It may favor spectacle in place of the deeper themes in Herman Melville's novel, but John Huston's Moby Dick still makes for a grand movie adventure.
Sloppy execution lysergic-acid 22 November When I first heard people criticizing this movie, I wrote them off as the typical whiners that accompany the release of any outrageously far-fetched monster movie. Of course whales can't grow to the size 2 football stadiums, and of course they can't snatch helicopters out of the air--that's why it's fiction!
It's precisely this outrageous scale and the novelty of seeing the impossible that makes these films so entertaining and thrilling.
Sci-fi B movies have their place in my heart. And I actually quite enjoyed Peter Benchley's "The Beast" and its epic portrayal of a giant man-eating squid. That was a made-for-TV movie from ; fourteen years later, we have " But although CGI has made huge leaps in the intervening years and no doubt costs far less these days, Moby Dick's special effects are still laughably bad in comparison.
They simply come off as cheap and very rushed.
To be fair, the whale itself, although a bit too shark-like IMO as seen in the movie posterisn't all that bad. It's not the best CG ever, but it's respectable for a low-budget movie.
However, much of the supporting special effects used throughout the movie is very poorly done, with no attention to detail.
For example, we've all seen underwater explosions on TV and in movies. When something blows up under water, the explosion has a very distinct look: Not in Moby Dick though In Moby Dick, the underwater explosions are simply dry explosions taken from stock footage sloppily overlaid on top of a poorly rendered underwater scene.
The result is an entirely unrealistic effect that precludes audience engagement in the story. I mean, there are Xbox games that have more convincing underwater action sequences.
Another example of the sloppy effects in this movie involves a scene in which a dead "school of squid" are supposedly being shown floating to the ocean surface--that's what is described in the dialog at least.
But instead we're shown a shot of the ocean overlaid with blurry blown-up photos of 2 enormous-sized squids. And not only are the squids very poorly pasted into the scene imagine a really bad Photoshop jobbut as the camera pans being shot from a moving helicopterthe squid cut- outs move completely out of sync with the background the ocean surface.
No attempt is made to synchronize the squid overlays with the camera movements or the corresponding perspective changes. And it's scenes like these that make the film look so amateurish and cheesy. You might expect this from a local cable access program or a Conan O'Brien skit, but not a feature film.
Sadly, as the movie intensifies and the stunts get ever more outrageous, the effort made by the filmmakers and special effects team seem to decrease.
By the end of the movie, when the audience ought to be sitting on the edge of their seats, gripped by the explosive action as they approach the big finale, they're instead completely detached from the on-screen action, the sloppiness of the film having worn away any suspension of disbelief they had.
So when the big finale does come, they're no longer emotionally invested in the characters or plot enough to care. And for good measure, a few peripheral military characters also deliver some spectacularly bad acting during their few seconds on screen. This is just a really shoddily made movie.
There's no other way to put it. However, this movie tries to take itself seriously and aims to be a big action monster movie, but the production team clearly weren't willing to make the effort for it to work.
I don't believe in such a thing as being untalented, just laziness and sloppiness. And that's what killed this movie. The sad part is, most of the problems don't seem to be budget related, and the individuals involved are clearly capable of producing quality work if they simply paid more attention to detail and set higher standards.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.Previous film versions of Moby Dick insisted upon including such imbecilities as romantic subplots and happy endings. John Huston's Moby Dick remains admirably faithful to its source%. Book Review: Moby Dick Posted on July 15, October 18, in Book reviews, Books by Scott Berkun Years ago, when I decided to become a writer, I decided I should read the classics I’d managed to dodge in school.
Moby-Dick is a book you come back to, again and again, to find new treasures and delights, a storehouse of language, incident and strange wisdom. Moby-Dick is – among some fierce contenders which will appear later in this series – the great American novel whose genius was only recognised long after its author was dead.
Captain Ahab is among literature's most tragic figures--the peg-legged whaler who forever bears the physical and psychological scars of his first encounter with nature's leviathan, Moby Dick.
On May 19, Hallmark Home Entertainment will release the latest retelling of Melville's classic novel on videocassette. Moby-Dick; or, The Whale is a novel by American writer Herman Melville, published in during the period of the American Renaissance.
Sailor Ishmael tells the story of the obsessive quest of Ahab, captain of the whaler Pequod, for revenge on Moby Dick, the white whale that on the previous whaling voyage bit off Ahab's leg at the knee/5.
Previous film versions of Moby Dick insisted upon including such imbecilities as romantic subplots and happy endings. John Huston's Moby Dick remains admirably faithful to its source%.