On the Waterfront (1954)

 Elia Kazan's "On the Waterfront"

In 1952, Hollywood filmmaker Elia Kazan made the controversial decision to identify eight Communists in the film industry to the House Committee on Un-American Activities. Now a part of history, this betrayal by this titan of the film industry hurt his career and his reputation, along with putting him in bad graces with other filmmakers and artists. Kazan is now synonymous with being a rat. I think Kazan, at the time, was aware of this moniker that would be placed on him and decided to erect a film that answered these concerns. That film would become one of the most iconic Hollywood films in history, 1954's "On the Waterfront." 

The film stars Marlon Brando in one of his most memorable roles, Terry Malloy. Terry was a New York Prize Fighter whose career was cut short when we purposefully lost a fight at the request of mob boss Johnny Friendly. Terry now works for Friendly's labor union as a longshoreman while his older brother, Charley, works as Friendly's right hand man. After Terry is coerced into luring fellow worker Joey Doyle onto a rooftop, where he believes Freddy's henchman want to talk Joey out of testifying to the Waterfront Crime Commission. When they instead murder Joey by throwing him off the roof, Terry begins to revaluate his relationship with Friendly. Joey's sister, Edie, and local priest, Father Barry, also become concerned about the crime ring in control of the labor union and begin to have meetings to try and bring them down. After being issued a subpoena, Terry becomes divided between his allegiance to his brother's crime ring and standing up to these crime bosses to support the laborers he works with.

In the film, Brando's Terry finally uses the subpoena to confess to the crimes Friendly committed. Despite being portrayed as an act of bravery and courage in standing up for the little man against corruption, Terry is ostracized from the community, as they now consider him a rat. To gain back their support, he goes to Friendly and stands up to him and takes a hard beating from him. This eventually wins him back over with the local community. 

Despite being written by Budd Schulberg and based on a series of 1948 "New York Sun" articles called "Crime on the Waterfront" by Malcolm Johnson, the script was still contextually tailored to the incident involving Kazan's testimony. Kazan's good friend, playwright Arthur Miller, took these 1948 articles and created a foundation to the story. After Columbia Pictures president Harry Cohn wanted the antagonists of the film to be directly considered Communists to better suit the contemporary narrative, Miller became disenchanted with the project, especially after Kazan's testimony. Kazan then replaced Miller with Schulberg. 

It seems as though that through this narrative, Kazan believed he was standing up to corruption in the film industry. The film points out that despite knowing he would be branded a traitor by his contemporaries, he believes that he doing what he felt was in their best interest. As time has passed, the perception has rightly put Kazan in his place, considering him not a hero, but instead placing him as being utterly part of the corruption he thought he was fighting.

Because of the parallel to real life circumstances, if you look at the film through this lens, you may be turned off completely. I would say this is entirely justified. However, if you choose to completely remove the parallel metatextual narrative at play, the story and film as it stands alone is a complete masterwork of storytelling. The character of Terry Mallow played brilliantly by Brando is the magnetic glue that hold it all together. You can never take your eyes off of Terry and you begin to empathize with his moral struggle. 

There are certain things you can pull from the film, like an analysis of power dynamics, political corruption, and racketeering. However, to me, the main crux of the film is the moral stakes of Terry, as he must decide whether to succumb to the corruption that he benefits from, or to stand up to it morally and stand with those whom are oppressed by the system. Weirdly enough, if you take away the film's true context, you can actually see the film through the total opposite lens. The film can actually be viewed through the lens of standing up to Cold War McCarthyism. You can feel the temperament of America at the time of the film's release, as many felt they were being taken advantage of by corrupt officials. Many Americans and workers were too afraid to buck the system for fear of losing everything. Terry's struggle at the heart of the film echoes the struggle of the everyday American and their contrast between abiding the corruption they're apart of or standing up to it, knowing very well it could cost you everything.

Regardless of the lens you watch the film through, there's no denying that the film cemented itself as one of the great American films of the 20th Century. Brando's magnetic performance, the 1950s Cold War-era McCarthyism that time stamps the temperaments of the film, and the iconic "I could have had class. I could have been a contender" line that Brando says all combine to make a film that is as classic as it is compelling.