Nov 26, 2005
I'll tell you guys, after watching it a couple of times...well, it is what it is. *shrug*

The visual effects of the capsize and some underwater scenes are impressive, but as far as story goes I don't think it comes close to touching the story in the 70's classic. True, they're both basically the same story, but this one lacks heart.

That's just my opinion.

João Carlos Pereira Martins

Hello everyone!

I watched Poseidon last month and I must agree with Matthew. The initial shots are cool, the ones showing the entire ship and the interiors are ok but the story in its whole is a "load of rubbish". The film lacks essential background information, as we just acknowledge the character's purpose very late in the sequence. The rest is just corpses, explosions, water torrents and a silly story of adventure that was not able to attract my attention. As a regular cinema goer I was rather disappointed, having watched other Peterson films, like Das Boot. I think the film is extremely short too. After twenty minutes of watching you get tired of it.

I apologize all the fans of Poseidon but it is my opinion, I was hoping for something better.

Best regards,

Mark Webster

Dec 24, 2005
I enjoyed the film, special effects great, and I like Emmy Rossum. However I felt the film really lacked the character's of the first one. where was the Shelley Winters type of character? Ok I doubt anyone could have played her character better, but a similair character would have been great. I still hate it when she doesnt make it in the original. To be honest I didnt feel much sympathy for any of the characters in the modern film, other than the little boy when he's trapped behind the vent (how the hell did he manage to get in there!!!)
Other than that I thought the film was very good.

Jason D. Tiller

Dec 3, 2000
Niagara Falls, Ontario
Well, I finally saw this film on tv last night. First off, I agree with a lot of the comments already posted; it wasn't that great, the characters were weak (although Richard Dreyfus and Emmy Rossum were okay; the latter was some nice eye candy!) and the rouge wave arrived too quickly, but it was a BIG improvement over the made for tv version.

Although, I didn't have any expectations, so I enjoyed it for what it was; a disaster flick. The special effects were pretty good and I did notice some resemblance to the Queen Mary 2. I was also pleased that there were no terrorists this time.

One thing I have to praise the filmmakers on is, the underwater shots which were quite impressive. They were quite realistic with the debris and parts of the ship breaking away.

Overall, it's not bad, but I still prefer the original.
Jan 29, 2001
As a matter of fact the POSIDEN plot is believable. The HISTORY CHANNEL frequently airs an episode on rough waves. The QUEEN MARY 1, which was acting as a WW11 troop transport (15,000 on-board), was barely able to right herself after being struck by a rough wave.

I also recall the AQUITANIA being struck by a 70' rough wave, resulting in damage to her bridge structure.

Michael Cundiff
Jan 29, 2001

Pardon my spelling of "rogue" on previous post.

A rogue wave is developed when an underwater current, for instance the cold Labrador Current collides with warm steady surface wave currents, both heading in opposing directions. This is particullary found at Southern land tips.

Michael Cundiff

Eric Paddon

Jun 4, 2002
The only comment I've got about this horribly bad movie is that they missed a golden opportunity for the perfect injoke, which would have been having Dreyfuss at one point take a look at all the carnage around him and go, "THIS WAS NO BOAT ACCIDENT!!"

Chad Goodwin

Aug 2, 2006
speaking of mistakes how about Dreyfus character being out on the deck seeing the wave...running back into the ship...yet the water doesn't get in??????My main problem with this movie is why should i care if they live....i wanted more history of the people.....more charaterization...give me a reason to like the people

Similar threads