Coming back to this video years later, god damn am I unfair in a lot of cases😭. I still think this movie sucks, but many of the critiques I made are incredibly nit picky and don’t really hold as genuine points. Gonna have to come back to this movie in a new video.
At least this movie helped to create one of the greatest tradition of the youtube ship community, the Sleeping Sun song on almost every single sinking ship video 😂. Amazing video btw!
I will admit though. I think a movie about Britannic could’ve been very good, but I think the main thing that killed this film was that no one cared. Really all ships are stuck in the shadow of the Titanic and a film about the fate of its sister ship just couldn’t get financed, it’s a miracle that it got green lit in the first place.
The movie critics gave it a hard time. Thus, nobody cared to go watch it. If the movie critics would have given it good reviews, perhaps many more may have watched it.
No it was budget mostly and a cash grab. Throw 200-300 million at this film it could been done really well cause it has some good story beats. The only way too do it right be too build the ship like the 1997 film and with today’s CGI you could fill in the gaps pretty well. The only thing is you need a good director like James Cameron lol that be sick if he did a Britannic film and you need a studio willing to throw out 300 million. This was obviously a cash grab and the result of a low budget
@@ryans413 it was more then a cash grab/low budget film. They straight up made up complete bullshit with having a fake royal navy ship being on the scene dropping depth charges... showcasing people on the ship using weapons to blow up one of the torpedoes... the reason for her sinking (although I know it was debated before).. got the sinking process horribly wrong including a list that comes and goes and a script that goes against not only the real side that was hit, but also the movies original depiction with it listing starboard side which they corrected in the next scene being level. 🤣 got the wrong propellor and it wasn't anywhere near as brutal enough, at least the propellor man in Titanic gave an Oscar worthy performance slamming into it and doing about 50 back flips until hitting the water... in fact legend has it he hit the water doing those back flips, hit the sea bed and continued doing so all the way down to the core... now this next part falls more into myth/legend but they say he went through the core and is currently heading back up to the surface of the ocean... but, that sounds a little too far fetched, the rest of it seems 100% but the going through the earths core and being intact not so much. This film is an actual joke, I hope this completely broke them financially, drove them to insanity and caused them to live out the rest of their pathetic life in a nut house/loony bin eating their own shit off their hand. Complete cretins.
I agree with with you Jace Vinson James Cameron needs to make another sequel to Titanic the involves the Britannic just what is wrong with you people I just don’t understand why some certain people like this movie maybe some of these individuals like this movie because they don’t know the real history of the Britannic Screw you people 🤬
As a 3D artist, I think Britannic did an excellent job with CGI, I would love to make models like that with confidence. CGI is no simple field, and considering the age of this movie, and how much more difficult CGI was at that time, the producers did almost 10/10. I've also studied Titanic and her sisters for years. The only flaws in the movie are hard to notice, and you wouldn't notice them unless you were an expert on the topic. I understand people get upset to see something they care about misrepresented, but passion and desire doesn't fund anything, money does. And when you're tight on money, you can only do so much. I remember seeing Titanic Honor and Glory back in 2017, how much effort was put into it. And today it still has not been fully completed. You can only get so perfect.
The "animated" scenes with Titanic look so much more real than the ones in Britannic, because James Cameron spared no expense, and built, not only a full-scale hull and stern piece, but also a 20 ft long miniature of the Titanic, which was used in conjunction with CG water. In the Britannic film however, they went the full CG route, and in 1999, the technology just didn't exist to make it look real.
Honestly this would have worked as a Lusitania movie. Weapons on the ship, the U-Boat, realistically possible love plot, they could have done it. In fact, it did sort of in “Terror At Sea: Sinking of the Lusitania” which didn’t even need fake characters since the protagonist of sorts was an actual passenger who survived.
@@riversword2660 honestly it would have been more fitting to make a movie based on one of the Tanias (i forget what the class is called though I do know it was from Cunard)As their class rivaled the Olympic class. So to have a movie based on a sunken Tania class ship rival a movie about a sunken Olympic class ship would be smart
I’ve always wondered why the movie looked a bit too dark in some scenes, but now that I think of it, they’ve probably did it to make the terrible CGI less noticable.
The CGI was a lot better than most of the TV movies and even some modestly budgeted theatrical films at the time since at 20 million it was one of the most expensive non miniseries cable TV films ever made if the studio hadnt gaslit the director into rewriting it as an action film it would have been better
One thing that always bugged me is that it technically is just a rehash of James Cameron Titanic plot wise. Nurse falls in love with a spy, spy falls in love with a nurse. Spy gets trapped while ship is sinking. Nurse goes off to find help. Gets a tool, rescues spy, both nearly drown. Never let go, you'll live on, spy dies. But yeah the whole team behind the movie just didn't really care.
The most annoying part is that he just sat there and died. This isn't the North Atlantic where the near-freezing water will kill you, some of the people who saw the earlier lifeboats torn apart just streight-up swam away before theirs was destroyed.
@@RRW359 The only logical explanation would be that he actually suicided, knowing that even if he survived the sinking, the crew would just notice he is a spy and kill him anyway. So instead of being tortured to death to confess info, he just chose easy death. Even then, the officer finding that action ''bravest thing a man could ever do'' makes no sense, and it implies the writer planned to make the guy sacrifice himself for the girl like Jack.
I was thirteen when this movie came out, I was all ready a ship enthusiast, and I was hoping to see things I recognized from the deck plans, and photographs I collected on HMHS Britannic, the movie disappointed me. I think the producers were so embarrassed by their CGI model, they decided to set most of the film at night, to help hide the crude graphics, but by doing so they sacrificed history. The main thing that bugged me about Britannic 2000, is the fact it tries to convince the audience it's a sequel to the James Cameron film, with the two leads being a rehashed Rose and Jack, and dubious claims that the Britannic was unsinkable, despite no such claim was ever made about Britannic, also they misspelled the captain's name, it was spelled Bartlett, not Barrett.
There's actually no definitive proof anyone claimed Titanic was unsinkable either. Also pretty much every mention of Britannic being unsinkable was followed by someone saying she's the largest ship in the world which was untrue by 1916.
@feldwebelfloppa4091 When they were building the Titanic, im pretty sure there was a dark shadow, maybe a fire, that weakened the hull leading to more water entering the Titanic during the iceberg collision.
From what I heard, only a few new sets were actually built for this TV movie (the ones they actually flooded with water). The bridge and super structure were recycled from previous tv productions. The Engine Room was actually a Pumping Station in Middlesex, England. The first class state rooms were actually filmed in Victoria House in London. This was a very cheaply produced tv movie -- that is why there are so many problems.
In the future, I am going to hire someone to create a Britannic movie that is historically accurate, tells the true story, and has more stages, unlike this version, and not edited like the shitty 2000 film
@@TheRedPanda. idk, its okay if i said no, i'll make my own britannic animation, using Tiny Ships Sandbox in roblox frame by frame like how i did with my RMS Majestic video
The thing that upsets me most, is that some people originally watching this film and don’t know the real history, could have taken it as what actually happened. With no disclaimer from the beginning.
During the movie where ‘HMS Victoria’ is shown, it’s not even a British pre-Dreadnought, it’s a US Indiana-class pre-Dreadnought. And last I checked, battleships didn’t drop depth charges. As well the majority of the British capital ships at the time of Gallipoli were stuck in the Dardanelles providing shore bombardment and none could be spared for much else.
Exactly. I'd get if this was fully fictional, like War of the Worlds, but it's meant to be a 'true story' film. Plus, if it's a 'True story' film, WHY ARE THERE WEAPONS ONBOARD, HOW DOES THE SHIP SINK FROM A MOLOTOV, WHY ARE THERE EVEN DEPTH CHARGES-
As well as flying the Union Jack from the stern, and not a naval ensign And having the name "HMS VICTORIA" on the prow even though no Royal Navy ship ever had the "HMS" prefix on its nameplate
Maybe it is the resurrected HMS Victoria that sank in 1893. But yes the CGI looks like Indiana class. Did someone try to pitch a movie about USS Oregon?
‘It’s just a movie. Who cares if it’s off? People who are interested will look it up themselves…’ Except…they don’t. The common person would assume the movie is accurate while a few would look it up and be shocked at the differences; fewer still would cover it on a Public platform.
The shading looks wrong on the animation because I don't think it's rendered shading. I think it's just static shading applied to the textures that doesn't change with the lighting conditions. Also, the cargo hold isn't a set, it's CG.
This is also beginning 2000s rendering, without a crazy budget which they did not have such technologies which are easy now are hard, like yeah if you hold the CG to 2020s standards then it’s going to disappoint, gotta look at this in context.
When the ship capsized and sank, why didn't: 1. the ship fall on any of the lifeboats around it; and 2. the force of a heavy ship going down suck the lifeboats down into the water with it?
As an interesting fact, ships don’t suck things down with them. The air escaping during a final plunge actually makes the water less dense, which can make humans or lifeboats unable to float. So it’s not that they get sucked down, but literally cannot float because the escaping air has made the water less dense than the object in it, which kills any buoyancy it may have
@@theshipenthusiast also if you look closely, the lifeboats keep pace with britannic even though the britannic is moving and the lifeboats most certainly couldn’t keep up
To answer the first question. The Britannic was constantly moving (apart from lifeboat launch after the 2 lifeboats that were destroyed, were discovered). The ship was still moving. Even in it's final moments so the lifeboats were well far away. To answer the second question. It is a mix of the first answer and the fact the the amount of air bubbles made the water less dense to it wouldn't actually suck anything if there were lifeboats near.
@@theshipenthusiast The opening daytime scene in this movie actually looks good. In my opinion, it helps substitute for the small amount of sets they had, and to be honest, Titanic's "I'm flying" scene also used a CGI model too.
Feels surreal going back and looking at this movie now, especially since I distinctly remember it from my childhood. I still remember going back to my Grandma's house and watching this when I was 8 thinking it was some kind of Titanic sequel. Most surreal part is how the CGI and effects didn't bother me whatsoever as a child but now nearly 14 years later it's horrendous.
There was a ~30 minute documentary on YT that used footage from this movie. Years ago it was deleted and I have no idea where it came from, but that was the place this animation was best suited. It's perfect as some kind of B-roll of the ship for documentaries. The documentary itself wasn't half bad either.
Was it 'Inside The Britannic'? I saw that when it first aired back in like 2002 and it using footage is how I learned there was a Britannic movie. Good documentary, I've been trying to find it online but theres pretty much no trace of it anywhere which is unfortunate.
@@WillieWonka928D and @TheBoatChannel, I remembered there was a Greek documentary that used to be on YT back in 2009. Had a music from Braveheart as well as footage from the 2000 Britannic and little bit from '97 Titanic. Including footage from Jacques Cousteau's documentary of when he discovered the wreck and interviews with the survivors.
As Britannic sinks in this movie it appears that after Captain Bartlett (and perhaps everyone save for the two protagonists) got into a lifeboat and rowed away, he forgot to turn off the engines. Another thing to further condemn this movie :)
That is the part that bothered me the most. And they show him standing there, hat in hand, in full view of that spinning propeller, looking not at all bothered by anything. If we follow along with this plot, he was responsible for the horrible deaths of a boatload of people, and he's just standing there trying to look heroic. Then, in an even more ridiculous scene, the bad guy rides along in another lifeboat and gets himself killed and chopped on purpose. Somehow this lifeboat does what an identical chopped up lifeboat did not do. His boat stops the propeller. Already makes no sense...but to make it worse, some disembodied voice calls him the "bravest guy he has ever known" (whattt??????) Detours from exact historical events for the sake of a mostly fictional film plot might have been excusable. For making absolutely no logical sense there is no excuse.
Forgot to turn off the engines? I'm sorry, but that's hilarious. Like he left his oven on or something! Also, CGI in the lifeboat scene was really bad in my opinion. It was supposed to be a serious moment. Indiana Jones handled similar scene better years before that movie.
I know how you feel. I'm a stickler for detail myself. "Gettysburg" is one my favorite movies, and I still find myself pointing out what actually happened in real life. My mom has been writing a historical novel for the past five or six years now and will do a month's worth of research just to be sure one sentence is correct. I'm not sure the Britannic's story would make a good film at all. She was the victim of a mine and not there was no hubris about her safety---her sister's demise in 1912 drove that lesson home hard---only twenty-one people were lost, and she's in shallower water than the Titanic. Now, if they had decided to do a film about the Eastland disaster, *that* would be a good successor to the "Titanic" movie. One could either have the drama of the "Go on this excursion or you're fired!" conflict and build up to the capsizing, or do it like "Dunkirk" and make the struggle for survival the focal point. The reason I chose the Eastland story for this is because the lifeboat laws put into place after the Titanic disaster contributed to the Eastland capsizing---the Titanic had too few lifeboats on board, but the notoriously top-heavy and unstable Eastland had too many lifeboats. 845 people died in the Chicago Harbor as a result. And she had barely cast off her lines too! UPDATE: I told my mother about this, and she says that while it isn't possible to make a good film about the Britannic herself, you *can* make a film about Violet Jessop, who survived the sinking of both the Titanic and Britannic. She worked as stewardess on the former and a nurse's aide on the latter.
Honestly, this was only meant to capitalize on that Titanic movie craze. Both were made in the late 90's/early 2000's and both had dramatized love scenes. Also, in 2000, the PBS documentary "Lost Liners" aired on television. Further adding to the mania. When I watched this with my mom back in 2000, I knew (even as a kid) that this was simply a studio's way on trying to produce a "Titanic-esc" movie because they heard that Titanic had a sister ship. Ironically, this movie, for better or worse, brought Britannic to the public's attention as many people may not have been aware that the Titanic had a sister ship. While the film is rather lackluster in its performance, I still find it very enjoyable, and I even own a working copy of the 2000 movie on VHS.
15:21 : One thing they did got right however is the radio cables on top of the two mast (These are the cables used by the Telegraph operator to receive answers and messages from other ships. They're not essential for transmiting, but are for receiving messages. Meaning that if the cables are cut-of, Britannic can still send emergency messages, but cannot receive any answers back.)
My big question. The whole Uboats, German spies, and weapons smuggling stuff. While no I’m not okay with distorting history like that, let’s pretend I’m actually okay with adding all that stuff. My question in that case would be, why would you use the Britannic to tell that story? Why not make that movie about the Lusitania? The ship that may very well have been smuggling weapons in reality. I’m guessing probably because they thought with the success of Titanic a few years earlier more people would hear the title and automatically associate it with something they already thought was good
I’m actually convinced by your Titanic association theory, since the alleged trailer for the movie indeed uses Horner’s music, and suspiciously tries to link it to the Titanic as a whole. I’d be betting that they indeed did try and sell the movie via association, advertising the movie as a sequel to Titanic, like how the trailer makes Britannic seem like the sequel of the Titanic. Link: ua-cam.com/video/0l4jah7Anb8/v-deo.html
Because the movie is realistic for the time it was made in. The real reason for the sinking of the Britannic wasn‘t clear for a long time, and some thought it was sunk by an german u-boat (what it technally was since the mine came from one) and the theory there there maybe were german spies on board is still didn‘t 100% proven wrong until today
I even knew that probably the water was green screened, and mainly, the grand staircase in the movie is not how she looked like in the original ship. I understand that the grand staircase got changed to an HMHS style instead of a white star line RMS staircase style, but still they should just have a blank White Star line staircase and just paint the walls white, remove the Honor and Glory clock panel and remove the Cherub statue, put the words ‘Out of bounds for patients’ on the wall where the clock used to be and there, the staircase looked accurate!
17:21 they also forgot that all the other lifeboats where launched after the propeller were turned of due to the passenger casualties of the boat going into the propeller
Honestly, the CG is pretty revolutionary for the time. All the VFX was handled by a 3 person team using NewTek Lightwave 3D for animation and Adobe After Effects for compositing. The ship was modeled by just ONE person. I know it doesn't hold up, but render engines back then did not have the capabilities we have today, especially when it comes to lighting and shaders. Titanic solved this issue by using actual scale models and only using CG for the backgrounds/smoke/water. Also great video🖖🤟 Wish people talked more about this film.
Well the original script was basically a pseudo micro biopic revolving around violet jessop surviving the Collision of the olympic and HMS hawke, sinking of titanic and britannic. The studio gaslit the director into rewriting it as an action film
It’s funny because just tonight I was thinking about how if they made a good Britannic movie, Violet Jessup would be the leading lady, and the movie would center around her trouble with the Olympic trio. First act, Olympic, Second act Titanic, final act Britannic
I dunno man. You're saying studio executives meddled in the creative process and reduced what could have been a high concept movie into a dumpster fire? I've never heard of that happening.
Finally someone that has true love for all of the sister ships. I always wanted to know more about the Britannic, and why people don’t do more explorations and post photos of the shipwreck being that it is so well preserved. your video is amazing.
I’m an Olympic class geek too lol. I didn’t like this movie either and about a year prior, I decided to see if there were any reviews of it on UA-cam. I didn’t look it up again until just now. That’s when I saw ur video. I was immediately sucked in and had to watch ur video. And I don’t regret it. I really wanted to get someone else’s opinion on the film and now I have. (And it’s how I expected the opinion to be) I hate the movie bc of plot and inaccurate story telling. But I love ur review. Keep up the great work! 👍
@@theshipenthusiast I agree with you we to get James Cameron attention so he can make a sequel to Titanic that do with Britannic maybe Rose could be on the Britannic
Deadass, when I hear the graphics comparisons to consoles, it usually always comes across a bit too harsh imo, but legit this looks like a PS3 era game; decent detail, but not convincingly real, noticeable aliasing, and things generally having a kind of fogginess about them. But this was 2000, even the better animation from the time isn't good. This is 100% a guilty pleasure movie though, it'd be fun to watch with a group of 'maritime history enthusiasts'
Tbh I’d say this is a bit insulting to the ps3, because I know at least the ps3 port of Project Diva had some pretty good effects in it, although it was because it was technically the arcade version of the game without the shader, but as a port of the original psp game which didn’t have high poly models or graphics
Great video on this! Honestly just gotta respect the fact a Britannic movie actually exists, and as someone pointed out this would've made more fitting for a Lusitania film LOl
I think all movies tend to do that. You see them when you're younger when you're attracted to visuals, action and romance. Then you grow up and the research it inspired you to do made you realize how all movies (based on reality or fiction) are in fact much more flawed that you initially thought. Also, the information and nuances it can give you is rather limited on screen time anyway. Conclusion: books, visual art, here I come.
Amazing video as always, another thing that has always bugged me (aside from all the things you mentioned in the video) is that the lifeboats are way out of proportion, like when the lifeboat got chopped up on the wrong side, you can see it’s wayyyyy to small compared to the hull, and all the other lifeboat scenes show the exact same thing, the boats are way to small.
As a sinking ships fan, I appreciated the dedication they put in to the movie. But, I come to see myself hating it. I don't care about the CGI. I just care about how much they know. Titanic had very well scripting, a good story line and good CGI.
Nice job! I did have one last nit pic to add on. Not only did the ship list super fast at the end, but in real life, the ocean was so shallow that before the stern even went under, the bow had hit the ocean floor causing it to break. They did not show this in the movie
Even if the movie is garbage, can we all agree that on the soundtrack being the only good thing? I mean, I won’t say anything about the movie itself ( hint: I’ve seen worse, and better ), but the soundtrack, that is something else.
Another really irritating thing about the propeller sequence is how all the other boats are in the water, when the whole reason the incident happened is because the boat was launched long before any other
The ending was just like Bob: I wanna get this over with Tim: Me too Bob: ok I know! Bob: HMHS Britannic tips over, loosing its funnels and crashes into the sea bed, done, movie over, and The End Tim: Great job! I’m sure ppl will like it!
I'm not sure if you noticed this like my friend did, but from what she told me, the movie completely messed up the boat deck set where the giant davits are. There should be like 6 boats stored under the davits
I love how whenever that life raft got sucked into the propellor,the boat seemed perfectly fine, in reality it would have probably been broken to bits, but it just got whacked and went straight down like a plastic toy, and the people inside got flung and stretched their arms and legs out, like in looney toons, It should be common sense they would be hit hard and probably thwacked to gibs (bunch of body parts) But hey, I did no research and know almost nothing about physics. Also excuse my english it's my third language
I also noticed when theyre getting on the lifeboat right before the tragedie, the ship isn't moving even tho the propellers are. But when the lifeboat is getting torn apart by the propeller the ship is suddenly moving quite fast
I keep forgetting this movie even exists. You tell this movie had a very low budget and no one really cared about this movie. The CG even for 2000 looks terrible. Compared to Titanic which looks amazing after all these years. The CG in Titanic for the most part still looks real.
When the propeller scene happens, it seems like the children and that lady die. Also, that guy just stayed on that lifeboat when it was clearly far enough from the propeller to jump.
if i were an film director, i would make an better Britannic by using models [like the poseidon adventure and Titanic] and add historical details like Paul Greengrass/James Cameron by adding the mine scene instead of the sabotage scene as in this crappy film. plus the new better Britannic movie would sink in the dayttime around 8am [like irl] and the scenes shown in this tv movie would be fixed like the propeller chop scene corrected on the port side and add some historical characters like Violet Jessop
What would have been more interesting if the nurse who was on the Titanic had shot the German spy she fell for before he dropped the wine bottle and she's prevented him from sinking the ship however when she's walking around the ship on deck taking this hard because she trusted him she fell for him and then an hour later when it's completely morning then the ship hits the mine that would have stayed true to the actual event and true story Don't you agree.
I watched this movie like once a long time ago, while still during the peak of my ship enthusiast phase, and immediately made me upset because I sat through the thing and noticed every inaccuracy
7:00 I GOTTA LOOK LIKE I'M DOING THINGS. Seriously he moved it from Halt Engine to....nothingness. Like he's telling the engines, "there are no orders, lads, time for a tea-break."
That's...not true. Like, those are small mistakes, which can be forgivable if it's just footage for a documentary, but this is claiming to be a better version of James Cameron's Titanic. Which, god forbid, doesn't have terrible character development, does fit the story of the ship, and IS actually accurate to the sinking-
This one has horrid mistakes. First, the grand staircase windows are just gaping holes into the void The doors are wrong. The characters are wrong, They mispelled the captains name. The port and center propeller is supposed to be the only one running, not all three as shown here. Quite clearly after the list is shown later in the movie it hasn’t listed yet. The passengers were chopped from the port propeller, not the starboard. Screw it theres even more mistakes.
And also the part with the people getting killed by the propeller, the ship had already stopped when they gave the order to lower the lifeboats. The people irl were part of the stokers I believe that evacuated before the official order to evacuate, and with the captain not knowing this, the propellers were not stopped
8:45 Fun fact: this was a 1/20 scale physical model with digital people and other (moving) details added. For as far as I know there are no fully digitally animated ships in the 1997 movie.
Was the ship in the ‘97 movie ever actually completely animated? I was under the impression it was a miniature which would explain why it has aged so well.
@@theshipenthusiast they actually used cgi to aid in compositing shots together, like between smaller models and larger ones, although in the case of the million dollar shot, parts were completely digital, but the whole thing was blended, which is also why Titanic still has amazing visuals. They used mainly practical effects and used cgi to put it together.
Imma be honest, the first time I watched this I was like “ok he hates the movie but I like it so you do you” but now it’s kinda like you know what he had a point.
I remember watching this when it first came out, excited that there was another "Titanic" movie about her lesser known sister. I didn't think it was that good when I first saw it at 15 years old, but holy cow I didn't realize it was this bad. Clearly it was made to snag a little bit of the hype from the "Titanic" film, but with only a quarter of the effort put in at all. I remember John Rhys-Davies looking like he was in pain throughout most of the film, and having listened to just a snippet of the dialogue again, I don't think I'm wrong. Thanks for reviewing this so we didn't have to go through it again.
Another thing, I'm sort of commenting as I'm viewing; about Britannic being stalked by a U-boat. I may not be too caught up on the most recent knowledge, but I thought it was very probable that a u-boat may have followed her briefly during an October crossing, with some record or another from a u-boat reporting stalking a ship in the area near the same time Britannic's logs show, before realizing it was a hospital and giving up the chase. It may have been a fact mentioned in "The Unseen Britannic", I'll have to check back, but I definitely heard it somewhere.
I find having the _Britannic_ sink from German sabotage to be, at least for the time, kind of clever. At the turn of the millennium, it was still uncertain if the ship had been torpedoed or had hit a mine, something reflected in the dialogue. I also kind of like how two of the actors from _Raiders of the Lost Ark_ reunited for this film, even if their characters don't interact, and I unironically enjoy the music. While the HMS _Victoria_ was a real ship, she sank before the _Britannic_ did. As in, nearly 20 years earlier. I also don't like how the ship is almost "proudly" introduced as the _Titanic's_ sister ship. That was not even five years ago; you might want to distance yourself from that. Imagine Violet Jessop, Arthur John Priest, or Archie Jewell having a moment where they look at the Grand Staircase and reflect on the sad existence that the _Britannic_ had entered into: A hasty conversion into a utilitarian hospital ship for a war being fought on a scale unheard of. The _Titanic_ may have been lost on her maiden voyage, but at least she was properly completed. That would be the direction I would take a _Britannic_ film: Her loss was tragic in a different way than the _Titanic:_ The loss of life may have been low, but now countless soldiers won't be able to return home, and the ship never served a proper career.
the weirdest part about the CGI parts is that there's just random people walking around casually. even when two torpedoes are heading straight towards the ship, or the ship is literally sinking
The Britannic movie was based off a theory of how it sank, at the time of production, it wasn't 100% confirmed how or what caused it to sink. Not until late 2000s (about 2007 or 2008) when it was confirmed that it struck a landmine that was planted by the Germans (but wasn't intended to sink it)
Jacques Cousteau confirmed Britannic was struck by a mine when he discovered the shipwreck in 1975. If you don’t believe me, he made a whole documentary about it.
I'm currently writing a dubbed comic series about a real, recent tragedy and I know something that the Britannic writers clearly didn't: handle tragedies with care. The tragedy my series will be based on is one I have researched heavily and know a lot about. I'm confident in my ability to accurately portray the story and not disrespect anyone who died. I've still been nervous about making someone feel uncomfortable with the series, because I did take a few creative liberties where information does not exist and in one major aspect as part of the story that I want to tell, the message of it all. It's disgusting that they'd make a movie about this tragedy with so many historical inaccuracies and little research, respect, or care for the event just to ride the coat tails of James Cameron's Titanic.
@@stanisawstanczyk5526 The 737 MAX crashes from 2018-2019. I know a LOT about the whole story and I hope I can do my best to represent it in a way that's respectful and close to the truth. I care a great deal about this case and the last thing I want to do is be disrespectful with it's handling in my retelling.
As for the “fake” battleship “HMS Victoria” I always assumed I they meant for it to be the “HMS Victorious”, ab actual pre-dreadnought battleship that was in service at the time but somebody in animation screwed it up. That’s just a theory though, maybe the story editor is the one who screwed up.
Victorious was a Majestic class battleship, but she didn't look anything like that. She spent most of WW1 in second line duties, by the way, as a repair ship, after a brief period as part of BS9 until the end of 1914.
At 8:43, I gotta point out, those sweeping exterior shots in the James Cameron Titanic were done using a massive and incredibly detailed Titanic model. His looked so real because he used different combinations of scale models for different shots and that's why it holds up. The Britannic just looks so uncanny by comparison
I’m pretty sure James Cameron used a miniature model for the CG shots too. It was like a 1/6th scale or something, and they motion tracked the camera movements in order to scale up to the green screen work for all of the extras you see walking on the decks.
this video is exactly what i looked for aside from what you said for the grand staircase my man brittanic was converted to a hospital ship so most of her furnishings for sold off including the ones from the staircase which made the grand staircase look like.. lets just say not so grand
That’s not my point. The layout of the grand staircase in this movie is completely wrong. It wasn’t a spiral like staircase even after the ship was converted. They didn’t change the layout of the interior, they just removed the furnishings. That is what I’m talking about.
@@theshipenthusiast yeah I see what you are talking about,mistake on my part If you familiar with the game Brittanic Patroness of the Mediterranean made by "Titanic honour and glory" the staircase is looks quite similiar to that so again sorry that was an error on my part 👍👍
@@theshipenthusiast I'm planning to write my own Titanic story about these two ten-year-old cousins who sailed on the Titanic and survived the nightmare of the shipwreck with their own courage and witts and their complicated friendship but with great cost, in other words, they survive but their parents and older siblings do not and the Sinking of The Titanic brinks the two cousins relationship closer and help them reconcile and they meet everyone who actually sailed on the Titanic from Captain Smith Molly Brown Thomas Andrew Bruce Ismay Ofccer Wild Moody Murdoch and Lightollar and Mri And Miss Strous and John Jacob Aster and Madelin Wallace Hartly and Benjamin Guitimhiem and his Italian Velvet and everyone plays a part in the cousin story the story is called Don't Lose The Light and I hope it ten times better then this version Of Titanic Twin espicly if they make it into a movie.
I remember this movie looking A LOT better in my memory lol, maybe because it was from 2008 you tube era were every video was super compressed...and failing memory, that too, tends to smooth things out over time
This reminds me of those made for TV SciFi Channel movies they used to make in the 00's. Only difference is that they knew what they were and didn't try to be anything more.
This is definitely a very good movie. Anyone who says this is bad is definitely going to go to a therapy session in the next 20 minutes. I am definitely not getting held by gunpoint by the director of the movie :)
You are right about the things the production team got wrong. The biggest piece of fiction was the U Boat stalking the Britannic while submerged underwater. The Britannic had a top speed of about 23 knots, whereas WWI era U Boats could barely make 9 knots underwater. But one thing that’s sort of interesting is that one of the main characters , Vera Campbell, is loosely based on a woman named Violet Jessop, who sailed on all three Olympic class ocean liners. She served as a stewardess on the Olympic when she collided with a Royal Navy cruiser HMS Hawke in 1911. She then served on on and survived the sinking of the Titanic, and on top of that she served as a nurse on the Britannic and survived that sinking as well. Resilient woman.
Well I wouldn’t say she is based off violet jessop, more like they took one thing that happened to her and shoehorned it onto the main character. There isn’t anything else similar besides that.
Coming back to this video years later, god damn am I unfair in a lot of cases😭. I still think this movie sucks, but many of the critiques I made are incredibly nit picky and don’t really hold as genuine points. Gonna have to come back to this movie in a new video.
do it then
Nice
Hi
No, The Lusitania movie sucks
dude it's been a while. Miss the discord server but I understand why you deleted it
At least this movie helped to create one of the greatest tradition of the youtube ship community, the Sleeping Sun song on almost every single sinking ship video 😂. Amazing video btw!
Or a lesser extent in a couple videos of either Titanic and Britannic I heard used Bryan Adam's Don't Let Go. Man, that was early UA-cam right there.
Everybody gangsta until sleeping sun starts to play
Sleeping sun is terrible
@@random_1045 no it is not
It’s such a bad song anyways honestly
I will admit though. I think a movie about Britannic could’ve been very good, but I think the main thing that killed this film was that no one cared. Really all ships are stuck in the shadow of the Titanic and a film about the fate of its sister ship just couldn’t get financed, it’s a miracle that it got green lit in the first place.
The movie critics gave it a hard time. Thus, nobody cared to go watch it. If the movie critics would have given it good reviews, perhaps many more may have watched it.
No it was budget mostly and a cash grab. Throw 200-300 million at this film it could been done really well cause it has some good story beats. The only way too do it right be too build the ship like the 1997 film and with today’s CGI you could fill in the gaps pretty well. The only thing is you need a good director like James Cameron lol that be sick if he did a Britannic film and you need a studio willing to throw out 300 million. This was obviously a cash grab and the result of a low budget
An insult to her memory to a beautiful ship
Ship movies tend to go one of two routes: Dramatic, like Titanic. Or snuff film like Poseidon.
@@ryans413 it was more then a cash grab/low budget film.
They straight up made up complete bullshit with having a fake royal navy ship being on the scene dropping depth charges... showcasing people on the ship using weapons to blow up one of the torpedoes... the reason for her sinking (although I know it was debated before).. got the sinking process horribly wrong including a list that comes and goes and a script that goes against not only the real side that was hit, but also the movies original depiction with it listing starboard side which they corrected in the next scene being level. 🤣 got the wrong propellor and it wasn't anywhere near as brutal enough, at least the propellor man in Titanic gave an Oscar worthy performance slamming into it and doing about 50 back flips until hitting the water... in fact legend has it he hit the water doing those back flips, hit the sea bed and continued doing so all the way down to the core... now this next part falls more into myth/legend but they say he went through the core and is currently heading back up to the surface of the ocean... but, that sounds a little too far fetched, the rest of it seems 100% but the going through the earths core and being intact not so much.
This film is an actual joke, I hope this completely broke them financially, drove them to insanity and caused them to live out the rest of their pathetic life in a nut house/loony bin eating their own shit off their hand. Complete cretins.
I hope that James Cameron makes a Britannic movie someday. He clearly knows how to make a movie about a real historical disaster.
no its a good film it doesnt need music your opinion is wrong and will never be right no opinion and mine will be right
@@peppermeat8059 Ok I’m just gonna assume this is a troll comment.
I agree with with you Jace Vinson James Cameron needs to make another sequel to Titanic the involves the Britannic just what is wrong with you people I just don’t understand why some certain people like this movie maybe some of these individuals like this movie because they don’t know the real history of the Britannic
Screw you people 🤬
minus the cheesy love team and you got a historical movie
@@drewadventurehistory we need a movie about britannic atleast
The way that he addresses the fact that he’s not a historian and a just a ship enthusiast fills me with joy
Why ? 😂
Fr why
yeah
Enough enthusiasm might lead you on the path of being an unofficial historian.
As a 3D artist, I think Britannic did an excellent job with CGI, I would love to make models like that with confidence. CGI is no simple field, and considering the age of this movie, and how much more difficult CGI was at that time, the producers did almost 10/10. I've also studied Titanic and her sisters for years. The only flaws in the movie are hard to notice, and you wouldn't notice them unless you were an expert on the topic. I understand people get upset to see something they care about misrepresented, but passion and desire doesn't fund anything, money does. And when you're tight on money, you can only do so much. I remember seeing Titanic Honor and Glory back in 2017, how much effort was put into it. And today it still has not been fully completed. You can only get so perfect.
The "animated" scenes with Titanic look so much more real than the ones in Britannic, because James Cameron spared no expense, and built, not only a full-scale hull and stern piece, but also a 20 ft long miniature of the Titanic, which was used in conjunction with CG water. In the Britannic film however, they went the full CG route, and in 1999, the technology just didn't exist to make it look real.
The Titanic sinking scene in Britannic showed it sinking in one piece. Which by this point it was accepted that the ship split in two.
@@chrislondo2683Britannic did sink in one piece
@@FritsfriedhofThey said it was the Titanic sinking, not the Britannic.
Aww so is James Cameron John Hammond now
@@Fritsfriedhofno the brittanics front or back got blown up and got split from the rest but they are together at the sinking place
Honestly this would have worked as a Lusitania movie. Weapons on the ship, the U-Boat, realistically possible love plot, they could have done it. In fact, it did sort of in “Terror At Sea: Sinking of the Lusitania” which didn’t even need fake characters since the protagonist of sorts was an actual passenger who survived.
In fact there were some Germans than managed to sneak into the Lusitania
It could have but they chose Britannic to challenge James Cameron.
@@riversword2660 honestly it would have been more fitting to make a movie based on one of the Tanias (i forget what the class is called though I do know it was from Cunard)As their class rivaled the Olympic class. So to have a movie based on a sunken Tania class ship rival a movie about a sunken Olympic class ship would be smart
@@prototypeoswald1140 Tanias class isn’t a thing.
@@riversword2660 oh. Well then Cunard line in general
I’ve always wondered why the movie looked a bit too dark in some scenes, but now that I think of it, they’ve probably did it to make the terrible CGI less noticable.
Also him and the debates are 1 cenameter to tall
Well at 20 million it was one of the most expensive non miniseries TV movies ever made at the time
lmao when i was a kid i thought it was real
The CGI was a lot better than most of the TV movies and even some modestly budgeted theatrical films at the time since at 20 million it was one of the most expensive non miniseries cable TV films ever made if the studio hadnt gaslit the director into rewriting it as an action film it would have been better
One thing that always bugged me is that it technically is just a rehash of James Cameron Titanic plot wise. Nurse falls in love with a spy, spy falls in love with a nurse. Spy gets trapped while ship is sinking. Nurse goes off to find help. Gets a tool, rescues spy, both nearly drown. Never let go, you'll live on, spy dies.
But yeah the whole team behind the movie just didn't really care.
The most annoying part is that he just sat there and died. This isn't the North Atlantic where the near-freezing water will kill you, some of the people who saw the earlier lifeboats torn apart just streight-up swam away before theirs was destroyed.
They were probably forced to make this terrible movie 😂
@@RRW359 The only logical explanation would be that he actually suicided, knowing that even if he survived the sinking, the crew would just notice he is a spy and kill him anyway. So instead of being tortured to death to confess info, he just chose easy death. Even then, the officer finding that action ''bravest thing a man could ever do'' makes no sense, and it implies the writer planned to make the guy sacrifice himself for the girl like Jack.
I was thirteen when this movie came out, I was all ready a ship enthusiast, and I was hoping to see things I recognized from the deck plans, and photographs I collected on HMHS Britannic, the movie disappointed me. I think the producers were so embarrassed by their CGI model, they decided to set most of the film at night, to help hide the crude graphics, but by doing so they sacrificed history. The main thing that bugged me about Britannic 2000, is the fact it tries to convince the audience it's a sequel to the James Cameron film, with the two leads being a rehashed Rose and Jack, and dubious claims that the Britannic was unsinkable, despite no such claim was ever made about Britannic, also they misspelled the captain's name, it was spelled Bartlett, not Barrett.
I agree 100%
There's actually no definitive proof anyone claimed Titanic was unsinkable either. Also pretty much every mention of Britannic being unsinkable was followed by someone saying she's the largest ship in the world which was untrue by 1916.
Yeah, i agree. It some scenes they make the shading different to hide the TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE Cgi
@feldwebelfloppa4091 When they were building the Titanic, im pretty sure there was a dark shadow, maybe a fire, that weakened the hull leading to more water entering the Titanic during the iceberg collision.
@@Agamingperson no there wasn't that was just a smudge in an image that started that theory
From what I heard, only a few new sets were actually built for this TV movie (the ones they actually flooded with water). The bridge and super structure were recycled from previous tv productions. The Engine Room was actually a Pumping Station in Middlesex, England. The first class state rooms were actually filmed in Victoria House in London. This was a very cheaply produced tv movie -- that is why there are so many problems.
Wow
In the future, I am going to hire someone to create a Britannic movie that is historically accurate, tells the true story, and has more stages, unlike this version, and not edited like the shitty 2000 film
I agree, thinking the same thing
Well do you want to partner with me to create a better movie sometime?
@@TheRedPanda. idk, its okay if i said no, i'll make my own britannic animation, using Tiny Ships Sandbox in roblox frame by frame like how i did with my RMS Majestic video
@@koltp1909 oh, I thought you meant like an actual movie
@@TheRedPanda. well, it could be either an actual film or an animation created by an fan
The thing that upsets me most, is that some people originally watching this film and don’t know the real history, could have taken it as what actually happened. With no disclaimer from the beginning.
Yes there is, says based on a true story
@@allentoyokawa9068 *not good enough.*
@Zidane's Autastic World lol
@zidanesautasticworld283 The movie or ship?
During the movie where ‘HMS Victoria’ is shown, it’s not even a British pre-Dreadnought, it’s a US Indiana-class pre-Dreadnought. And last I checked, battleships didn’t drop depth charges. As well the majority of the British capital ships at the time of Gallipoli were stuck in the Dardanelles providing shore bombardment and none could be spared for much else.
Exactly. I'd get if this was fully fictional, like War of the Worlds, but it's meant to be a 'true story' film. Plus, if it's a 'True story' film, WHY ARE THERE WEAPONS ONBOARD, HOW DOES THE SHIP SINK FROM A MOLOTOV, WHY ARE THERE EVEN DEPTH CHARGES-
As well as flying the Union Jack from the stern, and not a naval ensign
And having the name "HMS VICTORIA" on the prow even though no Royal Navy ship ever had the "HMS" prefix on its nameplate
@@ukaszwalczak1154 bruh it‘s a bomb and not an molotov, freakin inform urself before u open ur mouth
@@Angelthewolf Bruh, that looks like a bottle, not a bomb, how am i supposed to think "Ah yes, this is a bomb" when the 'bomb' is literally a bottle?
Maybe it is the resurrected HMS Victoria that sank in 1893. But yes the CGI looks like Indiana class. Did someone try to pitch a movie about USS Oregon?
It was good when I was 10. Re-watching it as an adult was definitely a “childhood diminished” moment. 😂
‘It’s just a movie. Who cares if it’s off? People who are interested will look it up themselves…’
Except…they don’t. The common person would assume the movie is accurate while a few would look it up and be shocked at the differences; fewer still would cover it on a Public platform.
The shading looks wrong on the animation because I don't think it's rendered shading. I think it's just static shading applied to the textures that doesn't change with the lighting conditions. Also, the cargo hold isn't a set, it's CG.
This is also beginning 2000s rendering, without a crazy budget which they did not have such technologies which are easy now are hard, like yeah if you hold the CG to 2020s standards then it’s going to disappoint, gotta look at this in context.
@@westernflyer7453Titanic had CG too, 3 years earlier than this movie. And IT LOOKS BETTER. This movie was surely disappointing
And they mistook the captain's name.
In the so called movie he is known as "Charles Barrett"
But in irl his name was "Charles Bartlett"
@@tjstephen lol
It's actually Bartlett...
@@No-ic8uq Yes we know
@@No-ic8uq but the movie called him that
@@No-ic8uq Idk I had no time to correct it
When the ship capsized and sank, why didn't:
1. the ship fall on any of the lifeboats around it; and
2. the force of a heavy ship going down suck the lifeboats down into the water with it?
The lifeboats were well away from the ship by the time she made her final plunge.
As an interesting fact, ships don’t suck things down with them. The air escaping during a final plunge actually makes the water less dense, which can make humans or lifeboats unable to float. So it’s not that they get sucked down, but literally cannot float because the escaping air has made the water less dense than the object in it, which kills any buoyancy it may have
@@theshipenthusiast also if you look closely, the lifeboats keep pace with britannic even though the britannic is moving and the lifeboats most certainly couldn’t keep up
To answer the first question. The Britannic was constantly moving (apart from lifeboat launch after the 2 lifeboats that were destroyed, were discovered). The ship was still moving. Even in it's final moments so the lifeboats were well far away.
To answer the second question. It is a mix of the first answer and the fact the the amount of air bubbles made the water less dense to it wouldn't actually suck anything if there were lifeboats near.
@@theshipenthusiast The opening daytime scene in this movie actually looks good. In my opinion, it helps substitute for the small amount of sets they had, and to be honest, Titanic's "I'm flying" scene also used a CGI model too.
Feels surreal going back and looking at this movie now, especially since I distinctly remember it from my childhood. I still remember going back to my Grandma's house and watching this when I was 8 thinking it was some kind of Titanic sequel. Most surreal part is how the CGI and effects didn't bother me whatsoever as a child but now nearly 14 years later it's horrendous.
That's because at that time we were used to crappy animation which was still in its rise
There was a ~30 minute documentary on YT that used footage from this movie. Years ago it was deleted and I have no idea where it came from, but that was the place this animation was best suited. It's perfect as some kind of B-roll of the ship for documentaries. The documentary itself wasn't half bad either.
Was it 'Inside The Britannic'? I saw that when it first aired back in like 2002 and it using footage is how I learned there was a Britannic movie. Good documentary, I've been trying to find it online but theres pretty much no trace of it anywhere which is unfortunate.
@@WillieWonka928D and @TheBoatChannel, I remembered there was a Greek documentary that used to be on YT back in 2009. Had a music from Braveheart as well as footage from the 2000 Britannic and little bit from '97 Titanic. Including footage from Jacques Cousteau's documentary of when he discovered the wreck and interviews with the survivors.
@@chrislondo2683I'm pretty sure I watched that one like 5 or 6 years ago. I am Greek and it might as well have aired here
As Britannic sinks in this movie it appears that after Captain Bartlett (and perhaps everyone save for the two protagonists) got into a lifeboat and rowed away, he forgot to turn off the engines.
Another thing to further condemn this movie
:)
That is the part that bothered me the most. And they show him standing there, hat in hand, in full view of that spinning propeller, looking not at all bothered by anything. If we follow along with this plot, he was responsible for the horrible deaths of a boatload of people, and he's just standing there trying to look heroic. Then, in an even more ridiculous scene, the bad guy rides along in another lifeboat and gets himself killed and chopped on purpose. Somehow this lifeboat does what an identical chopped up lifeboat did not do. His boat stops the propeller. Already makes no sense...but to make it worse, some disembodied voice calls him the "bravest guy he has ever known" (whattt??????) Detours from exact historical events for the sake of a mostly fictional film plot might have been excusable. For making absolutely no logical sense there is no excuse.
Forgot to turn off the engines? I'm sorry, but that's hilarious. Like he left his oven on or something! Also, CGI in the lifeboat scene was really bad in my opinion. It was supposed to be a serious moment. Indiana Jones handled similar scene better years before that movie.
I know how you feel. I'm a stickler for detail myself. "Gettysburg" is one my favorite movies, and I still find myself pointing out what actually happened in real life.
My mom has been writing a historical novel for the past five or six years now and will do a month's worth of research just to be sure one sentence is correct.
I'm not sure the Britannic's story would make a good film at all. She was the victim of a mine and not there was no hubris about her safety---her sister's demise in 1912 drove that lesson home hard---only twenty-one people were lost, and she's in shallower water than the Titanic.
Now, if they had decided to do a film about the Eastland disaster, *that* would be a good successor to the "Titanic" movie. One could either have the drama of the "Go on this excursion or you're fired!" conflict and build up to the capsizing, or do it like "Dunkirk" and make the struggle for survival the focal point. The reason I chose the Eastland story for this is because the lifeboat laws put into place after the Titanic disaster contributed to the Eastland capsizing---the Titanic had too few lifeboats on board, but the notoriously top-heavy and unstable Eastland had too many lifeboats. 845 people died in the Chicago Harbor as a result. And she had barely cast off her lines too!
UPDATE: I told my mother about this, and she says that while it isn't possible to make a good film about the Britannic herself, you *can* make a film about Violet Jessop, who survived the sinking of both the Titanic and Britannic. She worked as stewardess on the former and a nurse's aide on the latter.
She worked in Olympic as a stewardess too, and was there when the collision happened.
Honestly, this was only meant to capitalize on that Titanic movie craze. Both were made in the late 90's/early 2000's and both had dramatized love scenes. Also, in 2000, the PBS documentary "Lost Liners" aired on television. Further adding to the mania. When I watched this with my mom back in 2000, I knew (even as a kid) that this was simply a studio's way on trying to produce a "Titanic-esc" movie because they heard that Titanic had a sister ship. Ironically, this movie, for better or worse, brought Britannic to the public's attention as many people may not have been aware that the Titanic had a sister ship. While the film is rather lackluster in its performance, I still find it very enjoyable, and I even own a working copy of the 2000 movie on VHS.
15:21 : One thing they did got right however is the radio cables on top of the two mast (These are the cables used by the Telegraph operator to receive answers and messages from other ships. They're not essential for transmiting, but are for receiving messages. Meaning that if the cables are cut-of, Britannic can still send emergency messages, but cannot receive any answers back.)
This movie has less logic than history channel saying titanic ripped open the reciprocating engine room after hitting the iceberg.
My big question. The whole Uboats, German spies, and weapons smuggling stuff. While no I’m not okay with distorting history like that, let’s pretend I’m actually okay with adding all that stuff. My question in that case would be, why would you use the Britannic to tell that story? Why not make that movie about the Lusitania? The ship that may very well have been smuggling weapons in reality.
I’m guessing probably because they thought with the success of Titanic a few years earlier more people would hear the title and automatically associate it with something they already thought was good
I’m actually convinced by your Titanic association theory, since the alleged trailer for the movie indeed uses Horner’s music, and suspiciously tries to link it to the Titanic as a whole.
I’d be betting that they indeed did try and sell the movie via association, advertising the movie as a sequel to Titanic, like how the trailer makes Britannic seem like the sequel of the Titanic.
Link: ua-cam.com/video/0l4jah7Anb8/v-deo.html
Because the movie is realistic for the time it was made in. The real reason for the sinking of the Britannic wasn‘t clear for a long time, and some thought it was sunk by an german u-boat (what it technally was since the mine came from one) and the theory there there maybe were german spies on board is still didn‘t 100% proven wrong until today
I even knew that probably the water was green screened, and mainly, the grand staircase in the movie is not how she looked like in the original ship. I understand that the grand staircase got changed to an HMHS style instead of a white star line RMS staircase style, but still they should just have a blank White Star line staircase and just paint the walls white, remove the Honor and Glory clock panel and remove the Cherub statue, put the words ‘Out of bounds for patients’ on the wall where the clock used to be and there, the staircase looked accurate!
17:21 they also forgot that all the other lifeboats where launched after the propeller were turned of due to the passenger casualties of the boat going into the propeller
Honestly, the CG is pretty revolutionary for the time. All the VFX was handled by a 3 person team using NewTek Lightwave 3D for animation and Adobe After Effects for compositing. The ship was modeled by just ONE person. I know it doesn't hold up, but render engines back then did not have the capabilities we have today, especially when it comes to lighting and shaders. Titanic solved this issue by using actual scale models and only using CG for the backgrounds/smoke/water. Also great video🖖🤟 Wish people talked more about this film.
Well the original script was basically a pseudo micro biopic revolving around violet jessop surviving the Collision of the olympic and HMS hawke, sinking of titanic and britannic. The studio gaslit the director into rewriting it as an action film
It’s funny because just tonight I was thinking about how if they made a good Britannic movie, Violet Jessup would be the leading lady, and the movie would center around her trouble with the Olympic trio. First act, Olympic, Second act Titanic, final act Britannic
I dunno man. You're saying studio executives meddled in the creative process and reduced what could have been a high concept movie into a dumpster fire? I've never heard of that happening.
@@BULL.173 Which is why the executives should stick to the money side and let the creators create
E
6:58
My man trying to break the helm
Yes.
yea hes litteraly gonna break the helm
Video: "Reciprocating engines explode... Damage is take to the port bow."
Me: Am I having a stroke?
thats why they have to stop the engines
@PerishingPurplePulsar Lmao
Finally someone that has true love for all of the sister ships. I always wanted to know more about the Britannic, and why people don’t do more explorations and post photos of the shipwreck being that it is so well preserved. your video is amazing.
I think we should try to salvage some items from the Britannic
@@KG-ds2fj I agree. It really is a beautiful ship.
And the “seagulls” flying in the middle of the ocean 😂😂
I’m an Olympic class geek too lol. I didn’t like this movie either and about a year prior, I decided to see if there were any reviews of it on UA-cam. I didn’t look it up again until just now. That’s when I saw ur video. I was immediately sucked in and had to watch ur video. And I don’t regret it. I really wanted to get someone else’s opinion on the film and now I have. (And it’s how I expected the opinion to be) I hate the movie bc of plot and inaccurate story telling. But I love ur review. Keep up the great work! 👍
My second video on the topic has a whole section focused on plot if you are interested.
Yeah thanks! I’ll look into it
@@theshipenthusiast I agree with you we to get James Cameron attention so he can make a sequel to Titanic that do with Britannic maybe Rose could be on the Britannic
Deadass, when I hear the graphics comparisons to consoles, it usually always comes across a bit too harsh imo, but legit this looks like a PS3 era game; decent detail, but not convincingly real, noticeable aliasing, and things generally having a kind of fogginess about them.
But this was 2000, even the better animation from the time isn't good. This is 100% a guilty pleasure movie though, it'd be fun to watch with a group of 'maritime history enthusiasts'
The worst part about it is the detail and lighting. From far away, it looks ok but any closer it starts to fall apart
Looks like a high res PS2 cutscene
Tbh I’d say this is a bit insulting to the ps3, because I know at least the ps3 port of Project Diva had some pretty good effects in it, although it was because it was technically the arcade version of the game without the shader, but as a port of the original psp game which didn’t have high poly models or graphics
Even early PS3 games like Grand Theft Auto IV and Modern Warfare 2 look better than this Britannic movie.
Great video on this! Honestly just gotta respect the fact a Britannic movie actually exists, and as someone pointed out this would've made more fitting for a Lusitania film LOl
Really a shame, this could have been an amazing film
Thanks for going over it, much appreciated
I think all movies tend to do that. You see them when you're younger when you're attracted to visuals, action and romance. Then you grow up and the research it inspired you to do made you realize how all movies (based on reality or fiction) are in fact much more flawed that you initially thought. Also, the information and nuances it can give you is rather limited on screen time anyway. Conclusion: books, visual art, here I come.
Amazing video as always, another thing that has always bugged me (aside from all the things you mentioned in the video) is that the lifeboats are way out of proportion, like when the lifeboat got chopped up on the wrong side, you can see it’s wayyyyy to small compared to the hull, and all the other lifeboat scenes show the exact same thing, the boats are way to small.
i just love how it keels over and just dies at the end
She was like "ah fuck it." but in rl it was much slower than that lmfaooo
@@vibrantgleam no more fucks given to live lol
As a sinking ships fan, I appreciated the dedication they put in to the movie. But, I come to see myself hating it. I don't care about the CGI. I just care about how much they know. Titanic had very well scripting, a good story line and good CGI.
Yeah Camron had the juxury of rebuilding 80% of Titanic and having cutting edge cgi a good budget, and a lot of miniatures.
Nice job! I did have one last nit pic to add on. Not only did the ship list super fast at the end, but in real life, the ocean was so shallow that before the stern even went under, the bow had hit the ocean floor causing it to break. They did not show this in the movie
Yeah the ship just like fell sideways in the movie
Even if the movie is garbage, can we all agree that on the soundtrack being the only good thing?
I mean, I won’t say anything about the movie itself ( hint: I’ve seen worse, and better ), but the soundtrack, that is something else.
The soundtrack is decent but like everything else in the movie, it’s repeated too much and it gets old quick.
Good point.
Ye, it’s good, but my film intended to use the soundtrack (note: it wont repeat unlike this Britannic movie)
Another really irritating thing about the propeller sequence is how all the other boats are in the water, when the whole reason the incident happened is because the boat was launched long before any other
The ending was just like
Bob: I wanna get this over with
Tim: Me too
Bob: ok I know!
Bob: HMHS Britannic tips over, loosing its funnels and crashes into the sea bed, done, movie over, and The End
Tim: Great job! I’m sure ppl will like it!
I’m a ship enthusiast myself and the Britannic hit a mine 100 percent because Britannic dident have ammunition on it so it had to have hit the mine
6:32 “but then this happens;” _ad pops up_
I'm not sure if you noticed this like my friend did, but from what she told me, the movie completely messed up the boat deck set where the giant davits are. There should be like 6 boats stored under the davits
I love how whenever that life raft got sucked into the propellor,the boat seemed perfectly fine, in reality it would have probably been broken to bits, but it just got whacked and went straight down like a plastic toy, and the people inside got flung and stretched their arms and legs out, like in looney toons, It should be common sense they would be hit hard and probably thwacked to gibs (bunch of body parts)
But hey, I did no research and know almost nothing about physics.
Also excuse my english it's my third language
What you said actually amazed me
Coming from someone who doesn't know physics, that's impressive
@@TheRedPanda. thanks
@@Zelurpio you're welcome
I also noticed when theyre getting on the lifeboat right before the tragedie, the ship isn't moving even tho the propellers are. But when the lifeboat is getting torn apart by the propeller the ship is suddenly moving quite fast
To be fair, the animation was perfectly fine for a 2000 TV movie. It looked like a PS2 era game because it's as old as the PS2.
But the titanic movie has better animation
I keep forgetting this movie even exists. You tell this movie had a very low budget and no one really cared about this movie. The CG even for 2000 looks terrible. Compared to Titanic which looks amazing after all these years. The CG in Titanic for the most part still looks real.
When the propeller scene happens, it seems like the children and that lady die.
Also, that guy just stayed on that lifeboat when it was clearly far enough from the propeller to jump.
if i were an film director, i would make an better Britannic by using models [like the poseidon adventure and Titanic] and add historical details like Paul Greengrass/James Cameron by adding the mine scene instead of the sabotage scene as in this crappy film. plus the new better Britannic movie would sink in the dayttime around 8am [like irl] and the scenes shown in this tv movie would be fixed like the propeller chop scene corrected on the port side and add some historical characters like Violet Jessop
What would have been more interesting if the nurse who was on the Titanic had shot the German spy she fell for before he dropped the wine bottle and she's prevented him from sinking the ship however when she's walking around the ship on deck taking this hard because she trusted him she fell for him and then an hour later when it's completely morning then the ship hits the mine that would have stayed true to the actual event and true story Don't you agree.
I watched this movie like once a long time ago, while still during the peak of my ship enthusiast phase, and immediately made me upset because I sat through the thing and noticed every inaccuracy
7:00 I GOTTA LOOK LIKE I'M DOING THINGS.
Seriously he moved it from Halt Engine to....nothingness. Like he's telling the engines, "there are no orders, lads, time for a tea-break."
People forget that this was a TV movie and most probably didn't even have half the budget that Titanic had
Also, being made for TV in the 90s meant it was going to be viewed on standard definition TV with roughly half the resolution of a HDTV.
You have nailed this brilliantly.
I hope there is a proper Britannic movie in the future.
Movie maker: forgets to add 1 window to the ships
ship fanatics: OGM THIS IS INCORRECT, A CRIME SCENE lol
That's...not true. Like, those are small mistakes, which can be forgivable if it's just footage for a documentary, but this is claiming to be a better version of James Cameron's Titanic. Which, god forbid, doesn't have terrible character development, does fit the story of the ship, and IS actually accurate to the sinking-
This one has horrid mistakes.
First, the grand staircase windows are just gaping holes into the void
The doors are wrong.
The characters are wrong,
They mispelled the captains name.
The port and center propeller is supposed to be the only one running, not all three as shown here.
Quite clearly after the list is shown later in the movie it hasn’t listed yet.
The passengers were chopped from the port propeller, not the starboard.
Screw it theres even more mistakes.
And also the part with the people getting killed by the propeller, the ship had already stopped when they gave the order to lower the lifeboats. The people irl were part of the stokers I believe that evacuated before the official order to evacuate, and with the captain not knowing this, the propellers were not stopped
8:45 Fun fact: this was a 1/20 scale physical model with digital people and other (moving) details added. For as far as I know there are no fully digitally animated ships in the 1997 movie.
Was the ship in the ‘97 movie ever actually completely animated? I was under the impression it was a miniature which would explain why it has aged so well.
It is mostly a model. It’s enhanced by cgi though and that’s what I’m talking about.
@@theshipenthusiast they actually used cgi to aid in compositing shots together, like between smaller models and larger ones, although in the case of the million dollar shot, parts were completely digital, but the whole thing was blended, which is also why Titanic still has amazing visuals. They used mainly practical effects and used cgi to put it together.
18:40 Britannic be like: yea I'm done with these humans see ya
I hate why this movie had the Starboard Propeller Active.. like it wasn't even active.. only the port side propeller
Imma be honest, the first time I watched this I was like “ok he hates the movie but I like it so you do you” but now it’s kinda like you know what he had a point.
Actually I think the movie makers were probably embarrassed too when they saw their model
Britannic should get a proper movie, because this '99 movie is not what it deserves.
I hate this film just as much as you hate it
The director could have called Simon Mills who owns the wreck or called Ken Marshall
its cgi
Truly enjoyed every bit of this review and breakdown. Even when I saw this for the first time around 2013, I knew something was weird.
@MC 106 I am the real Top Hat Titan
I like when the ship suddenly capsizes & dissapears In a few seconds
I remember watching this when it first came out, excited that there was another "Titanic" movie about her lesser known sister. I didn't think it was that good when I first saw it at 15 years old, but holy cow I didn't realize it was this bad. Clearly it was made to snag a little bit of the hype from the "Titanic" film, but with only a quarter of the effort put in at all. I remember John Rhys-Davies looking like he was in pain throughout most of the film, and having listened to just a snippet of the dialogue again, I don't think I'm wrong. Thanks for reviewing this so we didn't have to go through it again.
Myyy wiish for this nighttime to laaaaast for a lifetime
This is like a drunk man making the movie
They could've just flipped the image for the boat deck scenes to make it look like the other side of the ship.
Yeah
Not even John Rhys Davis could save Britannic.
If they wanted to do an “Olympic Class ship vs U-Boat” story they should’ve done almost exactly that: the RMS Olympic taking on a U-Boat.
Another thing, I'm sort of commenting as I'm viewing; about Britannic being stalked by a U-boat. I may not be too caught up on the most recent knowledge, but I thought it was very probable that a u-boat may have followed her briefly during an October crossing, with some record or another from a u-boat reporting stalking a ship in the area near the same time Britannic's logs show, before realizing it was a hospital and giving up the chase. It may have been a fact mentioned in "The Unseen Britannic", I'll have to check back, but I definitely heard it somewhere.
So did I but I don’t think so as Britannic was way too fast
Finally someone talks about it
That’s the whole reason I made this video. No one else really has.
@@theshipenthusiast don’t call me stupid but i love this movie
@@braydensrandomvideos1628 May i know why?
@@u1k4 might be because it's nostalgic for him
I find having the _Britannic_ sink from German sabotage to be, at least for the time, kind of clever. At the turn of the millennium, it was still uncertain if the ship had been torpedoed or had hit a mine, something reflected in the dialogue. I also kind of like how two of the actors from _Raiders of the Lost Ark_ reunited for this film, even if their characters don't interact, and I unironically enjoy the music.
While the HMS _Victoria_ was a real ship, she sank before the _Britannic_ did. As in, nearly 20 years earlier. I also don't like how the ship is almost "proudly" introduced as the _Titanic's_ sister ship. That was not even five years ago; you might want to distance yourself from that.
Imagine Violet Jessop, Arthur John Priest, or Archie Jewell having a moment where they look at the Grand Staircase and reflect on the sad existence that the _Britannic_ had entered into: A hasty conversion into a utilitarian hospital ship for a war being fought on a scale unheard of. The _Titanic_ may have been lost on her maiden voyage, but at least she was properly completed. That would be the direction I would take a _Britannic_ film: Her loss was tragic in a different way than the _Titanic:_ The loss of life may have been low, but now countless soldiers won't be able to return home, and the ship never served a proper career.
the weirdest part about the CGI parts is that there's just random people walking around casually. even when two torpedoes are heading straight towards the ship, or the ship is literally sinking
that true
The Britannic movie was based off a theory of how it sank, at the time of production, it wasn't 100% confirmed how or what caused it to sink. Not until late 2000s (about 2007 or 2008) when it was confirmed that it struck a landmine that was planted by the Germans (but wasn't intended to sink it)
Jacques Cousteau confirmed Britannic was struck by a mine when he discovered the shipwreck in 1975. If you don’t believe me, he made a whole documentary about it.
I'm currently writing a dubbed comic series about a real, recent tragedy and I know something that the Britannic writers clearly didn't: handle tragedies with care. The tragedy my series will be based on is one I have researched heavily and know a lot about. I'm confident in my ability to accurately portray the story and not disrespect anyone who died. I've still been nervous about making someone feel uncomfortable with the series, because I did take a few creative liberties where information does not exist and in one major aspect as part of the story that I want to tell, the message of it all. It's disgusting that they'd make a movie about this tragedy with so many historical inaccuracies and little research, respect, or care for the event just to ride the coat tails of James Cameron's Titanic.
What tragedy is it ?
@@stanisawstanczyk5526 The 737 MAX crashes from 2018-2019. I know a LOT about the whole story and I hope I can do my best to represent it in a way that's respectful and close to the truth. I care a great deal about this case and the last thing I want to do is be disrespectful with it's handling in my retelling.
This movie was literally just a copy of the criteria in Titanic 1997.
They got the captains name wrong to. The movie said Barret instead of Bartlett
As for the “fake” battleship “HMS Victoria” I always assumed I they meant for it to be the “HMS Victorious”, ab actual pre-dreadnought battleship that was in service at the time but somebody in animation screwed it up. That’s just a theory though, maybe the story editor is the one who screwed up.
Victorious was a Majestic class battleship, but she didn't look anything like that. She spent most of WW1 in second line duties, by the way, as a repair ship, after a brief period as part of BS9 until the end of 1914.
It's the ghost of HMS Victoria from 1893, rendered as USS Oregon
At 8:43, I gotta point out, those sweeping exterior shots in the James Cameron Titanic were done using a massive and incredibly detailed Titanic model. His looked so real because he used different combinations of scale models for different shots and that's why it holds up. The Britannic just looks so uncanny by comparison
I’m pretty sure James Cameron used a miniature model for the CG shots too. It was like a 1/6th scale or something, and they motion tracked the camera movements in order to scale up to the green screen work for all of the extras you see walking on the decks.
this video is exactly what i looked for aside from what you said for the grand staircase
my man brittanic was converted to a hospital ship
so most of her furnishings for sold off
including the ones from the staircase
which made the grand staircase look like.. lets just say not so grand
That’s not my point. The layout of the grand staircase in this movie is completely wrong. It wasn’t a spiral like staircase even after the ship was converted. They didn’t change the layout of the interior, they just removed the furnishings. That is what I’m talking about.
@@theshipenthusiast yeah I see what you are talking about,mistake on my part
If you familiar with the game Brittanic Patroness of the Mediterranean made by "Titanic honour and glory" the staircase is looks quite similiar to that so again sorry that was an error on my part 👍👍
Btw I loved your content
U got a new sub,keep going :)
@@theshipenthusiast I thin krhey wanted to make the 2nd class staircase but again it's poorly
made
@@theshipenthusiast I'm planning to write my own Titanic story about these two ten-year-old cousins who sailed on the Titanic and survived the nightmare of the shipwreck with their own courage and witts and their complicated friendship but with great cost, in other words, they survive but their parents and older siblings do not and the Sinking of The Titanic brinks the two cousins relationship closer and help them reconcile and they meet everyone who actually sailed on the Titanic from Captain Smith Molly Brown Thomas Andrew Bruce Ismay Ofccer Wild Moody Murdoch and Lightollar and Mri And Miss Strous and John Jacob Aster and Madelin Wallace Hartly and Benjamin Guitimhiem and his Italian Velvet and everyone plays a part in the cousin story the story is called Don't Lose The Light and I hope it ten times better then this version Of Titanic Twin espicly if they make it into a movie.
Thank god some one finally talked about this trash heap great vid.
The cgi model is so bad it’s just a reskined titanic with gantry davits
the britannic isnt shit but i guess the modelled one is
They should have just ask james Cameron to lease his it's in boxes and storage
I remember this movie looking A LOT better in my memory lol, maybe because it was from 2008 you tube era were every video was super compressed...and failing memory, that too, tends to smooth things out over time
This reminds me of those made for TV SciFi Channel movies they used to make in the 00's. Only difference is that they knew what they were and didn't try to be anything more.
Amanda Ryan is a bit of alright though.
This is definitely a very good movie. Anyone who says this is bad is definitely going to go to a therapy session in the next 20 minutes. I am definitely not getting held by gunpoint by the director of the movie :)
I'd love to see what the creators say about this lol😂
Same
Would like to see an Olympic movie. Unlike her two sisters, Olympic was successful, ramming and sinking a U boat.
You are right about the things the production team got wrong. The biggest piece of fiction was the U Boat stalking the Britannic while submerged underwater. The Britannic had a top speed of about 23 knots, whereas WWI era U Boats could barely make 9 knots underwater. But one thing that’s sort of interesting is that one of the main characters , Vera Campbell, is loosely based on a woman named Violet Jessop, who sailed on all three Olympic class ocean liners. She served as a stewardess on the Olympic when she collided with a Royal Navy cruiser HMS Hawke in 1911. She then served on on and survived the sinking of the Titanic, and on top of that she served as a nurse on the Britannic and survived that sinking as well. Resilient woman.
Well I wouldn’t say she is based off violet jessop, more like they took one thing that happened to her and shoehorned it onto the main character. There isn’t anything else similar besides that.
@@theshipenthusiast that’s why I said “loosely based”