Great book, screenplay, acting and film

Rating: 10/10 (30 July 2014)

Although it's fiction, "The Caine Mutiny" is a highly realistic portrayal of the U.S. Navy, its men, and the stress of command during World War II. It's based on a book of the same name by Herman Wouk. He served on minesweepers in the Pacific theater during WW II. The role of Fred MacMurray somewhat resembles Wouk and his service. MacMurray is a writer working on a novel in his spare time on ship. How much else the character resembles Wouk is anyone's guess. Navy veterans have praised Wouk's work for his honest and accurate portrayal of life at sea during WW II, and for his variety of characters.
Wouk wrote a number of popular novels in later years, several of which were made into movies. Among them were "Marjorie Morningstar" in 1955, "Slattery's Hurricane" in 1956, and "Youngblood Hawke" in 1961. His two greatest works were historical fictions that were made into mini-series films for TV. "Winds of War," and "War and Remembrance" won multiple awards and recognition worldwide in the 1980s.
"The Caine Mutiny" is an excellent study of characters. The only other film of 1954 that has such depth of character development and study is the one that took the biggest honors for the year – "On the Waterfront." But, "The Caine Mutiny" is a classic film that should be in all war movie collections and all other serious film collections. It is one of half a dozen films that show Humphrey Bogart's great talent as an actor.
Bogart gave an Oscar-worthy performance in the lead role as Philip Francis Queeg, captain of the Caine. The screenplay, direction and supporting cast for this film all were outstanding. Indeed, the cast of this film was near perfect for so many prominent roles. Only that of Ensign Willie Keith, was weak. Newcomer Robert Francis was stiff and seemed to have stage fright in his part. One could image a young Paul Newman (27 or 28 then) giving a more genuine portrayal in that role.
But the Mutiny cast doesn't end there. Veteran stars José Ferrer and E.G. Marshall have noteworthy roles. Other veterans have very good parts – Steve Brodie as Chief Budge and Warner Anderson as Capt. Blakely. And some up-and-comers have sizable parts and play them very well – Lee Marvin as Meatball, Claude Akins as Lugatch, May Wynn as May, and Jerry Paris as Ensign Barney Harding.
As with all the years in the decade of the 50s, 1954 had many very good to excellent movies. But two films and their associated roles stood out. "Mutiny" with Bogart and others was one, and "On the Waterfront" starring Marlon Brando with others is the second. "Waterfront" was best picture and Brando won the Oscar for best actor. "Mutiny" and Bogart were nominated. "Waterfront" won 8 of its 12 nominations, but "Mutiny" didn't capture a single Oscar in its 7 nominations.
There's no doubt that Brando gave an Oscar performance in "Waterfront." But was his performance better than Bogart's in "Mutiny?" I don't dwell on speculation about the Academy Awards. No doubt, there are sentimental favorites at times. And other things may affect the academy voting as well. History has recorded some years when studios spent lavishly to influence the academy voters. And, perhaps chicanery has been at play in some years.
I wonder if that wasn't the case in 1954. I'll grant the Brando-Bogart nominations a toss-up. But the nominations of supporting actors must raise the eyebrows of serious movie buffs. "Waterfront" received three nominations for best supporting actor – Lee J. Cobb, Karl Malden and Rod Steiger. All gave deserving performances. "Mutiny" received one nomination – Tom Tully. While his role was very good, it was a lesser role than two other exceptional performances who were not nominated. Van Johnson and Fred MacMurray were outstanding in their roles as Lt. Steve Maryk and Lt. Tom Keefer, respectively. They were at least as good as the performances by the three "Waterfront" nominations. So, might there have been some chicanery afoot in the Academy echelon that chose the nominees to be voted upon? How could two such exceptional roles be overlooked, where they chose to nominate a somewhat lesser role from the same film?
Whatever skullduggery may have been at work, one wonders if the Academy voters didn't see through it or decide enough is enough. Not to take anything away from Edmond O'Brien for his very good role in "The Barefoot Contessa," but the voters may have picked him best supporting actor to snub the Academy for its choice of nominees – or lack of some obviously deserving nominees in this category.
Bur for "On the Waterfront," Paramount's "The Caine Mutiny" likely would have garnered three Oscars of its seven nominations in 1954. Bogart also starred in two other films that year – "The Barefoot Contessa" and "Sabrina," both of which did very well at the box office.
Incidentally, while "Waterfront" topped the Oscar honors, "Mutiny" beat it soundly at the box office. "Waterfront" tied for 14th at the box office in 1954. It had $4.5 million in ticket sales, with a budget just under $1 million. But "Mutiny" was a respectable fifth in gross box office for the year. It earned $21.8 million in the U.S. alone on an estimated $2 million budget. The top film for the year was "White Christmas," with a box office of $30 million. The others of the top five were "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea," with $28.2 million; "Rear Window" at $27.6 million; and "Demetrius and the Gladiator," at $26 million. Only one other film topped $10 million that year – "Vera Cruz," an MGM Western that grossed $11 million.