A bit overrated, but still an amazing film

The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

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.

Britannic is a good film that has a good cast which includes Edward Atterton, Amanda Ryan, Jacqueline Bisset, Ben Daniels, John Rhys-Davies, Bruce Payne, Alex Ferns, Eleanor Oakley, Archie Davies, Ed Stobart, Adam Bareham, David Lumsden, Wolf Kahler, Philip Rham, Daniel Coonan, Daniel Tatarsky, and Martin Savage! The acting by all of these actors is very good. Rhys-Davies and Payne are really excellent in this film. I thought that they performed good. The thrills is really good and some of it is surprising. The movie is filmed very good. The music is good. The nudity scene was a bit unneeded and I thought it brought down the impact of the film a few stars. The film is quite interesting and the movie really keeps you going until the end. This is a very good and thrilling film. If you like Edward Atterton, Amanda Ryan, Jacqueline Bisset, Ben Daniels, John Rhys-Davies, Bruce Payne, Alex Ferns, Eleanor Oakley, Archie Davies, the rest of the cast in the film, Thrillers, Dramas, Romance, War, Action, Mystery, and interesting true stories films then I strongly recommend you to see this film today!

The Britannic's tragic story will never generate the same interest or emotion as that of her more famous sister ship. Still, the Britannic met an even more mysterious fate and does constitute the world's largest shipwreck (the Britannic having been 20 feet longer than Titanic).This brings us to the 2000 made-for-TV movie. Overall, it provided an enjoyable evening's entertainment. It wasn't until near the climax that some disturbing anachronisms and very unlikely character behaviors began to seriously take away from my enjoyment.The film features Amanda Ryan as governess/British intelligence agent Vera Campbell, along with would-be chaplain/German intelligence agent/saboteur Father Reynolds (Edward Atterton). Jacqueline Bisset, as an aging and infirm aristocratic English matron, is the only big name in the cast-and her role is somewhat small. The cast is solid, though, also including John Rhys-Davies as Captain Barrett and Ben Daniels as First Officer Townsend.SPOILERSThere is certainly plenty of room for speculation with the Britannic story. Did it hit a mine? Was it torpedoed? Was an internal explosion the primary (or a secondary) cause of the sinking? If so, was it intentional? Was the hospital ship carrying contraband troops (as the real-life Germans seemed to believe) or a cache of weapons (as the movie Germans rightly believed)? These are all fair questions and any halfway feasible explanation is about as good as another. Therefore I had no trouble with the basic premise of a German spy on board and a German U-boat being involved-although the film shows the U-boat failing to sink the ship and then being destroyed by a British warship-something that did not happen.Other than the tiresome, ever-present presence of a 1990s feminist, EXPECTING 1990s treatment (and thoroughly surprised and outraged when her male antagonists act basically as they would have in 1916 instead of 2000), the film has a few other anachronisms. For one, Atterton and Major Baker (Bruce Payne), the ship's doctor, glibly discuss the explosive dangers of coal dust in the bunkers. I could be wrong, but hasn't this phenomenon been discovered only in the past 25 or so years? Secondly, this IS 1916. Whatever Vera Campbell's morals, her sudden and uninvited (at least expressly uninvited) return to Reynold's cabin where she immediately began disrobing without a word is quite a stretch! Not having figured out his ulterior plans, she still thought he was a minister. True, they were beginning to be very attracted to each other. Yes, they had shared a steamy kiss a short while before. In 2000, perhaps the woman returning and diving into the man's bed would be a feasible occurrence. But with a MINISTER, in 1916? Not that the two of them COULDN'T have gotten together during the movie…but, my gosh…if nothing else, her assuming that he would welcome her advances was a clear lack of respect for the man and his principals! I would have to believe that 85% of REAL ministers in 1916 would have been both flabbergasted and offended (if titillated ) by a young women bursting into his room (even after sharing an earlier kiss) and disrobing.This pales in comparison, though, with Agent Baker's suicidal desire to rescue Reynolds-AFTER she knew he was responsible for sinking the ship! Her being hesitant to leave him trapped in the sinking ship I can understand. But running back onto the ship to miraculously (love the length of time TV shipwreckees can hold their breath!) save a man who undoubtedly WOULD HANG within a few weeks' time is preposterous. What's more, despite her feminine racing heart (funny how these 1990s feminists are somehow too `feminine' to make a logical decision in movieland!), as a trained operative, she would KNOW that by aiding and abetting the enemy, she would be facing a REAL danger of being hanged, herself! This is where I felt cheated. A pre-flapper female charging around the decks of a ship, firing a pistol…OK…I can buy that within this context. There WERE female operatives throughout history. Yet, in making the character feminine and human enough to be liked, why does she have to make a mockery of the training she supposedly had received? My only possible explanation for this apparent plot hole is that only the two of them and the now-dead doctor (Payne) knew Reynold's identity. Perhaps Vera hoped they could just pretend he really WAS an innocent minister and forge a life together. This, too, sounds outrageous-although, under the stress and passion of the moment, perhaps such muddled thoughts COULD have been running through her mind.In any case, Britannic is an intriguing little film, but one which leaves the viewer with more questions about the characters' bizarre actions than about the mystery of the ship's actual sinking.

HiI loved this film, i thought it would be dull but it was exciting and the actors where very good, if people think it will be like Titanic then they are wrong this films story is much better and its about time there was a film made on the Britannic.Thanks quacker31