Complications harpoon this whale of a tale

What It’s About

A literary pedigree gussied up with 21st century bells and whistles can’t save “In the Heart of the Sea” from the excesses that sink its lofty ambitions.

A true seafaring yarn that was the source material for the Great American Novel “Moby-Dick” became Nathaniel Philbrick’s exhaustive whaling tale “In the Heart of the Sea,” which won the National Book Award for Nonfiction in 2000.

Adapting this epic disaster for the screen seemed a daunting task, and the complications show. Skilled director Ron Howard (“A Beautiful Mind,” “Frost/Nixon”) can’t fit this unwieldy, massive story into a neat narrative. Six writers (three credited) mustered as many conflicts as possible, wrapped in historical accuracy and old-timey phrases, but the result is a cumbersome work that requires much patience to sustain interest.

They frame the ill-fated adventure with novelist Herman Melville (Ben Whishaw) convincing the last survivor of the doomed Essex, Tom Nickerson (Brendan Gleeson), to reveal the real story behind the tragedy.

The young Thomas (Tom Holland) was a greenhorn, who was shown how to be a high seas sailor by rugged first mate, Owen Chase (Chris Hemsworth). Chase is angry that the captain position he thought he earned goes to an unproven son of a whaling industry scion, George Pollard (Benjamin Walker). The friction between the landsman and the birthright lay the foundation for bad decisions and bad blood.

This being a commercial whaling expedition, they need to find their prey, but the source of blubber and whale oil is elusive after the first successful catch. So they head farther off course, and come across the biggest whale ever. The battle between man and beast doesn’t go their way, suffice it to say.

The enormous speckled white sperm whale takes on the properties of a demon, with an insatiable appetite for vengeance. Death and destruction follow, as the men drift at sea for 90 days. Think Great White Shark in “Jaws,” only multiplied.

The film is presented in 3D so that the stellar visual effects get their share of screen time, with the centerpiece the mammoth creature.

Performances

Hemsworth (“The Avengers”) is certainly a handsome screen presence and his heroic role is primarily physical here. However, his previous work with Howard in “Rush” is superior.

The cast is reduced to stereotypes — the plucky orphan kid (Holland, so impressive in “The Impossible”), the childhood friend loyal to a fault (an understated Cillian Murphy, “Inception”), the out-of-his-league commander (Walker, “Abe Lincoln: Vampire Hunter”) the insufferable rich relative (Frank Dillane), and so forth.

They do what they can with the role limitations, but of course are upstaged by nature.

What Works

Yet, certain elements do grab our attention and sympathies. The look of the film, from the Nantucket fishing village setting to the breathtaking expanse of ocean views, is terrific. The muted palette is reminiscent of Winslow Homer’s paintings. Cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle (“Slumdog Millionaire”) immerses us in a bygone era, blending well with the computer-generated images.

What Doesn’t Work

After the film, I felt as if I had read Melville’s 635-page U.S. edition in one sitting, and needed fresh air. The story becomes claustrophic, as those desperate for survival go to extreme measures.

The intentions are noble, but the execution of a fascinating story is less successful.

This story was originally published December 9, 2015 at 9:14 AM with the headline "Complications harpoon this whale of a tale."