Inimigos e Amantes

Britannic starts off quite well, with relatively good effects and interesting characters, although its claim of being "based on true events" is very misleading, somewhat similar to saying that Men In Black was based on true events as Earth, where it was based, existed. The Britannic did indeed sink off Greece, although the sinking was believed due to a torpedo strike or mine, not German agents on board the ship as the film pretends. Too many facts are wrong in this film, either made up or worse still blatantly contradicting the real event - but taken as a work of total fiction, which it basically is, it is still enjoyable. That said, it just copies its sibling, James Cameron's Titanic, far too much - too many things in this film are copies of Titanic's plot, right down to the love story between two people of different classes - in this case German and British rather than First Class and Third Class. The film weakens noticeably towards the end, the special effects (which seem to have been quickly put together by the same effects house as for Titanic, but with little of the attention to detail) get a lot poorer, and the plot falls to pieces in its attempts to copy the Titanic formula. Watch it if you've nothing else better to do, but don't expect the plot to live up to the real event's promise...

While this is one of the better sort of 'made for TV movies', it did contain one mistake that made me cringe. During a conversation between the German Spy and an Irish accomplice, the accomplice states that many of the Irish seamen aboard will be glad to take part in the seizure of the ship because ' they've had family killed by the Black and Tans'. This is supposed to be 1916. The Black and Tans weren't founded until 1920. Its just a pity that that small element wasn't properly checked out first.

The latter TITANIC was not the epic film about the perilous disaster that the ship beheld when it crashed into an iceberg. No, TITANIC was a mediocre love story written around the ship's disaster. And, this film made the pathetic mistake a few years ago, to try and rip off the success of that first movie with making a TV "special" about the tragic journey of Titanic's sister ship (this TV special also included about a zillion commercials).

The characters are even less interesting than they were in TITANIC, and the special effects and camerawork and not nearly as good. And this is not a good thing, especially since the producers obviously made sure that everyone knew this film was coming, so that they would watch it. And when it finally arrives, it is a complete and total flop. This did not keep me from buying again for my video collection when I saw it at Hollywood for under five dollars. All together, the storyline is slightly more interesting, as there are several gunfights and thrilling moments in which people are chased around. The film is not the thriller that it says it is. It is just another average film based on your true story (with the facts altered of course) and tries to rip off of the success of its predecessor. BRITANNIC gets 2/5.

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.

I wouldn't say this movie was tacked together to take advantage of the Cameron Titanic's fame and box office success. Honest! First off it's made for t.v. and contrary to how the film tells the story of Britannic, there are some pretty good CGI effects. So being on t.v. there is no box office to appeal to. I just wish the Fox Family channel who produced this would have pertained more to what really happened on Britannic. Perhaps that's what documentaries are for as in the Discovery Channel's excellent docu on the Britannic's story and filming of her wreck. But if you go into this movie with prior knowledge of the real Britannic, you can enjoy this movie for what it is. Like I said there are CGi effects in this that could rival the Cameron Titanic. The story concerns a female undercover agent recruited by the British in 1916 to fish out a German Spy on the ship. I won't say what happens except that she gets him in more ways than one. The film makers spend much time recreating and touring different sections of the Britannic as they tell their story. What the ship looked like in the engine room or on the bridge or the lifeboat area etc. So those are pluses in the movie. John Rhys-Davies as the Captain is improbable here(he doesn't look anything like the Britannic's real Captain Bartlett). But I like Rhys-Davies as he is very portly and looks 'Captainly' ... is that a word. Don't take this story about the Britannic 'too' seriously. It's not what happened except that the ship sinks. But enjoy it for the 2 hours it gives you. Better yet go to the web or to a library to find much more bonafide info on this somewhat forgotten tragedy.