MovieChat Forums > Moby Dick (1956) Discussion > Peck was Unbelievable in This!!!

Peck was Unbelievable in This!!!

posted 17 years ago by movienut710
55 replies | jump to latest

Friends, I just got this movie on DVD for free from the library for 2 weeks. Today is about the 5th time in 3 days I've let it play, sometimes just in the background, and I must say rarely has an acting performance blown me away as much as Peck's portrayal of Ahab. Maybe it was just the big build-up to his introduction, but I for one fell for it. For fun, I like to imagine having to act very serious, or very insane roles to see if I even THINK I could. Peck's Ahab, I can tell you immediately, would require weeks of study and preperation. If anyone agrees about the magnitude of his performance, Cheers to you.

[–] naturboy99 14 years ago

I have to revive this stale thread to agree with the OP.

Peck owned the role of Ahab. I can't believe this film gets a 7.4 while dreck and drivel fills out 25% of the top 250.

I guess modern CGI is all it takes to make a great movie in many eyes today and great acting be damned.

The terrorists won a battle with America on 4/21/10 thanks to the cowards at Comedy Central

[–] Dr-RJP 14 years ago

If commenters would post their ages, you would see a sharp division along those lines. I first saw Moby Dick when I was nine years old, and even at that age, was mesmerized by Peck's performance, even if it seems a bit over-the-top in parts.

I've been a huge fan of Peck all my life and have seen this film countless times - especially when Moby Dick became required reading in school.

What people of today don't get is that, back then, movies were STAGE PLAYS on film. If you ever acted in a play on a stage, you would know exactly what I mean. You were projecting your persona so that even in the last seat of the last row of the balcony would see it, hear it, and feel it.

John Huston's a tremendous actor, but overbearing as a director. Can you imagine if he had directed Ben-Hur instead of William Wyler?

Can you spell, D-I-S-A-S-T-E-R?

[–] arman0612 14 years ago

I completely agree, I must say that I'm not always impressed by his performances, even by some of the nominated ones but he was brilliant in this film, I honestly don't understand how this wasn't nominated for any Oscar, I mean 1956 wasn't that good of a year to overlook this fine piece of filmmaking.

[–] cwente2 14 years ago

I think Peck does a fine job. Too much is made of Peck's own criticism of his performance. Most artists - actors, directors, painters and sculptors - can find the most to criticize in their own work -- IF they're real artists. I suspect that had I been a contemporary, and confidant, of Michaelagelo's, I might've heard him crying out in anguish -- "If I coulda climbed up that damn scaffolding (to the Sistine ceiling) just one more time, I coulda made a real masterpiece of that thing!"

I've seen this picture several times, and it seems to get better with each viewing (including, no, especially Peck). An impressive outcome all 'round of a VERY difficult challenge. In 1956, the critics couldn't have said enough good about "Around the World in Eighty Days" and enough bad about "The Searchers" (no Oscar nominations there either). 'Nuff said? . . .

(Btw, I did like "Around the World in Eighty Days", but ...)

[–] vinidici 14 years ago

(Btw, I did like "Around the World in Eighty Days", but ...)

There's just no accounting for the mood of critics and the public alike when some flick comes along that is a cut above the rest but they don't know it, e.g., Citizen Kane, It's a Wonderful Life and The Searchers; conversely, they'll pick a bad movie over an exceptionally good one, or, it the case of Around the World in 80 Days, rave over a fairly good film as though it were one of the all-time best motion pictures ever made--case in point, James Cameron's Titanic--when much better contemporary or previous films deserve such a distinction far more.

[–] kcflanagan 14 years ago

I couldn't agree more about this movie and Peck's performance. I'd even call it a brave performance. It's kind of like Al Pacino in Scarface. That dialogue must have look scary as hell on paper to an actor. It's the very over-the-top aspect of those performances that makes them so powerful. Peck really gives Ahab this fire and brimstone, Old Testament quality that fits the story to a "T." By comparison, Patrick Stewart's Ahad was flaccid.

[–] jbirtel-1 14 years ago

I agree with so much of the above.

I DO believe Peck's performance was spotty; but this really wasn't his fault.
Huston wanted to cast with a character actor, but Warner insisted on a big name star.
Huston was also the firm believer that when the cast is Right;
that accounts for 90% of directing.

As one of the earlier post stated; Huston would act out the scene first
which probably wasn't the best guidence for Greg's abilities;
for this paticular role.
At one point Huston said,
"Boy! This is the scene! If you're gonna do it; now's the time!"
Peck retorted back,
"You call that 'directing'?"

But since I saw this since I was 5, in black & white,
Peck's performance WAS a brave one; as kcflan' says;
and always has a nostalgic soft spot for me.

Wishful thinking what Walter H would have done with it.

I agree with Charlton Heston:
"But by God! He (Peck) DID the part!"

[–] demonflower_honeythorn 13 years ago

I think Peck was excellent in this role. He didn't just play Ahab; he WAS Ahab. I can't imagine anyone else as Ahab. Patrick Stewart did a good job as well, but his performance paled in comparison to his predecessor.

As a matter of fact, out of all Gregory Peck's performances, this is my favorite.

[–] Bishop_of_Battle 13 years ago

Stewart's performance wasn't bad...just nowhere near as memorable as Peck's. Loved the over-the-top intensisty he displayed in the role.

[–] suicidea 13 years ago

=================================================

It's the very over-the-top aspect of those performances that makes them so powerful. Peck really gives Ahab this fire and brimstone, Old Testament quality that fits the story to a "T."

================================================

Perfectly put. Most viewers compare Peck's acting style in this to his other works, or even today's so-called contemporary cinema. But this was a classic novel, very symbolic and full of Biblical references, and every role and line had to be performed exactly the way it was.

About the Oscar thingy... I have said in half my posts in other threads that an Oscar is not worth as much as the praise a movie gets 50 years after it is made. I'm 38 now, and I cringe at the crap that today's young auidence is subjected to. Yet when I still see 15-year olds watch, enjoy and appreciate films like this... it really gives me hope that cinema, as a form of art and entertainment, still has hopes to survive.

Never be complete.

[–] oscarinca 13 years ago

Well, I guess if people in modern days are even unable to read or even understand the novel, indeed they would make criticism of whomever actor delivering Melville's utterances, wouldn't they? Interesting is "Picard" (Star Trek Next Generation), who is an accomplished actor and used to play Shakespeare seemed to overact EVEN MORE than Peck himself! If Peck looked like Abe Lincoln is because he read tons of books about Lincoln and his looks were like him with that Amish beard without moustache.

Like the epic "Jaws" it takes time for the audience to actually see the monster and people add things to the mind due to the stories as told by the characters, and the special FXs were great with miniatures both the ship Pequod and the white sperm whale, specially the shipwreck. What happens is modern generation used to see ridiculous movies like Fast & Furious or Transformers III or used to superficial dialogue as heard in Gossip Girls series can't just understand a damn thing or enjoy watching non-stopping edited action sequences 'til the kingdom comes and call that "cinema". It's a sign of the times. BTW, Spielberg wanted to show some scenes from Moby Dick in his Jaws but was unable because of rights issues. A direct reference to these similarities may be found in the original JAWS screenplay, which introduced Quint by showing him watching the film version of Moby-Dick. His laughter throughout makes people get up and leave the theater (Wesley Strick's screenplay for Cape Fear features a similar scene).

However, the scene from Moby-Dick could not be licensed from Gregory Peck, the owner of the rights. The final scenes of the film, in which the men chase the shark and try to harpoon it with flotation barrels, parallel the chase for Moby-Dick in the novel.

The role is difficult and I share the view of the one saying the Australian guy from Pirates of the Caribbean could manage to play a wonderful Ahab. Peck admitted the role demanded "more" and he was too young for the part.

There's a thin gap between skepticism and cynicism

[–] intexor 13 years ago

I thought he was very good as Ahab, but somehow I also understand why he didn't really liked this or any other villainous role he played. On this one there's certainly nothing to be ashamed of though.

[–] kidjay83 12 years ago

just got done watching it for like the 10th time in my life .peck is ahab it would be wrong imagine anyone else in this role

What's real? What's not? That's what I do in my act

[–] wrfarley 12 years ago

According to the National Enquirer (consider the source), this is the film Peck watched in his last days.

[–] Mudflap 12 years ago

Peck? Who's Peck?? I am a big fan of the book, and after watching this 1956 version of the movie I only have one question:

How did they get Captain Ahab to play himself?

[–] herbsuperb 12 years ago

I think you are a little confused Mudflap. That wasn't the REAL Captain Ahab. It was an actor pretending to be him. The actors name is Gregory Peck, and his performance as Captain Ahab is much renowned in the world of film.

Just joshin ya. Brilliant performance for sure. One of my favorite. Although I think he was even better in To Kill a Mockingbird.

[–] Hey_Sweden 12 years ago

I think he did a very good job; he was definitely convincing as Ahab.

What do you think this is, a signature? It's a way of life!

[–] Fedorevsky 11 years ago

Peck was Unbelievable in This!!!

Yes he was. Unbelievably bad. One of his worst roles and pretty much the only low point in a nearly perfect film.

Hidyho!

[–] murdoch1111 11 years ago

@movienut710 » Tue Feb 5 2008

I agree. Belated cheers to you!

[–] murdoch1111 11 years ago

@movienut710 » Tue Feb 5 2008

I belatedly agree. For naysayers, I'll observe that the role of Ahab is EXTREMELY difficult to play and that Meville's fine novel is equally difficult to film.

[–] movienut710 11 years ago

Cheers Murdoch1111 ! At First I was just Happy to have Your Agreement at all, and now that I've read Your Bio I am Honored as Well. Have a Good Day Sir!

[–] ccorraliza 11 years ago

We saw this regularly as kids. Brothers and I can still recite his dialogue when he motivates the crew with the coin to the mast and the grog.

Wonderful.