User Reviews

This is a remake of the 1926 film THE SEA BEAST. John Barrymore stars in both of them. The movie is actually based on a stage play which explains a great deal about why the plot was changed so, dare I say it?, dramatically. Herman Melville contributed the title and a studio scriptwriter added everything else.

48 year old Barrymore plays 20-something Ahab Seeley, a happy go lucky sailor who is also a hard drinking woman chaser. We first see him doing acrobatic stunts from the crows nest of a ship (John is doubled by action film star Richard Talmadge). Ahab also has a brother named Derek (Lloyd Hughes) who stays on land and works in the local church. Plot complication 1: Ahab and Derek both fall for the same girl, the ministers daughter Faith (Joan Bennett). She rejects dull brother Derek for the more adventurous Ahab. ("But I'll always be putting out to sea." he says. "And I'll always be waiting for you." she says. Isn't love wonderful?)

Plot complication 2: On his next voyage Ahab gets his leg bitten off by (wait for it) a giant white whale named Moby Dick. At least they used something from the novel! Plot complication 3: When Faith Mapple sees Ahab with his peg leg she screams and runs off. This drives Ahab insane and he swears vengeance on the white whale.

Years pass and Moby continues to elude Ahab. He buys his own boat and becomes a skipper even more hated than Captain Bligh. His crew jumps ship leaving only his brutal First Mate Stubbs (Walter Long) and Ahab's only true friend Queequeg (Noble Johnson). Stubbs visits bars and brothels to shanghai a crew and accidentally grabs Derek Seeley who apparently has been drinking his troubles away since Faith rejected him (hmmm, should I make that plot complication 4? Oh never mind). During a storm at sea Derek tries to kill his brother but loyal Queequeg breaks his back. Oh and what about Moby Dick? Don't worry we haven't forgotten him; he finally shows up again so we can tie up all these loose ends. What happens? I won't spoil it for you; this movie runs now and then on TCM so you can "sea" for yourself (bad pun, I admit it).

John Barrymore overacts but what else is new? He loved his "mad" scenes and this time he gets to be looney for half the picture. After he goes insane his character begins to resemble Mr. Hyde, whom he played 10 years earlier. He even seems to be trying to re-create the Hyde character by stomping around the deck in a top hat and flowing cloak.

Noble Johnson is surprisingly good as Queequeg. He is constantly beating a drum to placate the sea gods and he is fiercely loyal to his captain. (When this movie was remade in 1956 German actor Friedrich Ledebur played the role and the character was expanded even more.) Lloyd Hughes is best remembered (by me anyway) for the 1925 version of THE LOST WORLD where he played reporter Ed Malone. Joan Bennett had a long career in movies and TV and is probably best remembered now for the terror/soap opera "Dark Shadows". Watch for silent film actor Nigel de Brulier as Elijah, the mad "prophet" who predicts trouble for Ahab early in the film.

I like this movie, now I wish I could see that 1926 version. Anyone know if it still exists?

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?

This is a film that does not revolve solely around the mad and popular figure of Captain Ahab trying to mercilessly hunt down the white whale Moby Dick, who mercilessly took his leg off. It does not follow the entire storyline from the original, Herman Melville novel. As Hollywood has done with many films over the years, they attempted to "beef up" the story by adding in newer subplots, which unfortunately developed to become the actual plot itself and forced out the more interesting points from the original novel into strictly subplots. Mostly concerning Moby Dick himself. While the title takes its name from him and he is in a way, the most driving part of the story, the film does not focus very much on the whale. Not even indirectly for a long time. And Hollywood has thrown in another love story in order to attempt to add more drama and more improved effect into the plot of the film.

While it is probably not the best film adaptation of "Moby Dick", this 1930 verison isn't a total failure by all accounts. It's flawed, it's a tad bit underdeveloped, but it is also a great late-night flick when you want to just sit back and watch a story about adventures at sea and at the coast. And that's what this film is. It's a sea story. It's not all about a madman hunting a giant whale, it's almost as if that whale never existed. It just revolves around Captain Ahab as he deals with his crew, life at sea, and so on and so forth. And by working in this sort of fashion, it's very well-done. While I personally wanted to see more of Moby Dick himself, this film was done well for its time and age. Maby the whale was shown on such a limited basis because of the infancy of special effects at the time.

Bottom line, the 1930 version of "Moby Dick" will not be for everyone, mostly concerning fans of the original novel. Me personally, having read the aforementioned literary work, find this film as very fine for its type. It's not perfect and there was room for improvement with other than just the whale and its involvement. But as a sea story kind of film, it's perfectly enjoyable, it lasts just as long as it should last, and I wouldn't mind seeing it again.

I suppose that any novel that's as much of a downer as Moby Dick would not find much favor with Depression era audiences who had enough of their own troubles. But any resemblance to the classic Herman Melville novel is a pure coincidence.

In fact half of the film is a prequel to the main story as we know it, not that too much of it was kept for the film. We first meet Ahab Creely (he's got a last name and a brother) as one happy go lucky soul with two legs and intentions to marry Joan Bennett who is Father Mapple's daughter. That brother Derek, played by Lloyd Hughes, also wants to marry Bennett.

John Barrymore is Ahab in an over the top performance. Barrymore had not quite mastered the sound cinema and he gave out with all the silent era histrionics plus a stage voice that would have shaken the rafters of any movie theater this film was playing in.

We see Ahab lose his leg to the great whale Moby Dick and I have to say the amputation scene was pretty gruesome. Of course this was all before the Code. Still I'm sure 1930 audiences shuddered.

After that the story of Ahab's hunt for the whale that he thinks made him unsightly in Joan Bennett's eyes. That is not exactly Melville's motivation, in fact there are no women characters in Moby Dick as he wrote it.

One of the things Melville did was invest the crew of Ahab's ship the Pequod with personalities. Other than Queequeg the cannibal harpooner the names are there, but not the personalities. Starbuck and Stubbs might as well be Smith and Jones.

I'd see this version of Moby Dick strictly for curiosity and nothing else.

1930's "Moby Dick" is a very, very loose translation of the Herman Melville story. In fact, so much is different, it's practically a different story! It's based more on John Barrymore's silent film, "The Sea Beast", and he's returned for this sound version.

When the film begins, it's obvious that the Captain Ahab in the film isn't the one in the novel. Instead of being a stern, joyless man leader as Gregory Peck played him in 1956, Barrymore's Ahab is a common sailor....more like Popeye or Bluto! He's a fun-loving galoot with tattoos galore and a lust for life. But this happy demeanor does change when he later meets up with the whale, Moby Dick. There's also a romance...and I know most people do NOT think of this story as a romance!! But these aren't the only major changes from the book....the ending is also 100% different!! Apparently, the studio didn't like the novel very much and decided to very liberally change it.

In many ways, this is much more a John Barrymore film than a Herman Melville novelization. On the positive side, the novel is pretty dull reading...and this film isn't dull. But it also misses so much of the point of the story and instead is a showcase for Barrymore's flamboyant acting and personality.

So is it any good? Well, for American Literature professors, it's probably a bad choice of films to watch! Others, however, might enjoy it very much provided they don't care about the source material. The special effects, for 1930, are very impressive and the film captures the look of the 1840s quite nicely. A few scenes were actually lifted directly from "The Sea Beast" (such as when Ahab is attacked by the whale). And, the amputation scene is amazingly vivid and effective. My advice is to watch the film and enjoy it for what it is.

160 years ago, Herman Melville put all humanity on a ship and sent them off to find out what God was thinking. In 1930 the Warner Bros. figured since nobody had read this book but might have heard of it, why not make a ripping sea movie with John Barrymore? Barrymore spends a great deal of the movie drinking and/or drunk, which I'm sure cut down on rehearsal time since it came naturally to him. The rest of the time he is the shell of the legendary actor that we have come to know. The love story is ridiculous, Noble Johnson is at least an interesting Queequeg and when at sea the film is undoubtedly salty. Just forget the source material and it's an enjoyable bit of early sound film making.

MOBY DICK or THE WHITE WHALE (Warner Brothers, 1930) directed by Lloyd Bacon, stars John Barrymore in the second screen adaptation to the famous 1851 book by Herman Melville. First filmed as THE SEA BEAST (Warner Brothers, 1926) that also starred Barrymore playing Ahab Ceeley, just like the silent version, it's more Barrymore than Melville. Each film had a love interest, first played by Dolores Costello, the role enacted here by the young, blonde and pretty Joan Bennett. As much as both films differ greatly in length time (132 minutes for THE SEA BEAST/77 minutes for MOBY DICK), it's Barrymore's performance in each that merits "The Great Profile" to seemingly be born to play Ahab, even though the plot in question would offer little from the Melville pen.

Following the open book passages regarding whalers and of Moby Dick being "the mightiest of all sea beasts," the story, set in the 1880s, begins in New Bedford, Massachusetts. Ahab Ceeley returns home from his three year voyage on the Mary Anne. He is greeted by his brother, Derek (Lloyd Hughes), working for the new parson, The Reverend Mapple (John Ince) from Boston. He loves Mapple's daughter, Faith (Joan Bennett). As much as he wants to marry her, Faith shows more interest in Ahab, regardless of his reputation for his eyes for the ladies and long passages away from home. When Ahab realizes his love for Faith, he promises to marry her upon his next return. During his whaling ship adventure, Ahab falls overboard and is attacked by the giant white whale known as Moby Dick. Rescued and brought back on board with injury to his right leg, to his horror, Ahab endures amputation. Three years later, Ahab, believing Faith would have nothing to do with a man with a peg-leg, ventures out to sea again for another three years. Now a captain of a new whaler called Shanghai Lady, Ahab has only one thing in mind - to avenge Moby Dick. First he must survive his new crew who want nothing more than to finish him off. Supporting players include Walter Long (Stubbs); Nigel DeBrulier (Elijah); Tom O'Brien (Starbuck); Noble Johnson (Queequeg) and May Boley (White Oil Rosie),

For anyone who's either read the book or seen the more famous 1956 screen adaptation MOBY DICK starring Gregory Peck, would be surprised to learn of it's two earlier screen adaptations to the Melville novel. It's interesting to find how closely director John Huston made his two hour retelling being the most faithful to Melville's book. Though the sound edition appears to still have the silent film acting style mood to it, it's Bennett's performance to be somewhat lacking in natural acting method. Had Warner Brothers waited to remake MOBY DICK in the latter part of the 1930s, chances are the casting might have been enacted by Errol Flynn, Olivia DeHavilland and Patric Knowles in the Barrymore, Bennett and Hughes roles. As much as the book did not include any love interest, who knows how close the proposed Flynn edition might have been to the Melville novel?

After decades in obscurity, MOBY DICK did surface on public television around 1988, and later on cable television's Turner Network Television (1988-1994) and Turner Classic Movies (1994-present). Even though Gregory Peck did a fine job as Ahab, it would be good to give Barrymore a chance with either editions both available on DVD format. (***)

This version of "Moby Dick" insults the audience by claiming it is based on Melville's novel - even going so far as to show a phony first chapter sentence rather than the famous "Call me Ishmael". In addition to having atrocious acting, even from John Barrymore, this is perhaps the greatest example of how far Hollywood (especially early Hollywood) would go to revise and change a famous novel just to beef up its chances at the box office.

All of the novel's beautiful, poetic language has been absolutely eradicated, and Ahab has been changed from a brooding, blasphemous, obsessive madman to a dashing,misunderstood hero who only wants to kill Moby Dick after his fianceé(!) turns away from him after seeing his wooden leg. To this is added the standard evil brother who wants the fianceé for himself, and a different ending!

Once one gets over the fact that this 1930 adaptation of Herman Melville's classic sea story has an at best tenuous relationship to the novel it's based on, it's quite enjoyable. John Barrymore makes an heroic Ahab, and Joan Bennett is fetching as his love interest (yes, I know). Warner Brothers went all out with this one, and as Barrymore was still a top leading man at the time, did a beautiful job with at least the visual aspects of the story, and the film is at times breathtaking to behold. Alas, they threw away most of the plot! Such were the ways of Hollywood. Noble Johnson makes for the best Queequeg I've ever seen, though.

There are a couple of shots in this film somewhere off Catalina Island, but it is made in the main not on the Main. In fact, it's a long way from either New England or Herman Melville, but why labor the point?

For 1930, just as movies were beginning to speak, this is not a bad effort at taking the art to a new level. Once again the only relevant comment someone can offer seventy-odd years years after the fact is that for its time and place the production probably succeeded. It is thus an artifact rather than a movie to be taken seriously for its story or characters in terms of 21st century values.

John Barrymore as can be plainly seen was primarily a stage actor, a bit long in the tooth by 1930 to be swashbuckling. And Constance Bennett barely out of her teens was hardly the stunningly attractive mature actress she was to become. Beyond that, Noble Johnson and the rest of the crew give very credible performances for the time. What is surprising is not how quaint and misguided this sort-of rendering of Moby Dick is, but rather how well-produced it is for a talkie.

In fact, the production qualities are marginally quite good, and seem to get better as the story proceeds. Lighting, editing, and costumes are at times excellent even by today's standards.

Did anyone notice how much Moby Dick resembles Monstro from "Pinocchio" of ten years later?

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.

I have never read the novel Moby Dick although I am informed this adaptation has very little to do with its source material. The film does open with a shot of the novel itself, however, the screen dissolves into the first paragraph of a Chapter 1 which does not exist in the book nor contains the famous line, "Call me Ishmael" (a character who also does not appear in this adaptation). Yet even to judge Moby Dick from 1930 on its own merits this is a flawed film but has enough good in it to make it enjoyable; although it is a shame as all the ingredients are there for the making of a classic. Oh whale, what can you do?

John Barrymore's performance is unlike my perception of Captain Ahab and also differs from Gregory Peck's Lincolnesque performance from 1956. This Ahab during the first half of the film is a womanizing, carefree rapscallion who even exudes sexuality at times. What's striking about Ahab's introduction are his acrobatics atop of a ship's mast. While some shots are clearly performed by a stunt actor, those involving Barrymore really gave me the Gene Kelly vibes, specifically of his performance in The Pirate (1948). Even his voice is reminiscent of Kelly when he shouts "Look out below!". In the latter half of the film, we see the Ahab more identified in pop culture as a bitter, vengeful man once Moby Dick robs him of a leg. Nothing beats Barrymore hamming things up and in one scene we even see him wearing a cape and strutting like he did in Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde.

Ahab's relationship with his brother's finance Faith (Joan Bennett) is an endearing bit of adultery as established in a cutesy scene taking place in a church in which they bond thanks a trusty Saint Bernard. The other real striking presence in the film is Noble Johnson as Queequeg, of whom Ahab humorously refers to as a heathen throughout the film.

The structure and pacing of Moby Dick is rather flimsy. The landlocked portions of the film, for example, leave me wanting to get some sea action. Likewise, the sequence of Ahab's ship navigating through a storm is visually impressive but didn't have to be as long as it did, plus it's hard to make out much of the dialogue amongst the sound of the storm.

One of the film's big positive's are the production values from the rich details of the port, the seedy taverns and even full-scale ship recreations - all contributing to the film's downtrodden atmosphere ( we are even given a sequence amongst an exotic Asian port in Singapore). The special effects, on the other hand, are mostly good for the time, all except for one extremely poor close up of Moby Dick during the first encounter in which the little mouth of the beast is seen moving. It only appears on screen for a mere second but looks poor enough that it sticks in your mind. Historical adventure pictures were not common during the pre-code era. After being abundant during the silent era they wouldn't make a comeback in Hollywood until the mid 30's so it is interesting to see a picture of this nature made in 1930.

Details on this film's background are not abundant. It wouldn't surprise me if Michael Curtiz directed any scenes (he did direct the lost, German language version) due to two scenes featuring the unmistakable use of Curtizian shadows. - But for now, I can only speculate. This brings me to my next point; the changes in image quality in the Warner Archive print of the film. Much of the clarity of the image quality is above what you would expect for a film from 1930, yet other scenes are of a much-degraded nature. Even more bizarrely in some scenes, the brightness levels between shots are very inconsistent. Is this the fault of the filmmakers, the print or where portions of this film lost at one point? Whale we ever know?

This is a great movie. It is very scary. It also has great special effects. It also has a great story line. It also has great acting. 5.6 is a good ratting it. It is a 7. Not a 5.6. This a great movie. It is scarier then The Silence of the lambs could ever be. This is scarier then A Nightmare on elm street and that is not easy to do. This is scarier then Friday the 13th V a new beginning. And is not easy to do. This is scarier then Halloween resurrection could ever be. If this does not scary you no movie will. This is so mush more scarier then Hannibal.

Not an awful film, far from it, but not particularly great either. It is the worst version as an adaptation and on its own of the brilliant Herman Melville book but still has its merits to make it at least a curio. The photography and John Barrymore's performance are the most noteworthy assets. The photography still looks great, managing to be striking and also creates a good amount of atmosphere. Barrymore is gleefully enjoyable as Ahab and while it is a long way from a subtle performance(despite being a complex character it is hardly uncommon to overact him) it is so much fun to watch him. Noble Johnson is also excellent as Queequeg. The scenery and costumes are beautifully done, and the Moby Dick attacks are shocking and thrilling at the same time, especially the final one. The amputation scene likewise. The rest of the acting doesn't really stand out, the crew in fact on the most part being very static. Lloyd Hughes is rather bland and only shines in his final scene and Joan Bennett while lovely to look at has very little to do and doesn't register as a result. That the characters are badly underdeveloped doesn't help, the crew we never get to know and they could have been just anybody and Ahab has next to none of his conflicts and complexities. One of the main problems is that there is nowhere near enough of Moby Dick, when we do see the whale although the special effects are very clumsy the attacks come off well. Without Moby Dick the film is quite dull and devoid of any real suspense, with a three-way romance that is both one-dimensional and hokey, something that would have belonged in another film altogether, an example of a very loose adaptation being lacking in execution. The dialogue has its moments but too many moments also where it just doesn't flow or ring true. Despite being an adaptation of Moby Dick, too many times it didn't feel like Moby Dick(that's the extent to which it deviates), and this is not intending to come from a "purist". To conclude, this film adaptation of Moby Dick may be poor as an adaptation but as a standalone it's okay. If someone were to ask me what my favourite Melville film adaptation was, the very easy answer would be 1962's Billy Budd. 5/10 Bethany Cox

I'm told that JOHN BARRYMORE was once a great actor. There is little evidence for this claim offered here. His entire performance has the flavor of smokehouse ham all the way, even given to over-the-top acrobatics on the ship's crows nest. He squints his eyes, widens them when angry, snarls all of his dialog in a theatrical manner, and then we're supposed to believe that a beautiful young girl (JOAN BENNETT at twenty) is so charmed by his dashing appearance that she falls instantly in love with him.

The only impressive things about the film are the settings, the photography and the all too brief moments at sea where Captain Ahab comes into contact with the great white whale. But for a film about Melville's famous whaler, it spends very little time at sea. Most of the story is taken up by a conventional three-way romance that is pure Hollywood hokum.

Bennett was a very beautiful young girl but there's a strange quality about the way she uses her voice--"talkies" being new, this is, I suppose, forgivable. She seems to be acting in a stage play rather than a movie--but then, so is Barrymore.

Summing up: Primitive attempt to present Melville to '30s audiences, leaving out most of the plot, substituting motivations and adding love interest. A yawner except for the sea scenes.

A crazed sea captain searches the Seven Seas for MOBY DICK, the great white whale which maimed him.

To enjoy this film on its own merits it would be well for the viewer to remind himself that great literature does not always become great cinema. The two art forms are very dissimilar, each making different demands upon its audience. Sometimes, as in this instance, there is only a hint of the original story when it reaches the screen.

Do not look for Ishmael or the Pequod here; you will not find them. Don't expect any titanic & transcendental clash between man and brute beast at the climax. Indeed, the conclusion of the film is so radically different from the novel as to be almost startling.

What will you find is a good-looking movie with very fine production values, featuring an enormously enjoyable performance by John Barrymore as Captain Ahab. Barrymore overacts outrageously, as is to be expected with a role of this sort, chewing the scenery and rolling his extraordinary eyes. In short, he is tremendous fun, even during the unexpected scenes depicting Ahab in love. His brief foray into church, followed by an adoring stray dog, is hilarious, not a descriptive term one usually associates with Melville's character. In short, the entire film is a star vehicle for Barrymore and he remains the primary reason to view it.

Joan Bennett, as Ahab's love, and Lloyd Hughes, as Ahab's resentful younger brother, don't fare as well in comparison to Barrymore's scene-stealing antics. Hughes' final moments, after being shanghaied onto Barrymore's ship, are his most effective, but Miss Bennett is not given much to do during her solemn sequences except to act patient and brave, which can be very dull.

Silent film star Noble Johnson has one of his best talkie roles as the half-savage Queequeg, Ahab's only true friend. Another excellent actor from Silent days, Nigel De Brulier, shows up very briefly as a pathetic barroom preacher. Character actress Virginia Sale is quite droll in her brief role as a New Bedford spinster.

The scenes actually showing Moby Dick are dramatic and frightening, even though the fate the script has in store for him would never have passed muster with Melville.

It's hardly worth discussing this. Throw the original out the window and you still have this half-witted mess. I guess John Barrymore was enough to satisfy the female audience. His character of Ahab in the first half of the film was a drunken jerk with no respect for anyone. Women were portrayed as drooling pawns. He gets anything he wants. I saw nothing about him that was worth talking about. He meets Joan Bennet and she is with his brother (he had a brother?). He and Bennet agree to marry upon his return from the voyage. When he goes off to sea again, he loses his leg to Moby Dick. Ahab is nuts and out of control, but now it is worse. He buys a ship, shanghais a crew and has only eyes for the White Whale. It's all so very stupid.

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.

John Barrymore was undoubtedly one of the finest actors of his era. However, in this Hollywood fantasy, he is nowhere near the character so carefully drawn up by Herman Melville's great novel. Gregory Peck would go on to portray this role far more accurately in the 1950s production several years in the future. In this version, the studio decided the audience was too stupid to appreciate the character drawn up by Melville, so they created a Captain Ahab character of their own, and, of course, it predictably fails miserably. A happy-go-lucky, devil may care Ahab just does not fit the bill for the Melville character. This is not the fault of the actor, but of the Warner Brothers studio. They were much better at gangster films.

Some good action scenes of the whale and ships at sea and the pleasure of seeing two Laurel & Hardy villains, Walter Long and a bit of Richard Cramer, as well as Noble Johnson as Queequeg, is not enough to distract from this hokum version of Melville's novel. A young woman, Joan Bennett, falls in love with John Barrymore as Ahab, because he stares at her a lot. In 1930, it may have been necessary to show that "love conquers all," but this is really too much. We'll have to wait until John Huston's 1956 version to see this story told correctly.