Mark Turner
MOBY DICK is famed as one of the greatest and most difficult to read novels of all time. The tale of a man obsessed with the destruction of a legendary white whale that took his leg and left him scarred has long been considered an allegorical tale of good and evil, looks at the differences in class structure and discusses the existence of God. At 822 pages that's a lot to transfer to a movie that last only an hour and 56 minutes but somehow it was done.The story itself tells the tale of a young seaman named Ishmael (Richard Basehart) who signs aboard the ship Pequod, a whaling vessel run by one Captain Ahab (Gregory Peck). Ishmael is bunkmates his first night before they sail with a tattooed harpooner named Queequeg who has a set of shrunken heads on hand in the room. The two start off tentative but become fast friends as Queequeg teaches Ishmael the ways of the ship.Eventually Ishmael meets the famed Captain Ahab who promises his crew to return with their ship filled with whale oil and success for all on board. But Ahab is a strange sort who also has an ulterior motive. He doesn't just seek whales but one in particular, a white albino whale feared by all and known as Moby Dick. The desire to find the whale is one filled with revenge as it was Moby Dick who took the leg from Ahab on another voyage.The majority of the movie takes the time to set up the final confrontation between man and beast. Segments on dry land before the ship sets sail include a scene set in a church where the pastor preaches from the bow of a ship installed in the church. That pastor is played by Orson Welles who is nearly unrecognizable. The journey of the men, the harsh penalties for wrong doing and the long wait to find the whales they seek all take up a portion of the time.When the great white whale is finally found Ahab promises those who follow him untold fortunes if they will but help him destroy the whale. His obsession with the whale becomes their own and all seem to set aside not just the fortune in whale oil they've already filled the ship with but their own safety as well. Larger than the ship they sail on the white whale seems as determined to insure none of them leave alive and the battle between man and beast is on display.The movie is a mixed bag, entertaining for some and tedious for others. That it is a well-made film that tackled the chore of bringing the novel to life is worth noting and for that matter makes it one worth seeing as well. While the cast does a great job it is Peck who stands out as the near mad Ahab, determined to have his revenge at all costs.The effects for the time are amazing to witness and the sequences involving the whale are fantastic. Done before the days of CGI as it would be accomplished now, the movie here offers practical effects. The whale is a terrifying sight to behold and imagining what it would be like to confront it on its own ground would be something I for one would choose to avoid.Twilight Time is releasing the film in blu-ray format and as with all of their titles limiting it to just 3,000 copies. If interested make sure you pick yours up right away.
Teyss
It requires considerable audacity to adapt such a masterpiece of world literature, all the more so that the novel's quality greatly relies on its inimitable style: how can one transpose this on screen? John Huston succeeds by creating a distinctive visual style, cinematographically compensating what he loses on the literary side.Also, he builds a forceful story from beginning to end. The scenario was written by famous author Ray Bradbury together with Huston: a successful synergy between literature and cinema creators, despite tensions between the two men.*** WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS (INCLUDING OF THE ORIGINAL NOVEL) ***SCENARIOThe first quality of the movie is its efficient selection of scenes and dialogues. This is a real challenge: the novel is long, even after disregarding its "documentary" parts about whales, whaling, sea, etc. (cumulated, as many as 40 chapters out of 135). Hence the scenario had to make drastic selections. For instance, in the novel the Pequod comes across nine other ships (of which four encountered Moby Dick), while in the movie there are only two. Yet these represent the most striking meetings, with captains who respectively lost an arm and a son to the White Whale. Essential scenes are almost all present, without feeling like a "reader's digest" of the novel: the movie perfectly holds together, with a balanced pace.Also, the movie follows its own logic, which sometimes triggers a change in plot structure. Notably, Moby Dick first appears after 75 minutes (out of 110), which is early compared to the novel where he only appears in the last three chapters. This highlights the different internal logics of literature and cinema: in the novel, the late appearance is powerful because the White Whale remains a mystery until the very end. Herman Melville could compensate this delay with other scenes: encounters with ships who came across Moby Dick, dialogues and considerations about him, documentary-like descriptions of whales in general and that one in particular, etc. However, since the movie had to disregard most of these scenes, showing Moby Dick at the end only would have been anti-climatic.Conversely, the movie transfers the tempest to the penultimate scene while in the novel it is slightly before: cinematographically, it typically is a highly climatic scene, while literarily it is less so, especially considering that Melville uses the tempest as a counterpoint to other scenes.Last, the movie operates pertinent changes to the story, notably:Queequeg rallies from dying to save Ishmael from a dangerous fight (novel: rallies by his only willpower): it is visually more dramatic and credible;Ahab gives the gold coin to a shipmate (novel: first keeps it for himself): since the movie is shorter than the novel, it cannot emphasise Ahab's negative aspects, which are offset elsewhere in the novel;Starbuck wants to kill an awaken Ahab (novel: while he is sleeping): it is visually more dramatic and allows a following dialogue between the two men;Ahab's body is tied to Moby Dick at the end (novel: it is Fedallah's): visually, it is compelling since Ahab is a major character and his arm seems to incite his men to continue attacking the whale;After Ahab dies, Starbuck urges the men to continue attacking (novel: stays on the ship): it seems Ahab's lust for revenge has spread like a disease, even to rebellious Starbuck.IMAGEFirst, image has a special texture close to pastel, produced by adding black-and-white and silver layers on the usual colours. This has multiple impacts: it creates a unique tone, fit for adapting a masterpiece; it gives an "antique" feeling on line with the diegetic period; it looks like a painting, similar to the ones shown during the opening credits. All this has a purpose: "Moby Dick", amongst other things, is a tale where narrative distance is essential ("Once upon a time…"), which Melville masterly rendered by his unique style. Hence the movie re-activates the exceptional sensation generated by the novel: narration sublimes the fable; it creates a legend by itself. Additionally, shots are frequently saturated: close-ups, frame filled with faces, sails, ropes, etc. It is a paradox since most of the action occurs outside: broad shots are rare; we seldom see the sky. The movie opens in a forest and closes with a shot on a floating coffin. This saturation has multiple impacts:It aligns to the novel theme that the ship is a world in itself, with different ethnic origins and professions: we are immerged in the sailors' environment;It reinforces the fable-like feeling, since tales unfold at individual level ("They lived (un)happily ever after"). For instance the close shot on Moby Dick's eye echoes the one on Ahab's;It provides a baroque "thickness" to the opus, comparable to Melville's dense, ornate style.Last, acting perfectly illustrates the story. It is emphatic, on line with the novel's tone and themes. Most actors' physique and approach completely fit characters: we feel Ishmael, Queequeg, Stubb, Flask, etc. could not be different. Gregory Peck as Ahab is convincing, but probably not as much as Orson Welles would have been, who was initially envisaged for the role and eventually gave a memorable performance of Father Mapple.CONCLUSIONThe novel "Moby Dick" altogether encompasses adventure, epic, documentary, tale, parable, myth. The movie takes all these aspects on board, bar the documentary parts. Yet, it is not a masterpiece: it could have been a longer, full-scale epic three- or four-hour long, to better render the sheer magnitude of the novel and include some revealing scenes (for instance, other ship encounters or when sailors erotically wade in the oil). Also, the dated special effects somewhat reduce awesomeness: Moby Dick is not quite impressive and the ship sinking at the end looks like a model siphoned into a bathtub. Nonetheless, the movie remains a rare successful adaptation of an eminent classic.
grantss
Great adaptation of Herman Meville's classic novel. The story of Captain Ahab and his constant quest to hunt and kill the great white whale, Moby Dick.A timeless tale on the irrationality, unproductiveness and futility of revenge.Gregory Peck is excellent as Captain Ahab, and shows that he can act the villain. Excellent direction by John Huston - the pacing is perfect and the drama is built beautifully. Good special effects, for 1956. The dialogue, especially Ahab's, is a bit overly melodramatic, but that would be the only flaw.
bankofmarquis
After seeing the trailer for Ron Howard's upcoming flick, IN THE HEART OF THE SEA, I had an urge to rewatch a movie that I thought was a classic from my childhood - John Huston's 1956 production of MOBY DICK.Boy, I'm glad I did.It is always a worry when I go to revisit a movie that I fondly remember from my childhood. I was trying to remember the last time I saw this movie and I think it has been at least 30 years. Did this movie hold up? Did it age well?I am glad to say the answer to both questions is YES!Huston's production has aged, for me, like a fine wine. I think that some of this is because it seems to me that he took the dialogue right from Melville's novel, which means the dialogue was dated back in 1956. It is not anymore dated now, it just seems like it was dialog that was actually spoken back when the activities of this movie took place.Huston's direction is strong and sure handed. He, obviously, had a vision and drove hard on this vision. I particularly liked his use of pastel colors (especially in the background), it gave this movie a washed out, old look to begin with and that look has aged well. True, the special effects are dated, but to me, that just adds to the old time charm.I've heard negative comments on Gregory Peck's performance and I just don't agree. I know Peck, himself, said he wasn't old enough to play Captain Ahab. I disagree. He commands the screen in every scene he is in. He is someone that I believe these other sailors would follow no matter what. Richard Basehart makes a fine narrator to this story. His Ishmael is an observer of the events that he is recording. This made sense to me. Special mention should be made of Orson Welles' 5 minute scene as Father Mapple. He gives a sermon that shows the strength of Welles as a performer. It was fun to watch it.8 (out of 10) stars and you can take that to the Bank (of Marquis).
