On the Waterfront

I know it's a classic independent of its award-winning status. I know it's on dozens of "best of all time" lists, from the AFI to Sight & Sound to iMDB, and how it's enshrined in the Library Of Congress. I know you're looking at the star rating and thinking I'm gonna go into some "WeLl AcKsHuAlLy" smartest-guy-in-the-room spiel about how this is really a bad movie. And I'm not. I was just bored by it. Really, profoundly, deeply bored. I won't deny the acting is very good. I won't deny that the themes it explores -- finding one's self-worth, standing up for something bigger than yourself -- are worth exploring in film, and done so admirably here. I'm not even bothered by director Elia Kazan's obvious right-wing politics (the dude was a narc for the House Un-American Activities Committee, an amusing irony for a movie that hinges on the perils of being a narc) being all over this movie. Don't get me wrong, they're gross and stupid and Kazan was a hypocrite and a scumbag and his movie is a celebration of being those, but my score isn't even about that. I was just bored. I was bored by the corny dialogue that felt like a parody of itself. I was bored by the repetition in the story's framework: something bad happened, someone should do something, someone stands up and gets knocked down, repeat. I was bored by every character feeling one-dimensional except Terry; the true-north good guy Irish priest, the slimy mob boss Johnny, the dull as a block of wood enforcer, the helpless damsel/love interest. I was just bored. And I don't see how this not only got nominated and won, but Rear Window -- a far superior movie with more interesting themes and two excellent, well-rounded performances in Jimmy Stewart and Grace Kelly -- got ignored entirely. So, yeah. There ya go. Not bad, not good, just there.