Nautilus

Being made in 2000 really surprised me actually, because it looks and has the same vibe as a film made in the early 90s, possibly sooner.

It reminded me very much of films that I used to watch with my Granddad from that time period too in terms of plot, the kind of "science" going on, the special effects, everything. Even the same kind of lines, some of them being cheesy. It's decent with how it uses the Sci-fi elements such as time travel, and has some nice touches here and there.

So when I thought it was made sooner than 2000, my rating would have been higher, but with a note it was a product of its time. But I guess since it isn't, it drops a little, but if you know anyone who likes films from that time period. Then it could be an enjoyable watch.

If you are expecting something more modern than what it offers, then you will be a little disappointed.

I first watched Nautilus a month ago, and I must say it was OK for a film that the sci-fi channel would probably air on TV constantly. The film is basically a time-travelling film (similar to Back to the Future) that involves saving the world from a untimely destructive event using a futuristic submarine. Richard Norton was OK in terms of acting, but overall all the characters were uninteresting and completely lacking in any depth. However, I thought that the whole concept of time travel in this film was interesting, but it unfortunately fails to achieve an amazing result, and in the end the plot was boring.

I did however enjoy some elements of the film. The time-travelling submarine (probably called Nautilus) was quite interesting to look at (the CGI was quite good), and it gave the film a Jules Verne / 20'000 Leagues Under The Sea element, which I quite enjoyed. Sadly, the underwater craft is only seen in the film several times, and that disappointed me greatly. Overall, Nautilus is a sci-fi film that was interesting at first, but it became dull later on. I just wished they focused more on the submarine than fighting spies or the constant chatter about rubbish...

Sometimes it is just better not to have an idea at all, rather than to create some sort of hybrid from other people's. This film takes a bit of HG Wells, a bit of "Dr. Who", a load of water, some C-listers and a script straight out of "Janet & John" then tacks it onto some very dated special effects. Add a soupçon of megalomania and you have a sci-fi adventure that is light on just about everything. The plot is just so very, very weak - it reminded me a little of that rotten but entertaining "Return of Captain Nemo" movie from 1978, just without any of the fun or charm. These guys are serious about this, and that possibly makes it worse. This genre is very easy to do badly, director Rodney McDonald excelled...

Made for very little money, NAUTILUS is actually a fun science-fiction film combining elements from 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA, CRACK IN THE WORLD and DIE HARD. On the level of a Roger Corman styled flick, the film has impressive productions values and some very nice miniature work. Richard Norton of the Jackie Chan films is a good, athletic hero and as a middle of the week video rental, this flick delivers the goods in an unpretentious way.

The Cover for the DVD shows a very impressive Submarine. Unfortunately, the sub in the movie is a very different and extremely inferior sub, nothing like the cover picture. Even though this is a sub movie, 98% of the action take place between humans far from the sub. No Monsters, No Fantasy Elements, just mid 90's direct to video really bad action, with less than stellar players. If this movie had just added some good CGI stuff, it would have been much better. This movie has an ecological message to it, and while important, always brings a movie down. And of course, even though the name of the movie is Nautilus and is about a sub, there is zero connection between it, and the writings of Jules Verne. (What we need are some direct to video/DVD Captain Nemo movies that hold no relation to the books, other than the character and his sub, fighting lots of monsters and stuff.) This movie was less than stellar, but I did manage to make it all the through with out turning it off. The actors failed, but the story did make me want to see how it ended.