Tag: Law

“The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial” (1988 & 2023)

EmmaLeave a comment

The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial (1988) starring Eric Bogosian, Jeff Daniels, & Brad Davis

This TV movie is an adaptation (originally staged as a play) of the court-martial segment from the novel The Caine Mutiny. The play premiered at the Plymouth Theatre in NYC on January 20, 1954. The original cast included Henry Fonda (Barney Greenwald), John Hodiak (Lt. Maryk) and Lloyd Nolan (Lt. Cdr. Queeg). James Garner appeared as a member of the court; he was the understudy to Hodiak. The play ran for 415 performances, closing on January 22, 1955. I know what some of y’all are thinking: there used to be smart movies on TV!? The script is V literate and gives most of us (civilians) insight into Naval protocol, attitudes, traditions, and conflicts btwn. personalities. As one viewer commented: “we see the usual [Robert] Altman technique of a lot of side conversations that are barely heard and added noises to make the film seem more naturalistic.”

Lt. Greenwald (Eric Bogosian- a theater actor/police capt. on L&O: CI) as the defense attorney sustains ambivalence; he does a good job, exuding caged-in intensity. As the defendant, Lt. Steven Maryk (Jeff Daniels) must decide whether his lawyer is capable or unreliable. The prosecutor, Lt. Cmdr. John Challee, is played by Peter Gallagher (a theater actor; D.A. on L&O: SVU). Lt. Cmdr. Queeg (Brad Davis) may be mentally ill; I hadn’t seen Davis before (he died at age 41 in 1991). Unlike in the remake (below), ethnicity/religion is mentioned (Greenwald is Jewish).

[1] Each “author” of the Caine mutiny is a plausible bad guy who lends slightly different emphases to instigators who escape blame for what they goad others into doing.

Davis’s Queeg raises the intriguing possibility that an officer might be flat-out nutty in a way difficult for psychiatrists to detect but easy for an attorney to expose. […] I agree that the caricature of the psychiatrist is hokey.

[2] …it is taught and claustrophobic for most of the story – being set in the court-martial room (a bit of the end of the play is at the post-trial acquittal party). The results is a different telling of the story, and one relying on the audience’s own evaluation of the truth or lies of the different witnesses.

…Queeg is first taken down a peg by Greenwald (Eric Bogosian) not on issues of fitness of command, but on his honesty.

-Excerpts from IMDb reviews

The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial (2023) starring Kiefer Sutherland, Jason Clarke, & Jake Lacy

Some of y’all (cinephiles) may’ve heard re: this one, as it was the last film directed by William Friedkin (who passed away at age 86 in AUG 2023). Lance Riddick (Capt. Luther Blakely) also passed away before the movie’s release; he’s a strong screen presence and gives a fine performance. For insurance purposes, Guillermo del Toro was the back-up director. Friedkin completed filming in 14 days (wow); he was given just 15 days by the studio! This movie (which was released on VOD) has well-known faces, as well as some newcomers; I saw it 1st on a flight last Thanksgiving.

Queeg (Kiefer Sutherland) here is much older (unlike in the original play by Herman Wouk); he has a constrained way of speaking here. The defense counsel, Greenwald (Jason Clarke- a prolific Aussie character actor), hasn’t practiced law much; he is the most fleshed out character. The no-nonsense prosecutor, Challee, is played by a young/Latina woman (Monica Raymund). Maryk is played by boy-next-door actor Jake Lacy (w/ big eyes/open face); he has lately done more on streaming shows than movies. I was a BIT disappointed, as I wanted to know more re: Keefer (Lewis Pullman- son of Bill Pullman; recently seen in Top Gun: Maverick). Keefer ended up writing a novel (based on this incident); it’s revealed that he influenced Maryk’s decisions.

[1] The original Caine Mutiny was a Humphrey Bogart led movie from 1954, one that I love and sticks in my memory very well. This takes notes form that movie, but is not really a remake, just an intensified treatise on the ending with the court martial hearing drug out and the final denouncement of the young opportunist shown his comeuppance. Anyone familiar with the source material, movie or book it was based on would know this. […]

The underlying theme of The Caine Mutiny story is not “wow that guy went crazy” – it’s that well, even the best among us can crack. There is no villain, it is all perspective, and even though a wrong decision was made by Caine himself the question is were there ulterior motives involved by other people.

[2] Yes, the ending could have been lengthened and strengthened a bit to really let the viewer know, but then again, here we have a Captain that does some outlandish things, but was that enough to justify a mutiny? You have to really decide the verdict. […]

Some people may have problems with the way the Navy is portrayed in this film, in that they don’t understand that as the captain of a US Navy vessel, one is completely and ultimately responsible for every little thing that happens on or to that boat, good or bad, and that as a result, discipline, rank, and orders must be maintained…

-Excerpts from IMDb reviews

“The Caine Mutiny” (1954) starring Humphrey Bogart, Jose Ferrer, Van Johnson, & Fred MacMurray

EmmaLeave a comment

When a U.S. Naval captain shows signs of mental instability that jeopardizes the ship, the first officer is urged to consider relieving him of command. -Synopsis

During WWII, the crew of a ship in the Pacific fleet experiences something unlike any event experienced by the US Navy before. The ship’s captain, Lt. Cmdr. Queeg (Humphrey Bogart), is removed from command by his Executive Officer, Lt. Maryk (Van Johnson), in an act of mutiny. As the trial of the mutineers unfolds, we realize that Queeg is mentally unstable. The Navy must decide: Was the Caine mutiny a criminal act, or was it an act of courage to save a ship from destruction? If you’re a fan of A Few Good Men (1992) and/or Crimson Tide (1995), then you should check out this classic film.

As one viewer noted: “in the 1950’s, films about the problems that you encounter during wartime (that have nothing to do with the enemy itself) began to appear.” WWII threw all kinds of people together; here we find career Navy, along w/ the other men drafted into the service b/c of war (disrupting their plans, BUT they had to make the best of it). Queeg is a petty jerk everybody ends up hating; he’s a compulsive authoritarian who sticks to the minute details of the rules (to the detriment of the ship). This film received 7 Oscar noms, incl. one for Bogie. His performance in the (climactic) courtroom scene even captivated the crew; after filming was done, they burst into applause!

A romantic subplot which frames the story w/ a young couple (played by newbies Robert Francis and May Wynn) distracts attention from the real story. I’m sure this was written to appeal to women and younger viewers; too bad it wasn’t effective. Sadly, Francis (who plays college grad/pampered son- Ensign Keith) had an untimely death about a year after this movie was released! I’m usually NOT impressed by Johnson, BUT this role suits him V well. I recently learned that Johnson was one of the (closeted) gay stars from the “golden age of Hollywood.” The actor I most enjoyed watching (aside from Bogie) was MacMurray; he plays Lt. Keefer (a writer in civilian life/reluctant naval officer). As the defendant’s assigned lawyer, Lt. Greenwald (Ferrer), gets to show his stuff in the last 30 mins. of the film; being recently injured, he is (finally) able to practice law. Lt. Cmdr. Challee (E.G Marshall- a prolific character actor) is a worthy counterpoint for Greenwald, as he is an experienced lawyer/no-nonsense proponent of Naval protocol.

[1] Having served in the U.S. Navy for 32 years, I can accurately state that many of the characters and situations depicted in Wouk’s book and in the film are all very real...

[2] The Caine Mutiny works well on so many levels. It is a great insight into navy life, a first rate legal drama, and an unforgettable character study. […]

Bogart spectacularly conveys the sheer complexity of his character: the quirks, the devotion to duty, the demand for perfection, the refusal to accept his own fallibility. 

[3] Bogart is brilliant, giving the greatest performance of his career, his quirky mannerisms and tortured demeanor contrasting starkly with his usual roles. MacMurray is superb as the glib slippery novelist who must eventually deal with his own cowardice, more damning than Queeg’s because of his intelligence and insight.

-Excerpts from IMDb reviews

“Anatomy of a Fall” (2023) starring Sandra Huller, Swann Arlaud, & Milo Machado Graner

Emma1 Comment

SPOILER ALERT: Don’t read this post if you haven’t seen, or don’t want to know, details from the movie Anatomy of a Fall (available to rent/buy on VOD).

A woman is suspected of her husband’s murder, and their blind son faces a moral dilemma as the main witness. -Synopsis

Samuel Maleski (Samuel Theis) is found dead in the snow outside the isolated chalet (in the French Alps) where he lived w/ his wife, Sandra Voyter (Sandra Huller), and their partially-sighted 11 y.o. son Daniel (Milo Machado Graner). An investigation leads to the conclusion of “suspicious death,” as it’s impossible to know for sure whether he took his own life or was killed. Sandra’s old friend, Vincent Renzi (Swann Arlaud), is her lead defense attorney. Sandra is indicted, so we follow her trial, where her marriage is dissected. The French legal system is quite different from our own! Daniel is caught in the middle- btwn the trial and life w/ his mother.

When we started working on this film, it was like a genre film. We have so many thrillers on all the platforms and I wanted to do something different. The original idea was to have a film where there was a lack of visual elements and images, unlike films which depict a trial where there are all sorts of flashbacks and you see the life of the couple – that might have been easier – I could have shown their lives in that manner. But everything is based on absence. The child doesn’t see very well and there aren’t many images, yet you have this loud, loud music which is a focal point for the film. Whence the idea of placing the spectator in a position like the child or the jurors where there’s a lack of facts and evidence – everything is interlinked. This delirium springs from the fact that there’s so much that’s missing. -Justine Triet, director/co-writer (Cannes 2023)

Sandra [testifying in court]: Sometimes a couple is kind of a chaos and everybody is lost. Sometimes we fight together and sometimes we fight alone, and sometimes we fight against each other, that happens.

The screenplay was written by Triet (who started her career in documentaries) and her life partner, Arthur Harari. They have 2 kids together and started writing this movie in the COVID-19 pandemic (when under lockdown in Paris). This movie is a blend of domestic and legal drama- something which we (Americans) don’t often see. Triet explained that she was influenced by the Amanda Knox case, esp. how the young American woman was treated by the media. She noted that there was a LOT of misogyny in the way the press covered that case.

Sandra [to her son, Daniel]: My love. I just want you to know that I’m not that monster, you know. Everything you hear in the trial it’s just.. it’s twisted. It wasn’t like that.

Anatomy of a Fall (which is in English and French) won the Palm d’Or at Cannes. Language plays an important part here. We notice that English is the language that Samuel (a Frenchman) and Sandra (German) have in common. Daniel can speak English and French well; it’s easier for adolescents to pick up languages. At times, Sandra is at a loss for the appropriate French words in court, so she requests to speak in English (which is allowed).

The lead character is NOT always likeable and remains somewhat mysterious; some may wonder IF Sandra could be guilty. IMO- no- she was innocent (though that’s NOT the only focus of the filmmakers). In the middle of the movie, there is a flashback to a fight btwn her and Samuel. Some viewers said they were shocked by how realistic it seemed! As some of you may’ve guessed, Triet said that she was inspired by the fight btwn. the characters played by Adam Driver and Scarlett Johansson in Marriage Story (2019). Sandra was more successful as a writer than her husband; Samuel earned money by teaching. Daniel (a V smart/sensitive boy) was closer to his father than his mother; his loyal dog is his constant companion.

The film moves towards this point, where it’s the child who becomes the centerpiece of the trial. What does the film talk about? It talks about a child – he carries around a very heavy weight. He’s very close to his mother, he trusts her and then there are cracks that appear and he effectively finds himself in the position of the jury; in other words having to decide whether his mother is guilty or not. We’ll never know. We’ll never know whether his testimony is true or not. I was deeply touched to see this kind of situation and it’s particularly moving as a child. I think this is the first film where I’ve really given the floor to a child. The whole of the film moves towards this point. -Triet, when asked re: the testimony of the son in the trial (Cannes 2023)

I’d heard positive buzz about this movie for several mos. before I saw it (by renting on Amazon Prime). I enjoyed it a LOT, as it subverted my expectations; IMO it’s one of the best movies of 2023! The acting is terrific, incl. by Graner and the dog (Huller’s pet IRL). Huller is garnering attention for Zone of Interest, as that film was also released in 2023. The advocat general (Antoine Reinertz) is a tough prosecutor; he has a quick wit. Some critics said that they loved to hate him! Arlaud (keeps things grounded/has charm) has the kind of (angular) face which looks different from different angles; he and Huller have great chemistry. At a recent awards event, Triet joked w/ a journo and Graner: “Doesn’t he look like a baby Adam Driver?” Such a cute moment! Check this movie out for yourself, IF you haven’t done so already.

Spoiler-Free Reviews of Three 2023 Movies

EmmaLeave a comment

Killers of the Flower Moon

In 1920s Oklahoma, a simple-minded/former WWII soldier, Ernest Burkhart (Leonardo DiCaprio), comes under the influence of his powerful/businessman uncle, William Hale (Robert DeNiro). In this area, the members of the Osage nation are V wealthy, as they hold land rights (to where oil was discovered). While working as a driver, Ernest meets and courts Mollie (Lily Gladstone), a young/single Osage woman who comes from a family of several sisters. Ernest and Mollie marry and have children, though their life together is NOT always smooth. In time, we learn of (mysterious) deaths of several Osage; the (newly formed) FBI sends agents to investigate, incl. Tom White (Jesse Plemons).

IF the 3 hrs. and 26 mins. run time doesn’t put you off, then you should check it out. I feel V important events, issues, and themes are discussed. I saw it w/ 2 of my friends a few weeks after it was released. I think younger (under 25) audiences could have a tough time, as they have shorter attention spans. Modern viewers are also NOT used to such long takes of scenes, some of which could’ve been edited further. IF you’re sensitive to blood, racist/sexist language, and violence, this MAY be difficult to watch; director Martin Scorsese films don’t shy away from these elements.

DiCaprio (who made a salary of $30M) is wearing a downturned (frowning) expression w/ his brows knit tightly; some critics commented that Ernest is working hard to understand what’s going on (as he’s NOT V smart). Gladstone is prominent in the 1st half of the film; she can express a LOT while speaking little. DeNiro plays the affable (unofficial) patriarch; he speaks the Osage language and knows the culture. I thought that most of the supporting (mostly NOT famous) characters did a good job and fit their roles; the standout was Louis Cancelmi (as several critics have noted). The production design was V impressive; you can tell that a LOT of research went into this production.

I was disappointed that the FBI storyline was NOT as developed much as I expected. The FBI came in ONLY in the last 1/3 of the movie; Tatanka Means (son of activist/actor Russell Means) is the young/handsome Native American agent. As some of you MAY know, the (original) script had DiCaprio playing Tom White and focused more on the law & order angle. When Scorsese decided to focus more on Ernest and Mollie’s story, Plemons was brought on to play Agent White (who became a supporting character). There are some V effective shots which will stay in your mind; we wouldn’t expect less from Scorsese. What did you think of the ending? I think it was an unusual directorial decision. This story did get me emotional in the final moments.

Napoleon

I went to see this movie on a TUES about one week after it was released; I ONLY paid $7 for the ticket (at Regal). I didn’t have high hopes, BUT was curious to see what director Ridley Scott had done. I was disappointed to see that French actor, Tahar Rahim (who plays aristocrat/general Paul Barras), was ONLY in the first 1/3 of the story. English actress Vanessa Kirby (Josephine) is a strong onscreen presence; I wanted to know a BIT more about her. As for Joaquin Phoenix in the lead role, I was NOT impressed by the characterization (we know he is a strong actor). He speaks w/ an American accent and is now close to 50; Napoleon accomplished much as a young man. Napoleon often looks tired, annoyed, and petulant; we see him planning battles (in ONLY one scene) though he was famed for strategy. As one critic said, this movie shows us “the greatest hits” (just 3 of his battles). As for these few action scenes, I thought they were done quite well. Some of the background CGI is NOT that realistic. At the end, I saw that the (small) audience I went to see it w/ was NOT impressed. Scott’s work in the past 15 yrs. has been hit or miss.

Oppenheimer

I went to see this movie the day after it was released, as I had time off that afternoon; the (IMAX) theater was full w/ viewers of ALL ages. I’m sure MANY of you have heard/read re: this movie, so I won’t give a synopsis. I was glad to see that Cillian Murphy (an Irish actor I admire) got a starring role; he is now 47 y.o. (so it’s high time). He is up to the challenge of carrying the film; there are MANY close-ups of his face. My audience seemed to enjoy the scenes w/ Murphy and Matt Damon (in the 1st act); they have good onscreen chemistry and quippy banter. Even more so than w/ KOTFM, we see supporting actors who each get a chance to shine. The standouts among the scientists are two Americans: David Krumholtz (who started out in teen comedies) and Benny Safdie (also an indie director). There are some cameos which MAY surprise viewers.

Unfortunately, we don’t get a LOT of character development for the 2 main women- Kitty (Emily Blunt) and Jean (Florence Pugh). Blunt gets more to do than Pugh; as some critics said in the past, director Christopher Nolan doesn’t focus much on women. Another issue is the (incessantly overdramatic) music which I did NOT appreciate! There are a few shots (whether practical or special effects) that were V impressive. When we get to the last act, it looked like people were NOT as engaged. This is the section where we see more of Robert Downey, Jr; his young aide is played by Alden Ehrenreich (who was the co-lead in Fair Play). It was a V long movie, BUT I was mostly interested in the material. Nolan isn’t much for emotion (as y’all cinephiles know), BUT he does have an unique viewpoint here.

#Noirvember: “Abandoned” (1949) starring Dennis O’Keefe, Gale Storm, Jeff Chandler, & Raymond Burr

EmmaLeave a comment

NO NAME FOR HER BABY…only a PRICE! -A tagline for the movie

This B-movie delves into an unusual/sensitive topic for its day: black market baby adoptions. A young woman, Paula Considine (Gale Storm), from a small-town comes to a police station in L.A. She is looking for info on her missing younger sister; a local newspaper reporter, Mark Sitko (Dennis O’Keefe), offers to help. There is a burly/tall man, Kerric (Raymond Burr), lurking in the shadows and following Paula. Her sister’s dead body is in the morgue; there is evidence that she recently gave birth! Though it looks like suicide to the coroner, Paula insists there must’ve been foul play. Also, what happened to the baby?

Mark [to Kerric]: You couldn’t sleep, so you decided to take your gun out for a walk.

I saw this film (free on YouTube) last week; it moves along quickly, w/ snappy dialogue, and a variety of characters. Several of these actors went on to long/successful careers in TV. Burr (best known as Perry Mason) is working for the main baddie, a matronly “society lady” w/ a cane, Mrs. Donner (Marjorie Rambeau). In one tense scene, Burr fights one of her henchmen, played by Mike Mazurki (another “heavy” often in noirs). As for the good guys, Major Ross of The Salvation Army (Jeanette Nolan- looking FAB after 40), is an ally to pregnant women w/ no place to turn. Mark’s handsome/cop friend is Chief McCrae (Jeff Chandler); I hadn’t seen this actor before, BUT learned that he became a TV star.

[1] This excellent thriller deals with the sale of stolen babies by baby broker racketeers. It is thus more relevant to today, when this problem is much more widespread, than it was in 1949. The plot is sound, the script first rate, and the acting is extremely good. […]

A sinister sub-plot about the father of the two sisters making his daughter get rid of her illegitimate baby seems to have been cut because it was too shocking, but enough of it survives to show that it was clearly once there.

[2] I loved the camerawork… particularly in the early portions of the film. The angles and shadows are great… and very moody. I also loved the incredibly violent and gritty ending, where evil clearly is punished big time! Overall, a well written and acted film that never is dull and is well worth your time.

[3] Despite an obviously low budget, “Abandoned” benefits from location filming, which adds a documentary touch, enhanced by narration that implies some truth to the story. A fine cast of “B” players, memorable photography, and steady direction by Joe Newman, a veteran of modestly budgeted second features, together produced an entertaining, engaging film noir that is well worth catching.

-Excerpts from IMDb reviews