The Poseidon Adventure (2005 TV Movie) User Reviews

Not as bad as I expected, but....

[cellapie · 5/10 · 21 November 2005]

Where do I begin? Of course this movie was cheesy and it could've been much better, but it also could've been much worse (i.e. some other film about a capsizing ship was made and the only upside down scenes were in corridors! I apologize for not remembering the name of it). There was no sense of suspense whatsoever. The scenes taking place outside the ship of the rescue effort absolutely RUINED the movie. The ending was too pat; you knew what going to live and who was going to die---James Martin has been so helpful getting Mrs. Rosen thru the air duct: dead! slutty maseusse who sleeps with a married man: dead! The terrorist who Rogo dragged thru the inverted ship: DEAD! However, I do choose to give the writer and the director the benefit of the doubt. The scuttlebutt is that the TV movie was severely altered from what was originally planned by some network exec who played up the terrorist angle. (IN THE SPIRIT OF FULL DISCLOSURE, I SHOULD ADD THAT I AM A MEMBER OF THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE FAN CLUB).

The one bit of casting that I truly hated was Steve Guttenberg. If you see his name in a movie, you know it's going to have a cheese factor. And he is still in great shape but his body looks 20 years younger than his face. scary. Plus, he was quoted in an EW article in a review of this movie and he came off sounding like a self-important jerk. You're Steve Guttenberg!!! I would've much rather seen someone like Jimmy Smits, Gary Sinise, William Petersen, etc. in the role of the duplicitous husband.

I also agree with one of the earlier posts pondering how someone could survive getting bounced about in a 3-story tall ballroom, while others die from massive trauma in a corridor. huh?

I also found it a tad disappointing that the survivors found the other bomb---in the mess of the overturned engine room, the bomb is just sitting on a platform waiting to be tapped--blew a hole in the hull and just jumped to safety. Reminds me of Lindo Rogo's lambasting of her husband in the original: "Why don't you just say this is the police, kick out the hull, and swim to shore!"

That being said, when the movie is released on DVD (according to Netflix, that will be in March), I will buy it. Maybe it will be the director's real cut.

Personally, I'm not going to complain about not being emotionally vested in the characters because I watched The Simpsons during the movie's first half hour. oops!

Forgettable

[neil-476 · 5/10 · 20 April 2011]

You wouldn't think that 3 hours of something as iconic as the Poseidon Adventure would be forgettable, but this is.

The insertion of a wholly unnecessary (an massively unconvincing) terrorist plot subplot draws attention away from the main course - do our survivors escape? The fact that we don't care very much about the survivors (and particularly about the adultery-and-its-consequences subplot which impinges on a good chunk of them doesn't help).

The TV movie budget means that we are never looking at masses of production value on screen, but instead we are looking at very dim lighting to disguise the absence of production budget - OK, I know there wouldn't be much light, but this is ridiculous.

And there is too much of it, given that it is plodding and fairly uninteresting a lot of the time.

Terrorists Try To Sink The Love Boat . I Know How They Feel

[Theo Robertson · 4/10 · 28 February 2013]

This turned up on one of the more obscure film channels and instantly thought I was going to be watching the 2006 remake of THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE only to find out relatively late that this is a Hallmark production no doubt produced to tie in with the big budget remake , a sort of cynical marketing ploy used by The Asylum company and their infamous " mockbusters " . I'll say one thing about Hallmark and that is no one is capable of making a film as bad as the ones at The Asylum . However we are talking about a very well regarded disaster movie from the 1970s and that alone may come close to cinematic blasphemy . After seeing the whole TVM I'm afraid Hallmark have done their level best to make a shipwreck of a movie

Being effectively a three hour miniseries the producers have split the story in to two halves , one setting up the characters and backstory and the second half featuring the disaster of a capsized ship . Watching the first half you're not reminded of THE POSEIDON ADVENTURE but that most dreadful and twee of American comedies THE LOVE BOAT . Most of the characters are looking for either romance or success where as the relatively big name actors playing them should have started looking for a new agent circa 1990 . The actresses seem to be slightly more fortunate since they've seemingly found a plastic surgeon , but the trouble is he wasn't a very good one who seems to have a fetish for botox . Honestly I'm not trying to get a cheap laugh but more than a few women seen here look like they're emulating waxworks and I'm not just referring to to the wooden acting

Being a TVM means that it's family friendly fare . This means for the sake of audience identification we've got a little irritating kid as a relatively major figure . He also spends much of he first half of the story hanging around with one of the crew filming home made vampire movies in dark remote spots of the ship without any hint of an adult having an unhealthy interest in children . This jars greatly with one of the main aspect of the story where the cause of the ship capsizing is by an act of cold blooded terrorism. When the bombs explode and the terrorists start murdering the ship's crew it's almost like watching another film . That said after watching something that resembles THE LOVE BOAT I started thinking perhaps the terrorists were the good guys

Wrong-headed, blasphemous piece of drek.

[Poseidon-3 · 22 November 2005]

There's little sense in "reviewing" something so devoid of logic, appeal, captivation, construction or even suspense, so instead a few of the many mistakes in attempting to remake the memorable 1972 feature film will be listed.

~~The insertion of a terrorist plot. All this did was prolong the capsizement, add characters no one cares about and feebly try to appear timely when actually the full force of nature has proved to the world to be plenty to deal with! ~~The removal of a strong leading character and his antagonist. Half the suspense of the original was wondering if the survivors were doing the right thing and they often fought about it in between climbing and trying to stay alive. No one really seems in charge here. ~~The complete stripping of any Biblical symbolism, which added a subtle gravity to the original as the characters followed their leader, sometimes with great sacrifice. The book gave Reverend Scott twelve followers. This thing doesn't even have Rev. Scott! ~~The omission of the most popular character among die-hard fans -- Linda Rogo. She provided sass and comic relief throughout the suspenseful original. She's scarcely even mentioned here. Also, the removal of Manny Rosen lessens the interest and the meaning of Belle Rosen's character despite endless references to him. ~~The absence of great music, which enhanced the original tremendously. ~~The lack of urgency. The original survivors could only barely keep ahead of the water pouring in. Here, the ballroom survivors stay alive much longer and most characters hardly get wet at all! Except for Belle, no one of any importance is killed. Only the non-name performers die and their deaths are telegraphed to where a six year-old could see them coming. It was never a "given" in the original that there would even be a rescue as there is here with all the endless naval sequences. ~~One of the key sequences of the original film, Belle's swim and heart attack, is so poorly handled as to be laughable. There's no discussion beforehand, no need for her to go first and no benefit from it, since the priest swims right beside her all the way. The whole point was that no one was sure it could be done. Since the priest kept up with her, he obviously could have done it alone first!

These are only a few of the major points. In addition, there are countless inanities and confounding changes which do nothing to enhance the story. The capsizement no longer takes place at midnight and no further reference is made to a new year. Why? Was it so wrong to have the explosion happen at 12:00? Part of the drama was that everyone went from so jubilant to so terrified within minutes! A singer preposterously strips off her dress at the drop of a hat in order to provide masks for people, yet Mrs. Rosen has a large flowy jacket that could have easily done (for three times as many people!) This film asks the audience to believe that a teen girl can follow instructions left by a Sharpie marker on the walls and ceilings of an overturned liner. Additionally, a teen boy films everything with a video recorder even when death is at hand. He never once wonders where his father is, but just keeps taping everything. Ridiculous. The film provides a massive insult to professional massage therapists as a female one practically has her left breast exposed during a session and proceeds to flirt with and eventually sleep with the married client. The characters are practically bereft of engrossing traits or texture. They don't even get to the point of stereotypes. They're merely props!

Is anything good? The overturning sequences aren't bad, actually, and this time the viewer gets to see other areas of the ship such as the kitchen and (ridiculously) a bedroom with a copulating couple in it. Also, the sets tend to be fairly decent throughout. Otherwise, it's a pretty dire affair.

Several of the actors (Hauer, Brown, Van Wyk, Hamilton) attempt to inject some presence into their nondescript roles. Most of them are wasting their time and get no thanks for their efforts. Time and gravity have been very cruel to several of the people on hand here (Guttenberg, Weller, Howell and Syms) and it's depressing to see them wallowing in such a poorly conceived project. It was a pointless idea to begin with. The producers should have just made up their own story and left the name Poseidon out of it. One can only hope that Wolfgang Peterson, director of the upcoming feature remake (!) learned something from this futile mess. It should be noted that this was originally a FOUR HOUR mini-series and so a great deal of character development was cut out to make it a three hour movie. they should have trimmed down the rescue and government scenes and left the emphasis on the ship, where it always should have been! Lastly, 5 out of the original's 10 primary cast members were Oscar-winning actors. With talent like that you can rely on the performers to fill in the blanks. Unfortunately, most of the people in this would be lucky to work as a seat-filler at the Academy Awards ceremony.

Just sink already!

[Son_of_Mansfield · 1/10 · 6 February 2007]

THREE HOURS. It has the same basic plot and lasts three hours. Scenes drag on for minutes with the ending of each scene obvious. The catwalk scene is a perfect example, it is clear that someone is going to die. We wait for a few minutes as everyone walks over, instead of crawling safely, only to see the annoying terrorist and the wussy masseuse die. Yawn. This predictability is worsened by movie of the week acting complete with cheesy close-ups and heart wrenching music. Add in effects look like they were done on a high school computer and you have a snore fest filled with over the hill B-actors. I found myself wanting all the people to die so that the movie could END.

Who dies? Who cares?

[Charly-25 · 1/10 · 23 November 2005]

Poor Paul Gallico must be spinning in his grave to see such an excruciatingly bad production of his adventure novel, The Poseidon Adventure (it says so in the credits; "based on the novel by Paul Gallico")and then to have it so blatantly based on the Irwin Allen disaster movie. Come to think of it,Irwin is probably doing about 500 RPM's himself.

To start, the teleproduction committed the very worst of sins. It bored. There was little suspense or tension. The characters evoked no charm, no life, and no spark. Most of the actors may as well have been carrying cardboard standees of themselves and reading from the script as they moved about. With few exceptions, most of the portrayals made Sharon Tate and Pia Zadora's worst performances look like Sarah Bernhardt and Ethel Barrymore. Even Mamie Van Doren and John Agar were never this tedious.

There were characters who did not emit waves of blandness. The castrating shrew of a wife, Mrs. Rosen and the terrorist "high value prisoner". No, they just annoyed the hell out of me. The wife was so emotionally disaffected, my jaw dropped. Here you are on a capsized, sinking ship. Would you let your teen daughter stay behind to help the injured? For all the reaction she showed to the idea, the girl might as well have been her favorite manicurist. Mrs. Rosen would not have been too bad if she had not kept blathering on about her deceased husband, and as far as the terrorist went, he might as well have had a turban and a Kris and a handlebar mustache to twirl.

The screenplay had the feel of a high school play that was written by the drama coach and cast with the popular students, rather than the ones who had talent. It was trite, mediocre, and awkward. With lines such as "We'll burn and drown at the same time!", my eyes were rolling more than a hooker at a craps table. Mrs. Rosen's death scene was excruciatingly horrible, I cringed with embarrassment for Sylvia Sims. And that was the only time I felt anything for anyone in the production.

The special effects were okay at best and unbelievable at worst. The best were the actual capsize scenes in the ballroom, but even there it felt matter of fact. The worst were the scenes of the oil fire,burning on water,in the engine room. It was obviously computer created and done by people who have never seen an oil fire.

The worst mistake the director made was to take us outside of the ship. By doing so, any sense of immediacy, tension, and mystery were completely lost. by switching back and forth, the viewers were not able to put themselves into the story. One could only watch as a distanced and disaffected viewer.

One of the most wonderful things about seeing a film is to be able to become part of the film; to forget yourself and merge with the story. The most magnificent example of this I ever noted was in the original 1972 film. When Shelly Winters and Gene Hackman emerged from the water, I was startled to hear this odd noise in the theater. And I was delighted to realize that it was the sound of almost 700 theater patrons releasing their breathe at the same time. Had this film been shown theatrically, there may have been a similar incident, that of hundreds of people losing their dinners at the same time.

This Movie Will Turn Your Frown Rightside-Up

[camp_hazzard · 1/10 · 25 February 2006]

By accident, we rented this instead of the original. I couldn't imagine this movie being any worse. Several scenes and characters have been added, which have no real value. There's the guy from police academy in some awful "divorce" angle. A fake ex-American idol contestant sings a whole song for no reason. There's a kids who's not just annoying, but is making humorous handi-cam films with the help of the zany crew. And oh yeah, there's a terror attack, because the dead horse is only half-beaten by TV standards, I guess. There's also a creepy old crewman who's trying to get with some teenager, and the priest in this film is a far weaker character/actor.

Add in some of the most un-inspired editing, music, and dialogue imaginable and that sums up the worst of this movie. I'd rather draw a picture of boat upside-down and stare at it for two hours rather than repeat watching 10 min. of this film.

You have got to be kidding me!

[deniabate · 1/10 · 20 November 2005]

I am a huge fan of the original 1972 classic......They ruined, butchered the original. How this ever got approved is beyond me? They should of retitled this "The Love Boat: The Sinking"......I mean that is what I felt like I was watching. You get a bunch of actors that should of put on The Surreal Life and put them in this......There is nothing about this remake that even comes close to the original. The whole entire movie was rewritten......Not even a tidal wave, guys come on.......Oh and the terrorist plot how genius....NOT!! This piece of garbage is laughable and a disgrace......I would rather sit and watch Barney by myself for two hours! I have never seen a worse remake of a movie. The remake of Carrie came close but this takes the cake!!!! This is S.S. Disaster!!!!! Way to go!!!

horrible

[waervin · 3/10 · 21 November 2005]

I love the part where the bishop goes into a room and comes out saying that there are toxic fumes. He suggests everyone needs to cover their face with a cloth so they can breathe long enough to make it through the room. An old lady screems because she sees a dead body, the person right behind her isn't covering his face. He talks for about 30-40 seconds about how she needs to move on. Then they pan out and multiple people are shown coughing and hacking like crazy while they have a cloth over their face. For some reason this one guy had no problem breathing and talking in a smoke infested room.

If a boat is upside down, wouldn't you have to reach up for the door knobs, plus step over the trim where the wall where it meets the ceiling...not on this boat you don't.

I love how they explode a 15 ft hole in the boat at the end, but they only needed to be 20 feet away from the explosion. If they were that close to the explosion i would think their ears would have been bleeding.

Take it for what it is and it'll be an enjoyable ride

[Robert_duder · 6/10 · 19 February 2006]

To say that the first remake of The Poseidon Adventure is "flawed" is the understatement of the decade. The film is rampant with bad acting, a poor script, a film that drags on far longer than necessary, and a hacked up editing job with poor special effects. So how can I give a film like this a 6.5/10....well it also deserves kudos for taking the story in a slightly different direction than it's original predecessor. Some of the characters are not badly done and some of the action is as edge of your seat as the original...just not nearly as much. It's a very watchable Made-For-TV, LOW BUDGET film. If you go into it expecting millions of dollars in budget you'll be shocked, dismayed and probably very disappointed. But if you take it for what it is than you'll see the magic and appreciate it a little more.

The unfortunate part of this remake is they don't ever truly capture any of the main casts characters. Within the first half of the original film you were so taken by each character, you felt connected to them and although this TV Version works on that, it never quites make it. The biggest headliner in this film is probably former big screen star Steve Guttenberg who plays Richard Clarke, aboard the Poseidon with his family to try and have a relaxing vacation and work things out with his estranged wife. I miss Guttenberg, but he's definitely washed up. He looks awful, old, and he doesn't have the spark he once had for being a leading man. His character is quite shallow and you never feel one way or another for him. Rutger Hauer plays Bishop Schmidt, a loose interpretation of Gene Hackman's character from the original. He actually does pretty well, he's one of the better actors and characters but even still they never give it time to really unfold. C. Thomas Howell plays Doctor Ballard and he too does an adequate job and no he doesn't share hardly any screen time with his former Horror film nemesis (obscure pop culture reference that few of you will likely get.) Sylvia Syms tries to take over the role of Belle Rosen from the incomparable Shelley Winters. She too does alright but the character of Belle Rosen is written to shreds in this remake. She doesn't die a hero like she did in the original. Amber Sainsbury and Rory Copus takes over as the brother and sister in the film but this time they are joined by their parents. Copus does a good job as the young film maker, probably one of the better performances and Sainsbury is more eye candy than anything else, her character is underused a lot and the romance between her and C. Thomas Howell is never explored at all. Alexa Hamilton plays their mother (Guttenberg's wife) and her character too is underdeveloped and used. They seem to imply her intelligence and leadership but she never shows it. The only real redeemable performance in the movie is by Adam Baldwin. This guy has been around a long time and done pretty much everything but he is the one person in the film whose character does get explored and you do attach yourself to him. He plays Homeland Security Office Mike Rogo. He's a leader and a fighter and a tough guy but still a heart of gold and he does make the cast tolerable by being in it. Bravo to him!! Direcot John Putch has never really done anything of huge significance and unfortunately this won't turn the tide for him because it is campy and poorly written BUT it is watchable.

The story is quite different from the original film in that Terrorists set off bombs on The Poseidon causing her to capsize. The story begins with these terrorists which is quite different. We also get much more of a story in those who are working to rescue survivors from The Poseidon. This is interesting but also might take a little of the claustrophobic, disaster feel that the original had, away from it. There are still some edge of your seat moments and some great stunts and disturbing deaths that make the film watchable. Also it was nice to see some full fledged moments that pay homage to the original master piece (see my review.) The scene in the ball room with the Christmas Tree is practically pulled right from the original. This is not a good movie by any means but it's also not disgustingly bad. For a TV film it's just fine and if you loved the original you'll enjoy this little homage to it. It's a little long and a little too "Made-For-TV" but it's worth checking out anyways. It'll amuse you if nothing else. 6.5/10

Oh my

[jonj-8 · 1/10 · 6 December 2009]

How can I begin? It should have been called The Love Boat VII. There is nothing even interesting about this movie. Would anyone involved win this movie use it on their CV? It was one of four movies on a $5 DVD in the delete bin at Walmart. This movie cost $1.25 and at that was overpriced. I noticed that the Australian version of this thing was considerably shorter than the general release version and had we not fast forwarded through every piece of "significant" dialogue I would have kicked myself for not searching out the Aussie release.

I am somewhat grateful however knowing that should I decide to finish my story about the workday of a toll-booth collector, there are producers out there waiting. Rutger Hauer and Steve Gutenberg are already cast.

A chimpanzee could write a better screenplay by sticking a crayon where the sun don't shine and squatting over a copy of the National Enquirer.

I don't know what you're all talking about.

[jonathan-zabel · 10/10 · 1 November 2005]

I saw this, and I thought it was riveting entertainment. All of you are so caught up on comparing it to the original that you refuse to rate it based on what it is--a modern adaptation. The casting was solid alongside the pacing, and I felt that all of the characters were fleshed out in interesting ways.

If you're going to comment, you need to evaluate this based on it's own merits, not be fanatical based on truthfulness to the original. How many times have we seen the "boat sinking" story? This new angle feels a lot more fresh and contemporary to me.

So that's my two cents. At least watch it and come up with your own opinion rather than just going along with what everyone else has said.

Did the original justice

[indy42 · 7/10 · 22 November 2005]

I saw the original 1972 Poseidon Adventure a couple years ago and I loved it. I saw this hoping that it just did the original justice. And I think it did. This version is about a cruise liner, the S.S. Poseidon, that has terrorists on board that intend to blow up the ship. They plant a bomb and the ship takes in too much water and it capsizes. Only a group survive and head to the bottom of the ship that is above water. The group is lead by Mike Rogo, a homeland security agent, and a terrorist that he captured. It includes many of the original characters in different names, and a couple added. The deaths in the movie are predictable and many of them are pretty weak, but overall, it updated a great movie.

No treasure on this sunken ship

[lawofthebicycle · 2/10 · 9 October 2005]

A clarification: Another commenter seems concerned that people should not be allowed to comment on how the film compares to the original. Let me make this clear: This telemovie is dreadful on it's own terms. Some might find it regrettable that it associates itself with the earlier '70's movie, but it is poorly executed regardless of that fact. Still there is nothing wrong with drawing legitimate comparisons for the purpose of highlighting some of the many weaknesses in this new version. I also wonder whether those who rated this movie as 10 stars honestly believe that it deserves such a rating, and if so, what kind of rating they would give to a even a reasonably well-regarded film let alone the truly great films.

I saw the original Poseidon Adventure as a 12 year old, so I am conscious of the fact that there may well be young kids out there today who will see this with fresh young eyes and enjoy it, perhaps even as much as I did the original.

Having said that, this TV movie sunk to new depths of "bad", perhaps even plunging to "evil", in some respects.

One of the more amusing goofs in this TV movie is that most of the cast still had their eventual fate clearly written on their foreheads with magic markers ("dies early", "dies mid-way", or "saved") during many of the early scenes! OK, I exaggerated slightly - their fates weren't literally visible, but it's generally easy to see who will live and who must ultimately die to keep the "drama" from flat-lining.

On the positive side, the change of plot to incorporate a terrorist attack as the cause of the disaster is in some ways more plausible than the original "Tsunami at sea", and the CGI special effects are generally obvious but passable, especially considering it's a TV movie.

Major weaknesses involve the dialogue and the none-too-subtle way in which the survivors all turn out to be "good" (or at least clearly repentant) white folk.

There are far too many long-winded, schmaltzy speeches at points where the pace should be frantic from both a logical (within the plot) and a dramatic point of view. A classic example is when the ship is just minutes from sinking, and the survivors are crossing a makeshift bridge, one by one, interspersed by obligatory pep-talks, expressions of love, etc... and the would be rescuers radio in "It's taking too long! What's the hold-up?" (eerily echoing the viewer's thoughts precisely).

Alec Baldwin, the Sea Marshal character, should have replied "there's too much talk, not enough action", but instead, he somehow manages to calculate the load-bearing capacity of this makeshift bridge and says "this looks like it will take two at a time". Not wanting to give too much away, I'll just note that he may have been correct in theory, but perhaps didn't take into account the extra "weight" of the sins being carried by certain people. The "fire of hell" burning below at the time was perhaps a missed hint.

At the end, after the cheers go up at HQ with the news that there are about nine survivors (out of the thousand plus passengers and crew)...the one person with a bit of perspective in the room sums up the entire show with the very last line:

" This isn't a miracle... it's a bloody mess".

One word: Shande!

[jgoodfriend · 1/10 · 8 January 2006]

Remember the tag line on the poster for the original? It was "Hell, Upside Down". Well, this little TV movie of the week is definitely from hell. And it does, of course, turn upside down. It may also turn your stomach upside down if you're stupid enough to sit through this garbage.

I can't believe anyone in their right minds would associate their names with this piece of dreck. Oh, I forgot. If I were Steve Guttenberg, I suppose I'd be thrilled if the phone rang with a job. Too bad he was home the day his agent called with this audition. Too bad he auditioned. Too bad he got it. Too bad he took it. But, I suppose he does have mortgage to pay. Bless his heart. But I shouldn't just pick on poor Steve. Ditto Rutger Hauer. Bless his heart, too.

The producer should be taken out and beaten with a stick. So should the executives at the network who decided to buy and air this. It must have been bring your toddler to work week at NBC, and some little one got into an office he shouldn't have, pushed a button and sent TV Guide their weekly listings with this reject in the Sunday night slot.

I can't believe I was able to sit through this whole thing. What an embarrassment. If you've got a few hours of your life to kill and don't mind throwing a chunk of it away, watch this if it ever comes out on DVD, which I pray to my personal God, for YOUR sake, Poseidon enthusiast, it wont! Let's hope for something better when the film remake comes out.

I'm not holding my breath.

PS - for those of you who don't know, Shande is a Yiddish word which translates to: THE MOST HORRENDOUS DISGRACE EVER! Belle would know. Well, Shelley would DEFINITELY know. This other hack cast in her part, I'm not so sure.

Classically Bad made for TV Movie

[JamieClay · 1/10 · 20 November 2005]

This film is only entertaining if you like watching bad movies. It's full of clichés, bad special effects huge plot holes, random acts of death and even a gratuitous hot chick in her underwear.

This adventure is over acted, poorly directed, poorly written, contrived (of course) and predictable. It could have been saved if they had done it using Legos. (cast included) There is no reason this needed to be 3 hours but no doubt NBC wanted to fit as many commercials into this time slot as possible.

If you like crap, then this is the film for you. Why did I watch it? Because I like to study disasters (in film) and this turned out to certainly be a classic.

The "New" Poseidon Adventure

[glenn-mcleod · 5/10 · 9 October 2005]

Having just watch the first remake of the classic Poseidon Adventure to be released, I can now safely say "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Not to say that this was a bad remake but it was not great either. Disappointing characters, none of which were endearing and it would not have been a huge loss if none of them got out. Good special effects, but not spectacular - lots of very average CG effects. The capsizing of the ship had no shock/horror effect of the original - it looked like it could be a lot of fun to go sliding across the polished floors, landing on your feet to walk up the wall to the roof of the ballroom. Let's just hope that the big screen "POSEIDON" due for release in 2006 is better than this small screen adaption. My last comment is "STELLA, STELLA, WHERE ARE YOU STELLA?"

Sink, sank, sunk

[TheLittleSongbird · 1/10 · 27 April 2011]

What a disappointment! I really like the 1972 film with Gene Hackman, not so much the bloated remake, but this is by far the worst of anything to do with The Poseidon Adventure. Granted, the production values are great on the whole, but everything else sinks faster than you can shout anchor.

Pace is a huge problem with this. The Poseidon Adventure(2005) is incredibly dull, with over an hour of sluggish pacing and little else. It does try to liven things up towards the end, but in the process trying too hard and trying to do too much. The story is very hackneyed, at first it seems as though it never leaves the deck then later on it feels bloated, also it is completely devoid of suspense, poignancy and foreboding. I would blame some of the plot additions for this, especially the terrorist one, which was stupid and added nothing to the story.

The Poseidon Adventure also feels very under-directed. Never in a TV series/movie have I seen a more soulless and clumsy directing job. And the dialogue is dreadful, often convoluted, very silly and unsure of which direction it wants to go. The acting doesn't fare that much better, Adam Baldwin and Steve Guttenberg are decent actors but because of the material being so poor not to mention their badly written and thoroughly unlikeable characters they and all the actors for that matter deserve much better than this.

Overall, had potential but ended up being a shipwreck. 1/10 Bethany Cox

Makes "Beyond the Poseidon Adventure" Look Like "Titanic"

[dsb113-1 · 2/10 · 25 November 2005]

Certainly from the school of "what the ...?", this production is ground-breaking on so many levels; terrible TV movies; needless remakes; mind boggling lack of logic; one dimensional characters; questionable casting of forgotten "C" listers; and how bad can Steve Guttenberg act - and now look?

I watched it because I love the original, and disaster movies in general. It was a chore to sit through the entire commercial-padded three hours. Wolfgang Peterson's "Poseidon" has only up to go from this trash.

One note: this is definitely NOT based on the original novel, as one piece of Trivia states. The ship of the novel flipped at dinner the day after Christmas; there were many more characters involved; a large number of passengers were rescued from the bow.

Not even fun in the bad movie realm. It stinks.

The movie that dares to ask: what if the Love Boat flipped over?

[rooprect · 23 February 2018]

I tried. Oh Lordy I tried for 2 hours, but figuring the last 50 minutes would be better spent staring at my cat, I gave up.

I usually have good things to say about even the worst movies. "Mars Needs Women"? Acting was actually pretty good. "Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus"? The plane scene made my day.

But ""The Poseidon Adventure"" (I put in double quotes so not to associate it with any other works of a similar name) was so bad it was good... but then it rolled over into bad again. Beginning with a comic bookish raid on a terror cell (note how they blow the flimsy aluminum garage door open and it leaves a perfectly circular hole whilst leaving the rest of the door standing completely intact lol), the filmmakers immediately establish an irrelevant sideplot about the Department of Homeland Security and a bunch of other miscellaneous Tough American Guy outfits chasing terrorists.

This wouldn't have been so annoying if they hadn't wasted so much time on gratuitous military base scenes and random 1-scene actors running around like the beginning of the tv show Hogan's Heroes. I'm not exaggerating; almost half the movie isn't on the ship, it's about SEAL teams gearing up, military types barking orders, cheesy graphics of GPS satellites circling overhead (real suspenseful there) and soldiers playing poker.

You get the feeling early on that this movie, made in 2005, was just capitalizing on the post 9/11 go-team-USA vibe. It crosses over into propaganda territory with several lines about how Homeland Security doesn't have the funding it needs, as well as a laughable plug for racial profiling (A murder is committed on the ship, and within 5 minutes the Homeland Security guy narrows it down to the 3 culprits by looking at the ship's manifest and checking for people who are from "terrorist-harboring countries". I AM NOT KIDDING! Was Trump watching this trash when he cooked up his many travel ban(s)?

Oh wait, there's something about a boat. And passengers trying to escape. But the story is actually more focused on a husband having an affair with the ship's masseuse while his 2 kids run around the ship and discover dead bodies and stuff. And then there's a random French chick who decides to rip off her dress, like completely, so they can use the fabric to cover their mouths as they run through a fire. Who comes UP with this stuff???

Oh I gotta go, my cat just blinked. Victory is mine!

It's just a TV movie

[njp704 · 7/10 · 21 November 2005]

You know, I get a kick out of reading other people's comments about this movie. Especially the old people that choose to compare this to the original. I for one loved the original and this film could never hold up to it. However, there are some people out there that just don't get the enjoyment out of older movies. I don't narrow this down to the younger generation because I am only 23 and I watch a lot of old movies. Some people can't though and that is why it is necessary to do remakes. Now, onto this film. It had a lot of problems. The main one for me was the looks of the boat after it was upside down and the navy seals were right next to it. It looked embarrassingly fake. And the hole in the boat, WHAT WAS THAT?!!! Some of the dialogue and the acting was kind of lame as well. However, I like that fact that a lot of the actors were people that we haven't seen for a while, mainly steve guttenberg and c. thomas howell. Once I knew that they were in the movie it didn't matter if there acting was any good or not. It was just nice to see that they are still around and acting. i don't think they'll ever be big again but they are still good. this movie will never be a classic and soon will be forgotten, but the main reason why i gave it a seven is it didn't leave me bored.

The swimming pool adventure

[spyanotherway · 1/10 · 9 October 2005]

Was this meant to be a comedy? I and my family were laughing either way. I just finished watching this, and at 3 and a half hours, i have to say it was definitely not worth staying up for. The sets are bad, the story is very predictable and corny, the effects are in their own right, disastrous, the cast tries their best, but with dialogue like this, how could you help it? The navy were a pack of idiots who didn't end up helping at all, just sitting in the ocean (the still water-like pool) outside the ship and making them inside the ship all risk their lives instead of actually blowing a hole in the ship with THEIR OWN resources. And everyone at the end was celebrating that only 9 people out of about 1000 survived! What heartless monsters. As with the other comment, I agree. That annoying little kid with the fake accent and the water proof video camera (that also has a 1000hr tape inside it) should have perished with the ship and the film. "may god help us all"

New Posiedon Adventure...(without all the silly puns)

[carlajenkins5 · 8/10 · 9 October 2005]

At 7 30pm last night while having dinner, i was fortunate enough to catch this new TV Movie adventure after having seen the adds calling it the "Best Thriller on TV Yet!!!" I've never seen any of the other Posiedon versions so I liked this movie from a "newbies" perspective. The plot line was very awesome and fast moving which is good when watching, unlike Titanic where you're sitting there going "Just DIE ALREADY!!!" It kept the viewer on edge and constantly glued to the screen which i found was excellent since not many movies in this day and age seem to comprehend the concept of GOOD suspense. The level of violence was another thing i liked about it, if you can sit down and have a family meal and watch this sort of thing at the same time is awesome, you get to have two good things a meal and a good movie. Many movies today turn to senseless gore for the answer of entertainment and me having a weak stomach, i don't think this is very fair. This movie opened up hope for me. Its a good movie to watch if the only other thing on television is Cricket and i'm very glad i found this movie!!! However, i do have to say a few things i saw that didn't impress me about the movie. The digital imaging left much to be desired in a few spots with the frames being visibly fake. In some places such as when the group of 11 are walking across the fire pit in the ship, i found that there was too much talking to make it seem like a real panic. By the time they all got across the ship should have sunk already. Also at the end when their all watching the ship sink, one, it sunk way to fast too quickly to have not sunk more before hand, and two as soon as the ship sunk the credits rolled... and your left wondering, is that really it? What happens??!!?!?! That is a good thing in most cases however for me its really annoying.

On the whole, i liked it for a Sunday night entertainer and if movies build more on this concept in this day and age and improve further on the path that this movie is going on, i shall be much happier to actually get my moneys worth at the Cinema again...

Hurruh! Finally, a GOOD remake!

[Diodorino-Rotolo1 · 6/10 · 14 July 2006]

Well firstly, I think this movie was actually pretty good. I don't know what these other people are going on about bad acting and stuff like that.

Second, I do admit that the storyline of a group of terrorists setting off bombs that capsize the ship a bit cheesy and paranoid, but besides that, I think you'll be able to endure it.

The 'Poseidon' in this version was absolutely splendid, with even a computer room and a bar.

This one isn't quite as good as the original, but I would still recommend it.

YOURS TRULY,

Diodorino-Rotolo1

(PS: That isn't my real name.)

"All Are Bored!" (Cast, crew and the audience)

[disc_home · 2/10 · 10 October 2005]

The original "Poseidon Adventure" was exactly that - an adventure, and for audiences, it really was new and exciting.

This "new" version fails to be either "new" or exciting from the start. It relies so heavily on stereotypical cliché characters and plot lines, that, as another reviewer implied, they could just as well have had labels written on their foreheads.

Shamefully, this reliance on stereotyping bleeds over into the story itself. Blatant racial profiling seems to be given a big thumbs up by the lead character. The "sea marshal" on board (Adam Baldwin) explains to the ship's security guy that in selecting suspects to keep an eye on from the list of ship's employees, he always follows the most obvious leads to their conclusion. The "moral" of his lesson? If you have a middle-Eastern or other "suspicious" sounding name, or your skin is the wrong colour, watch out, you're probably a terrorist.

Of course, turns out he's exactly right in this super-simplified piece of trash. And the terrorist characters don't just look evil, they bend over backwards to look evil. Perhaps the director was concerned that they may not be sufficiently recognizable as terrorists since they weren't wearing all the overdone headgear that the terrorists wore during the earlier terrorism-plotting scenes.

Certain characters also have an interesting habit of giving long, disapproving looks of contempt to others who are clearly less worthy of salvation than themselves. Of course plenty of films have flawed characters who are found wanting in various ways, but there's something about the smarmy judgementalism in this film that just detracts from the characters who display it.

Young children might get something from this (though I'm not sure exactly whether it would be anything intellectually or morally healthy), but it rarely reaches beyond infantile.