Pretty Good

it is finally so absorbing because it plays like a lyrical road odyssey that’s also a detective story.

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Blistering performances.

This movie is an all time favorite for me. I first saw it at an age too young to remember and have watched it many times over(I have my own copy, of course). Its lack of special effects(unless the soap suds can be considered special), The feeling that you could be sitting in a Broadway playhouse even though its a movie, the way it kept my attention without the use of non stop action or violence(are soap suds violent?) and its many great lines make it dear to me. I often use the the James Cagney line "who did it?" at work when a snafu occurs and my "superiors" need a target for their fingers(even though this tends to make me a target)! a do a doo a doo a do do do

When one looks at the blue chip cast, the director and the basic setting, one feels that it cannot be bad and it could be something unique and special. Unfortunately, it falls well short of the high expectations. Paying tribute to the those who toiled in far-from-combat logistical assignments in WW2 was no doubt appreciated by the many who served in that capacity. At the same time, it makes it more difficult to find suspenseful plot material. That can be compensated for with human interactions and great acting. We don't quite get that either. There just is not much to the plot here. In a way, that is part of the point. These characters lives are not interesting and so they make small things into big things. They are trapped, have no other choice and have to create a facsimile of excitement where there is none. Yes, that point is made but it is not enough to sustain a full film and at times, it seems to stretch believability. It could have been a solid subplot in a film that included a lot more. But obviously, they wanted to drive that point home relentlessly even if you were ready for much more. Many scenes drag and again that might be to reinforce the point that these lives are not interesting. At times, the acting, especially Henry Fonda is like a sleep walk. Anything but exciting and not noteworthy either. You see what I am doing here, i.e. making the same point about the film, over and over again. Just as the movie does with its point. None of the other actors stand out. Cagney is the most inherently skillful of the bunch but his character is limited in scope so it is not the best example of his work. Powell is good but has little to do. He comes across as old and tired (again, is that the point?) I've never been big on Jack Lemon but he has had his great moments such as in "The Apartment" and "Missing". Why he received an academy award for this is beyond me. He is quite irritating here and not in a good way. The best picture nomination is a big stretch. Was 1955 really such a weak year? Were people in awe of the cast and John Ford and so eager to give tribute to the supporting cast in WW2? It is a full colour Cinemascope production but those features are NOT powerfully used here. After all, that would make the lives of these people seem interesting!

The action takes place in 1945, in the "waning days" of World War II. The "Mister Roberts" of the title is Lieutenant Douglas Roberts, cargo officer aboard the United States Navy cargo ship "Reluctant". The ship's work of keeping the Navy supplied is vital to the war effort and Roberts performs his duties conscientiously and well, but he is dissatisfied with life. This is partly due to the fact that he longs to see combat action, which he regards as a more exciting and honourable, if more dangerous, form of service, and the "Reluctant's" work keeps her well away from the actual fighting. It is also, however, partly due to a personality clash between Roberts and the ship's captain, Lieutenant Commander Morton.Roberts is not the only person with whom Morton clashes. Indeed, he seems to have a personality clash not only with Roberts but with the whole of his crew (and probably with most of the human race).He is an unpopular martinet, obsessed with maintaining strict discipline and imposing harsh punishments for minor infractions of the rules. He is also obsessed with trying to promote his own career by sucking up to the top brass; a palm tree presented to him by an Admiral as a reward for his crew's performance plays an important role in the plot. Roberts has made several requests for a transfer to another ship but all have been rejected after Morton refused to endorse them, not because he is desperate to keep Roberts as part of his crew but because he is anxious to do a bad turn to a man he dislikes. Much of Morton's dislike of Roberts is rooted in inverted snobbery; he is of working-class origin, and at one time worked as a waiter, and resents the educated middle classes, to which Roberts belongs, for the condescending way in which they treated him. In some ways, Morton reminded me of Humphrey Bogart's Captain Queeg in "The Caine Mutiny", another film from the mid fifties about a tyrannical wartime naval captain. The main difference is that "The Caine Mutiny" is a serious drama whereas "Mister Roberts" is, generally, a comedy. For most of its length the film is played for laughs with Morton as a figure of fun; the crew flirt with pretty nurses, run riot during a long- delayed shore leave on a Pacific island and spend most of their time trying to do as little work as possible and to get around their hated captain's regulations. One officer, Ensign Pulver, spends most of his time idling in his bunk. Only towards the end does the tone of the film become more serious. Henry Fonda, as Roberts, plays his role competently enough, but I still felt he was miscast. In 1955 he would have been 50 years old, too old for a junior officer, and I felt that the role should have gone to a significantly younger man. The studio (Warner Bros.) apparently would have preferred either William Holden (13 years younger) or Marlon Brando (19 years younger) but were overruled by director John Ford who insisted on Fonda. In the event this proved to be an error on Ford's part as he and Fonda repeatedly clashed on set, even though they had previously worked together on "Fort Apache". Ford also clashed with another of the film's stars, James Cagney. This was to be one of the reasons (health problems were another) why Ford was replaced as director midway through filming by Mervyn LeRoy. (Both men were credited). Jack Lemmon rather surprisingly received the 1955 Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor for his role as Pulver. I say "surprisingly" because, although there is nothing particularly bad about his performance, he was up against a much better one from Sal Mineo in "Rebel without a Cause". William Powell (acting in his last film, although he was to live for another three decades) is good as the kindly ship's doctor, but the best performance comes from Cagney as the bullying Morton, in my view better here than in "Love Me or Leave Me" for which he received an Oscar nomination in the same year. The film itself was nominated for "Best Picture", a nomination which looks odd when one considers that movies as great as "Rebel without a Cause", "East of Eden" and "Bad Day at Black Rock" were overlooked. This strikes me as an example of two potentially good films being incongruously joined together to produce, if not a bad one, then a mediocre one. It would have been quite possible to produce a good comedy about a wartime naval crew's battles against an unpopular captain. It would have been equally possible to produce a serious wartime drama about a naval officer who yearns for a transfer to an active combat role, despite the increased risk to his personal safety. Trying to combine both stories in a single tragi-comedy evidently proved more difficult. Comic relief can be an effective device in a predominantly serious play or film. The trouble with "Mister Roberts" is that it tries to do the opposite, introducing tragic relief into an essentially comic film, and the result is that the final scenes strike a jarring note indeed. 6/10

"Mr. Roberts" was originally a Broadway play and it was amazingly successful--running for well over 1000 performances. While today this may not seem so amazing, back in the late 40s and 50s, this was almost unheard of and kept its leading man, Henry Fonda, very busy. Oddly, however, when it came to filming this story, the studios fought the original director (John Ford) because they didn't want Fonda. While he was arguably too old for the part, the studio's first choice (Marlon Brando) seems today ludicrous. It's ironic that although Ford insisted on Fonda for the film, Ford himself would be taken off the project due to his totally unprofessional and sadistic treatment of Fonda.The film is set aboard a very unimportant cargo vessel stationed in the Pacific in the latter portion of WWII. It's Captain (James Cagney) is a dictatorial little tyrant who seems to enjoy making the crew miserable--probably due to his own inadequacies. His first officer is Mr. Roberts--a man frustrated to serve under such a man and because he desperately wants a transfer to a ship that has some chance of seeing action. Other important characters on the ship are Ensign Pulver (Jack Lemmon)--a wimpy upstart who talks big but refuses to do anything as well as the Doc (William Powell)--a sympathetic but passive ear for people on board. Pulver is clearly intended as comic relief and spends much of the film hiding from the Captain--who, after fourteen months aboard, doesn't even recognize Pulver as a member of his crew! And, for this memorable role, Lemmon received the Best Supporting Actor Oscar.As for the film, it lacks the excitement of many war films and often has to do with the mundane and petty activities on such a ship. In many ways, it plays like "Operation Petticoat"--but with even less action and a bit less comedy. It can also be compared to "The Caine Mutiny", though this film is definitely grittier and totally unfunny compared to "Mr. Roberts". In "Mr. Roberts", most of the film is a power struggle between this second in command and the Captain. The crew love Roberts and cannot stand the Captain--and it's easy to see why. The result is generally funny but with some very poignant moments (such as the very downbeat ending). Not a great film...but very, very good.Reading IMDb's trivia further solidifies in my mind that although John Ford was a masterful director, as a human being...he wasn't. If it's true that he slugged Henry Fonda, it would fit in with a lot of the information I read about him. Despite today being admired as a great man, he was a horrible person. Apparently, he was so nasty and dictatorial with his family as well. Try doing more than watching the glowing documentaries on the gifted but very flawed man--it makes for fascinating and rather sad reading.