Moby Dick

This film & it's silent predecessor, "The Sea Beast"(1926), both starred John Barrymore. Some have said while the films' took liberties with Melville's text, the visualizations were superb on these two films, particularly the silent version. In fact John Barrymore created the very personification of Captain Ahab and to many was more of what Melville envisioned than Gregory Peck's fine but (Lincolnesque) Ahab 26 years later. The success of "The Sea Beast" was a huge hit for Warner Brothers in 1926 and when talkies arrived they, like other Hollywood studios ie MGM, carted out recent previous silent successes for sound remake. Douglas Fairbanks Jr once said that between "The Sea Beast" & "Moby Dick", that "The Sea Beast" was the superior movie and that he had seen it numerous times. Audiences agreed with Fairbanks Jr at the box office and this made the silent version of the Melville story, butchered though it may be, a likely candidate for an early talkie remake. Barrymore is obviously older in the talkie after having been more svelte in the silent The Sea Beast. His face is now beginning to take on it's 1930s jowlish appearance due to the effect of his continuing alcoholism. He had recently been very ill after a cruise with wife Dolores(who costarred in The Sea Beast)on their yacht. This film offers Barrymore an opportunity to use his marvelous voice to impart the character of Ahab but denies him the opportunity to get to do some really outlandish 'mad-man' makeup as he had done in "The Sea Beast" and other silent films lke "Dr Jekyll & Mr Hyde". The Moby Dick prop used in this remake is superior and way more convincing than in the silent film. But it's still not on a par with John Hustons 1956 whale prop filmed in believable muted colors.

Since this is a rearranging or reinventing of what Melville intended it would be fun to speculate if he would get a chuckle out of showing Ahab as a young man with both legs intact as well as having a female love interest. Purists don't like this tampering of Melville text but 1920s audiences were either ignorant or just didn't seem to mind good storytelling through the medium of motion pictures. Thus the part of Moby Dick concerning Ahab's dallying as a young man and his love for this girl Esther is enough to fill a prequel book or movie leading up to the famous encounter with the Great White Whale. The last part of the movie after they kill Moby Dick and Ahab lives and arrives back home to Esther is a far fetched sequel story in itself. I think Melville & everybody would disagree with the fact that Ahab lives but it would still be enough for a separate story and possibly leaving enough future story open for Ahab to perhaps hunt down and kill 'the son of Moby Dick'. In this age of Sequels & Prequels we live in , a surviving Ahab killing Moby's son is not pablum but perhaps just good fantasy story telling.

As others have mentioned, this is a very loose adaptation of the novel. The main reason to watch is Barrymore's performance as Ahab in this, the oldest surviving sound film in which he is featured. He transforms from a crusty lusty happy sailor into a very dark soul after Moby Dick bites off his right leg from below the knee. There is a scene relating to the cauterization of that wound that I find hard to watch today, so I can just imagine how 1930 audiences reacted. Ahab always fancied himself a bit of a ladies man and now he fears not so much how women in general will react to him but how his fiancée Faith(Joan Bennett) will react. His worst fears are realized when she first sees him after he loses his leg and she runs away screaming in horror. The complicating factor here is that Ahab's brother Derek considered Faith to be his girl before Ahab came into port and won her heart. Derek's pride was hurt when Faith picked Ahab over himself, and now he has an opportunity for revenge.

The precode elements in this filmed version include a heathen fellow whom Ahab becomes friends with and the fact that Ahab enlists the supernatural powers this fellow has via his gods on his worldwide quest to find and kill Moby Dick. You really have to marvel at the production values in this one. The sound mix is still Vitaphone - sound on disc - yet there are quite a few outdoor scenes and the film is not static at all. To put it mildly, the Warners were known for thrift, yet they took the time to make this one look good.

I don't understand the rather low rating on this one as I found it thoroughly entertaining and would recommend it for anyone who appreciates the early talkies and John Barrymore's acting talents.

Herman Melville lost his readers when his later novels like 'Moby Dick' became too philosophical and he died in obscurity in 1891. There was renewed interest and a more favorable re-evaluation of his work in the 1920's with the discovery and publication of the manuscript for 'Billy Budd.' Hollywood was not far behind when Warner Brothers released a bowdlerized version of 'Moby Dick' renamed as 'The Sea Beast' with their biggest star, John Barrymore. It's probably good that Melvile wasn't around to watch the plot changes and character additions such as Ahab's brother and fiancé. In 1930 WB decided to remake the silent with Barrymore, still a big star, but whose legendary looks were beginning to fade from years of boozing which is noticeable in comparing both versions. The same plot was used but this time audiences could hear his stage-trained voice that aided his characterization in the later mad scenes. Listen for his howling when his wounded leg is treated, Besides borrowing the plot from the silent version, you can also observe ocean footage with an obviously younger Barrymore spliced into the remake since Barrymore didn't repeat the same stunts for whatever reason. Notice the difference in the projection speeds of the old and new footage. This version will appeal to Barrymore fans and as an example of an early sound film that still used silent film techniques. It's safe to say the 1930 'Moby Dick' is more of a curio than a classic. Although the Gregory Peck-John Huston version has its detractors, at least it's faithful to Melville's novel than this, I'll admit as a Barrymore fan, amusing chowder with its good production values. And 1962's 'Billy Budd' also proved that a Melville story could be done faithfully without an additional love interest and comic relief .I would love to see the German version made at the same time. Anyone know where to find it?

Although this film does suffer from Warner Bros. attempt to sex up the story from Melville's meditative original, it has some interesting original qualities all its own. First, it looks great. The rich details of the port, seedy taverns and docks lent a realism which was a delight to behold in itself. Second, Ahab is merely a harpoonist first class(or whatever they were called) at the beginning of the story, rather than captain. I wasn't sure where he got the funds to buy the old whaling vessel, but he transforms himself into the Ahab of the book--an interesting character arc of its own. I would never have envisioned Ahab as the care-free rascal engaging in crow's nest acrobatics as he does in this movie, but it serves as a contrast to the bitter, obsessed tyrant he becomes later on. His final triumph over Moby Dick and return to his sweetheart make for typical Hollywood pablum, but what's new, even after 70-odd years? In addition, much of the story is so land-locked, I was getting antsy for them to get to sea and get it on with MD.

John Barrymore can act. His performance as Captain Ahab is the best I've ever seen. That might not be saying much because the novel "Moby Dick" despite being as popular as it is has only been brought to the screen four times and the first two, this version being the latter of the two are based on a stage play adaptation "The Sea Beast." This movie adds a love interest to the proceedings and changes and alters the ending and character relationships. Is it blasphemy? All I can say if you do not know the plot of Moby Dick and just recognize it as most people do as a story about a man chasing a whale, you'll love this version. Heck, I know the story and I loved it. I think it is much better than the more faithful Huston-Peck version or TNT-Patrick Stewart version. First for a 1930 version, it has aged well. The special effects including the sea sequences are better than some movies made today and almost equal to the "Perfect Storm", in certain places. Moby Dick itself is a sight to behold. It has to be at list twenty times the size of the shark in Jaws. It's a wonder of prop making indeed. Barrymore, I repeat his fabulous embodying the character completely. Well, this was his second time playing the character. All, in all, good Hollywood entertainment. 9/10.