remotely seriously as a sort of anti-hero protagonist. The feelings he wrestles with when he is torn between his loyalty to friendly and his developing feelings for Edie, which is also probably the closest thing to a healthy interpersonal relationship Terry has given his lack of friends and his unhealthy, almost more parent/child rather than brother/brother allegiance to his brother Charley, who is not only Friendly’s right-hand but also the person most responsible for Terry’s mediocrity in life. Prior to working on the docks, Terry had a promising career as a boxer that Charley ultimately squashed by forcing him to take a dive at the request of Friendly, because every corrupt movie mobster has to be involved in fixing sporting events.
Little by little Friendly begins to lose his grip on Terry- not only because of Terry’s feelings for Edie, but also for his increasingly heavy-handed rule over the docks. He has another potential informant killed by smashing him with a pallet of whiskey in a shipping “accident,” then has his goons harass Father Barry who attempts to perform last rites for the murdered laborer. When Terry takes Father Barry’s side over the thugs, Friendly turns up the heat on Charley, going so far as to pressure him into killing his own brother unless he can convince Terry not to testify against Friendly after he is subpoenaed in Joey’s murder. Charley and Terry’s confrontation in the back of a cab is probably the most famous scene in the movie and also represents Terry finally declaring his independence from both the Union and his brother. His emotional breakdown and unleashing years of pent up aggression towards his brother is entirely reminiscent of Brando’s role in “Streetcar:” in fact almost too reminiscent. The big galoot shows emotion and the other person, this time Charley rather than Stella, goes against their better judgment and submits to him. This decision will end up costing Charley his life, which could be just as heroic as Terry’s decision to testify if given the right spin, but it never is.
The film then begins to play out like a really terrible “Death Wish” sequel, complete with Terry having to endure seeing his brother’s corpse and even having his pigeons killed when he eventually testifies. His decision to turn on Friendly culminates with a showdown on the docks where Terry is beaten within inches of his life by several gangsters after Terry gets the upper hand on Friendly in a one-on-one fight. The severity of Terry’s injuries cannot effectively be conveyed through conventional 1950’s third-person shots, so a point-of-view angle is employed, complete with blur. The shot is very minor but is in many ways a precursor to the technique that would eventually become key to much better movies like “Saving Private Ryan.” Out of respect and solidarity (definitely a literal play on the word “union”) the other longshoremen refuse to go to work unless Terry is hired back on despite his condition. For the lack of a type of subject matter that provides for a “happy” ending, Kazan instead goes with a realistic ending.
I have never let political or ideological differences get in the way of enjoying a movie if it is good *cough*BirthofaNation*cough*, however, I just don’t buy Kazan’s use of film to justify his own stool pigeoning during the McCarthy hearings. Also, unless Arthur Miller hung Elia Kazan’s brother from a meat hook and killed his animals then I don’t buy the self-pitiful comparison either. Perhaps I would be less critical of this film were it not for the fact that, between “The Grapes of Wrath,” “Chinatown” and “A Streetcar Named Desire” I’ve already essentially seen this movie earlier in the list.
