Without revealing spoilers (the ending spoils things quite well enough all on its own), let's just say you'd be much better off reading the 1954 novel "The Caine Mutiny" instead...
This film adaptation attempts to modernize the book's story, which was originally set in WWII era, Pacific Theater, whereas the film is current time, Middle Eastern seas. The modernization itself wasn't really the problem per se, but it definitely didn't help that some of the events differed too much to properly illustrate the characters' mental states and reasonings behind their actions/behaviors.
The main problem with the adaptation arises from the fact that it only covers the court martial trial, cutting out huge chunks of the story both before and after the trial in the book...
This robs the film of the contextual explanations necessary to fully make sense of the ending; which, in the novel, are revealed by the cut story sections, as the reader is led to compare and contrast the different events that occur for the key characters (Queeg, Keefer, Maryk, etc).
Without the rest of the book's story, the conclusions drawn by and the actions of defense attorney Greenwald (in the film's ending) seem way out of line with what appears to have been the truth, as is revealed to viewers during the film version's trial-only storyline.
The result, in my opinion, is an ending that feels confused and disjointed; and ultimately stains an otherwise great courtroom procedural drama...
This film adaptation attempts to modernize the book's story, which was originally set in WWII era, Pacific Theater, whereas the film is current time, Middle Eastern seas. The modernization itself wasn't really the problem per se, but it definitely didn't help that some of the events differed too much to properly illustrate the characters' mental states and reasonings behind their actions/behaviors.
The main problem with the adaptation arises from the fact that it only covers the court martial trial, cutting out huge chunks of the story both before and after the trial in the book...
This robs the film of the contextual explanations necessary to fully make sense of the ending; which, in the novel, are revealed by the cut story sections, as the reader is led to compare and contrast the different events that occur for the key characters (Queeg, Keefer, Maryk, etc).
Without the rest of the book's story, the conclusions drawn by and the actions of defense attorney Greenwald (in the film's ending) seem way out of line with what appears to have been the truth, as is revealed to viewers during the film version's trial-only storyline.
The result, in my opinion, is an ending that feels confused and disjointed; and ultimately stains an otherwise great courtroom procedural drama...