Juonikuvaukset(1)

Talvella 1820 valaanpyyntialus Essex joutui jättimäisen ja lähes inhimillisen kostonhalun omaavan valaan hyökkäyksen kohteeksi. Katastrofi inspiroi myöhemmin kirjailija Herman Melvilleä, joka kirjoitti tapauksen pohjalta kuuluisimman teoksensa nimeltä Moby Dick. Mutta kirja kertoo tapauksesta vain puolet. Kamppailu merta vastaan paljastaa hyökkäyksen jälkeiset tuskalliset ajat, jolloin eloonjääneet joutuivat kamppailemaan henkensä edestä inhimillisen kärsimyksen äärirajoilla. Toistuvat myrskyt, nälkä, paniikki ja epätoivo olivat miehistön vakituisia vieraita, kun kapteeni yritti johdattaa haaksirikkoutuneet turvaan. (SF Film Fin.)

(lisää)

Videot (7)

Traileri 2

Arvostelut (12)

DaViD´82 

kaikki käyttäjän arvostelut

englanti What is a letdown for me is that "story-telling" line provides disproportionately more interesting characters (and also actors) than the "narrative" line where only shallow characters show up. And while Hemsworth carries the movies, at least because of his charisma, Walker doesn't. What is an even a bigger letdown is that it is often so obviously digital. There are not so many movies where it is so obvious that the actors are standing in front of a green screen in the studio, and all the rising waves and sea vermin are added subsequently. But even this can be done in such a way that you will not know it, but this is not the case. This is highlighted by the fact that, with a few exceptions, the camera zooms in on the actors’s faces and bodies in these scenes, which is rather unusual. Fortunately, there aren't that many these scenes, and as soon as it takes place in classic interiors and locations, it suddenly works much better. And why did I use a word letdown when talking about these two shortcomings? Because otherwise it's true classic (maybe too much though) manly old school maritime adventure movie about survival. ()

Malarkey 

kaikki käyttäjän arvostelut

englanti The problem with this movie is that it was made by Ron Howard. So before I even put the movie on, I was expecting a cinematographic quality. In the end, I ultimately got it. But it was worse with the plot that actually tells a story about how people destroy nature and how nature, because it can, returns the favor with the same force. So not only did I not hold a grudge against that whale, but even the fishermen didn’t bring out any emotions in me. Not even in the moment when they were dying in a long and disgusting way on the remains of the ship after a month in the middle of an ocean. But Ron is a director with a capital D and despite this, he prepared a few unforgettable scenes and quality moments you cannot overlook. But still, the story and the emotions connected with it knocked the movie down to being average, which proves how easy a story can affect an otherwise quality movie. ()

Mainos

3DD!3 

kaikki käyttäjän arvostelut

englanti A classic adventure voyage, filmed with enthusiasm. You have to fall in love with In the Heart of the Sea, otherwise you will be bothered by the green screens and the insufficient depth of some characters. The main trio is excellently cast, the characters are written very well and you will have no problem experiencing trouble with a big white whale. No shortage of action, but Howard is best in details and crushing situations. Baños’ music is stylish and catchy. Call me Ishmael. ()

Isherwood 

kaikki käyttäjän arvostelut

englanti A digital sea, a famously moving camera, and useless protagonists. Howard's confident dexterity handles things for the first half, but the second half, when the waves calm down, is accompanied by his traditional pain - zero passion. The characters speak from behind fake beards and swollen lips, but there’s really no emotion to it. Fail. 2 and a ½. PS: The digi visual is the ultimate cornea-burning bullshit. ()

POMO 

kaikki käyttäjän arvostelut

englanti Ron Howard doesn’t make bad movies. But sometimes he just misses the mark. The few scenes at the table where the story begins and ends are more powerful than the cruise itself. The plot that plays out on the ship proceeds by presenting the individual characters in an unoriginal way and putting them in predictable conflicts. Moreover, Howard doesn’t make the most of their roles in the story and, first and foremost, he does not quite know what he wants to say with this film. There are several themes, but none of them serves as the driving force of the film. We’ve got a conflict between the captain and the first officer, the pursuit of wealth culminating in a tragedy, and reflections on how far you can go to save your own life. But it is all just routinely suggested and does not drive the story forward. The most controversial element of the film is the killing of the animals, which is supposed to turn our characters into heroes fulfilling their great roles so that they can return home to their families. The time for such stories has long since passed. The movie is pleasant to watch, especially for female viewers. But it’s not the riveting spectacle we expected from Howard. All of the elements that appeal to the audience were already shown in the action-packed trailer and the work with the characters, which would have given it some sort of dramatic arc, is too weak. ()

Kuvagalleria (72)