A Nave da Revolta

Robert Altman's simple and brilliant reprise of the celebrated fictional naval trial succeeds both as a series of character studies, and, more effectively than the Bogart film, as a rebuke of the sprawling anti-military novels (such as the Naked and the Dead) that followed World War II. Unlike the 1954 movie, this version is based on Herman Wouk's stage play and focuses exclusively on the trial itself. As events focus on the progression of witnesses in the temporary courtroom (it's a converted gym), each man is scrutinized under a microscope which reveals strengths, weaknesses, hypocrisy and anguish.

Facing the thankless task of following in Bogart's wake, Brad Davis gives an edgy performance as Qeeg, a ticky personality that slowly melts and becomes unglued in the witness chair. Eric Bogosian is just as watchable as Lt Greenwald, the razor-sharp defense lawyer who is torn as the issues of the trial tear into his own changing moral attitudes about the war. A cynical intellectual when he entered the Marines as a flyer, Greenwald now sees the pragmatic need for a structured military to defeat the evils of fascism (particularly as a Jewish American). To win the trial, he must destroy the life of a career officer and he's sick about it.

Jeff Daniels, Peter Gallagher and the rest of the cast are all top drawer. The 1988 TV Movie version is also able to briefly touch on issues of anti-Semitism and homosexuality that were expunged in the 50s big-screen version. The Caine Mutiny Court Martial offers that all-too-rare treat of allowing Hollywood stars to get into some meaty characters and performances which are normally reserved for the stage. Offered with Altman's trademark overlapping dialogue, it's great drama, an under-appreciated gem, and is well worth 100 minutes of your time.

This was an good adaptation of the Caine story. I've read the original book on which the story was based, and have seen the 1950s film version many times, but hadn't seen a stage version of this film. (Wouk wrote both the book and this play.) This version is interesting on several levels. First, unlike the original story, everything is stripped out except the courtroom scenes and the party afterward. This allows us to experience the story without having seen it first, which allows us to view the Queeg story fresh, without having seen it ourselves and formed opinions about it.

Also, Altman wisely chose actors which were very unlike (in most cases) the 1954 version of the story. The most noteworth, of course, is Queeg himself, with Davis doing a very credible job that is very different from the Bogart portrayal. (For one thing, Davis is a very different physical type than Bogart and is a lot younger.) Keefer is good too - and again, different than the 1954 version, with Fred McMurray in the role.

And, of course, this film has the usual Altman technique of using a lot of side conversations that are barely heard and added noises to make the film seem more naturalistic. As others noted, this is most evident during the party scene at the end, but it used with good effect during the rest of the movie too.

Overall a nice piece of work.

Excellent dramatic rendition of the final segment of Wouk's great novel. All the players made this picture come off looking like a real court marshall. Davis' portrayal of the oddball Queeg showed a man with a skewed personality and totally obsessed with an authority complex. Finally, Bogosian's Barney Greenwald's rant at the celebration party was the high point of the film. Courtroom enthusiasts should go for this one.

I love Robert Altman's persona, a kind of hippy apres la lettre. He'd be fun to have dinner with. But I can never get with his movies. No matter how carefully he explains why he constructed them as he did, it always comes out sounding to me like a burglar's explanation of why the victim brought it on himself because he should never have left the windows wide open in the first place. This TV production is better than most of his movies, though. As a courtroom drama it almost has to be since the focus is almost always on exchanges between two or three people in an otherwise silent courtroom. (When Altman gets a chance, as in the party scene, he lets everything go so that when Barney Greenwald gives his climactic speech, the signal is almost buried in the surrounding noise.) I hate to be negative because, as I say, I like Altman and think the novel is marvelous -- I reread it every two years or so. But the production seems underlighted and unnecessarily dark, which casts a gloom over the exciting proceedings. The performances are okay but they don't always fit the part. Bogosian is nice as Greenwald. Daniels is a bit trim and comes across as more intelligent than he might be. (He ought to be like a brown bull getting the banderillas placed.) The Keefer character is miscast, period. Here, he is soft-spoken and deliberate, completely in control of himself, whereas Keefer knew very well that he was tanking his close friend during his testimony and was nervous and guilty. (His right foot danced all during his testimony in the novel, and he could not meet Maryk's intense gaze.) Keefer is always nervous -- except when he's lambasting the navy, then he comes into his own. These nervous tics are here given to the psychiatrist, a guy who definitely should NOT have had them, so that his frosty complacency could be more effectively destroyed by Greenwald. Altman turns the shrink into a complete fool with big pursed lips and thick glasses, which is extremely amusing, whether it fits or not. Just looking at this poor neurotic is a treat! Much of the success or failure of the production devolves onto Brad Davis's performance, and again the results are mixed. He is the person whose presence undergoes the most dramatic change, and Davis delivers during the breakdown scene. When I first saw this, in 1988, I was somewhat surprised at a particular twist Davis gave Queeg's character, especially during his first court appearance, a kind of wispy lisping quality, and I thought, "Geeze, is Davis trying to suggest Queeg was a homosexual?" I worried that he was going to wind up in a snit when he went to pieces, but Davis in the end projects a genuine-enough paranoid anger. Maybe if I'd never read the novel I'd have enjoyed the movie more, although I did in fact enjoy it. At least it was never insulting. I'd happily watch it again if it were on.

We have a phrase in England, a 'curate's egg', which means, good in parts.

On the positive side, this is very much a Robert Altman film in the best sense, He displayed again here to best advantage how he can create not just one backstory but a whole world of backstories just in a converted naval gym which is serving as ad hoc courtroom for a court martial. There were the stories of the principal characters, to be sure, to be given time and attention in the script - the Caine officers, crew, judges and advocates - but what Altman did even better I think than in his other films was make each person on screen, even in the background, and I stress every person you can see either in background or foreground, appear existentially real and three dimensional. They all appear more than just either a principal actor or an extra, as we know them variously to be as members of a cast, but in Altman's subtly shifting focus on screen, in what they are shown doing, even if we can't hear what they are saying or not quite sure what they are doing, they come across as real people, mostly naval personnel, of course, with real activities and real lives taking place simultaneously with the people and events staging in the foreground. I am not sure that any other director ever has managed that as well as Altman.

Focussing on the trial itself, the script is highly literate and gives a fascinating insight into naval protocol, attitudes and tradition, and, of course, into the conflict of personalities and within personalities, of men at war, with the advantage of the extra detail that such focusing allowed, in comparison with the 1954 Edward Dmytryk original film which had to cover both the actual naval action and the court room drama. Though, I want to say here, that the Edward Dmytryk film managed to portray with admirable faithfulness and admirable economy a long book, and with first class acting and production values of its own.

On the negative side, and it is no reflection on Brad Davis, but I have seen the film with Humphrey Bogart and also the stage play in London with Charlton Heston and none of them quite manages right the moment when Captain Queeg starts slipping from a reasonable officer, if something of a martinet, into one who, it turns out, has been over-promoted, probably because of the exigencies of war, to the point where he presents clear symptoms of mental disintegration. That is maybe a weakness of the writing in what is otherwise a very fine war drama by Herman Wouk which perhaps no actor can overcome.

I do miss the drama of the actual scenes aboard ship. As I say, the original film managed to portray the gripping action of the sea drama and then with well-judged economy the trial and compressed it successfully into about the same length of time as Altman's film concentrating almost solely on the trial. Also, the final party scene is far better handled in the 1954 film with the confrontation between the defending advocate, played by Jose Ferrer, and Fred MacMurray as the barrack room lawyer Keefer striking a far more dramatic note. After an otherwise taut film, Altman's ends on rather a flat note.

However, I am glad of this new adaptation of the Caine Mutiny, because it is fascinating to compare the two films which nicely complement each other. I think Herman Wouk's Caine Mutiny is one of the best ever World War II stories ever written and subsequently screened, not just for its action but its psychological subtlety and depth. Sadly, his Winds of War is a let-down but that is matter for another review.