Home > Drama >

Britannic

Britannic (2000)

January. 10,2000
|
5.2
|
NR
| Drama Action History War

It was the sister ship of the infamous Titanic... and its final destiny was the same. Experience the true untold story of Britannic, a tumultuous, epic voyage of human passion, courage and betrayal aboard an ill-fated ocean liner bound for a shattering demise. With the world at war, an undercover British agent (Amanda Ryan), embarks the Britannic in search of a German spy believed to be on board to sabotage the ship. Posing as a governess, the undercover agent finds herself falling in love with the ship's chaplain (Edward Atterton). In a stunning discovery, the lovers suddenly find themselves enemies of war. And when a massive explosion deals a deathblow to the ship, their battle becomes one for their own survival. With a dynamic, international cast and a story line that hosts a chilling tale of espionage, politics and romance, Britannic brings one of history's most devastating events to riveting, new life.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Scanialara
2000/01/10

You won't be disappointed!

More
Stometer
2000/01/11

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

More
Dorathen
2000/01/12

Better Late Then Never

More
Salubfoto
2000/01/13

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

More
Leofwine_draca
2000/01/14

A cheap cash-in on TITANIC, replacing the heading-for-an-iceberg storyline with one involving a German agent (this is set during the First World War) with plans to sabotage the titular hospital ship. BRITANNIC is sub standard in every respect, with poor casting, a laughable script and all manner of low-rent heroics which never convince. When I tell you that this is a made-for-TV movie, all of the above will make sense.I watched it for Brian Trenchard-Smith, the maverick B-movie director of TURKEY SHOOT and THE MAN FROM HONG KONG, who can still make a decent Z-grade flick occasionally (I'm thinking AZTEC REX). Sadly, Britannic isn't one of his better films, as it's an entirely forgettable escapade which pales in comparison to just about any other seafaring movie you can mention. The leads are dull, the only cast interest comes from three B-flick veterans (John Rhys-Davies, delightful as the gruff captain; Bruce Payne, not a bad guy for a chance; Wolf Kahler in his usual typecast role) and the most offensive part of the story is that we're supposed to buy a romance between the female agent and the German spy! Even worse, we're supposed to sympathise with the guy's predicament when he's the one responsible for what happens in the first place; I don't know about you, but I was cheering when the propeller appeared.

More
Dante Kindley
2000/01/15

Here's some facts. Improved safety features included raising 5 bulkheads from E to B deck (it could stay afloat with 6 compartments flooded, dia instead of the Titanic's 4), making it 904 ft. long, 94 ft. wide, compared to 883 ft. and 93 ft. of Titanic, and weighed (est.) 48,000 tons, the Titanic 46,000 tons, so Britannic was the longest, widest, heaviest, and largest of the 3 "Olympic" class ships (Olympic, Titanic, and Britannic). Because of WW1, it never hauled a revenue passenger, it was used as a hospital ship. It's sinking was similar to the Impress Of Ireland in one crucial fact: many port holes were left open. Had the port holes been closed, it probably wouldn't have sank. Some say a torpedo sank it (there was a U-Boat in the area), but it was more likely a mine (the U-Boat had laying mines in that path). Here's a mistake in the movie: the explosion was from a bottle of ether in a coal bunker.

More
Jake
2000/01/16

I believe this movie was made for TV, and I think that I have seen better special effects in an older video game. But I don't think that those things make this a bad movie, the plot is interesting and the movie never gets boring. If you are looking for a historically accurate story of the Britannic, then you might not like this movie. It is true that the Britannic was the sister ship of the famous Titanic, that it was suppose to be even safer and grander, and then the ship was commissioned by the British government as a hospital ship during World War One. But the story about spies on board, and that they were the ones that made the ship sink is not true. The ship was really sunk by a mine, or torpedo and I really doubt that there were any spies. The movie is not rated; I don't remember any swear words, or crude language. There is some violence, but it is not bad. But I was disappointed that the movie does have a nude/sex scene, in which Amanda Ryan shows off her stuff. This scene really disappointed me because the movie had been so clean and family friendly until that point. But I really do think that this movie was interesting, and if cheesy special effects, and nudity (You can always hit the skip button) do not bug you I would suggest watching this movie.

More
m0rphy
2000/01/17

Firstly the facts:R.M.S.Britannic was the third of the "Olympic" class of liners to be launched by White Star from Harland & Woolf's shipyard in Belfast after the original "Olympic" (1910) and "Titanic" (1911).She was launched in 1914 but due to the outbreak of the First World War in Britain in August of that year, was requisitioned by the Admiralty and soon converted into a hospital ship with her distinct white hull and huge red cross on her sides.On her 6th outward voyage to the island of Mudros (Greece) she was either torpedoed or mined in the Kea channel in November 1916.The actual cause is still something of a mystery and I presume this doubt partly inspired the "plot".Lessons had been learnt from the earlier loss of "Titanic" (1912), notably the cellular double bottom, higher watertight bulkheads together with distinctive and exaggerated davits from each of which several lifeboats could quickly be launched. Mercifully there was minimal loss of life since it only had the White Star crew and medical staff onboard who were going to tend the casualites arising from Winston Churchill's ill advised Gallipoli campaign (1915) which he ordered when acting as First Lord of the Admiralty.Had this tragedy occurred after embarkation of the troops, the disaster could have become monumental.As one perceptive critic has observed below, one Violet Jessop had the dubious distinction in serving as steward/nurse on all the three aforementioned sister ships but was not mentioned in the film.It seems almost "de rigeur" in all these type of marine disaster films to have a fictional slushy love story wrapped up in a few facts.We had Robert Wagner and Audrey Dalton in "Titanic"(1953) Leonardo de Caprio and Kate Winslet in "Titanic" (1997) to name but two.I have read Robert Ballard's account of his expedition to the wreck which is still in remarkable condition lying on her starboard side when compared to what is left of "Titanic".I also have another video which explores the second explosion (the first being caused either from a German mine or torpedo) and whether this was caused by igniting coal dust or cold water causing the exposed boilers to explode.The most fascinatng part of the film was what appeared to be authentic newsreel footage of the launching of "Britannic" as I had never seen this before.As regards the film itself, it can only be judged on entertainment value alone.Present are the usual Hollywood stereotypes of "Irish Freedom Fighters" given free reign in a wildly imaginative plot adequatly dealt with by my fellow reviewers below. Violet Jessop fractured her scull in the water as the ship ploughed on while her rising propellers still turned and I assume this gave rise to the suicidal scene where the German agent commits virtual suicide while sitting in his life boat as it advances towards them without making an effort to avoid them.This was at odds with his desperate escape earlier.On enertainment value alone I rated it 5/10.

More