ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre

ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

Senteur As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

d_imdb-47 A derivative but nonetheless intriguing set up; a ship (in this case a submarine) is found many years after it sank, with no sign of the crew, or what happened to them. This has been done many times, it is essentially the story of the Marie Celeste. Despite that the set up hooked me, I love these kind of vaguely supernatural / time travel plot lines, however familiar they are.To be honest I was disappointed by what was delivered. David Jason is a fine actor but his character in this came over as terse, sullen and not especially interesting. As he is the lead, and therefore your focal point throughout the story, this was a big failing. He just wasn't interesting or unusual enough, you learned almost nothing about his character despite him being on screen for most of the 180 minutes.The plot itself seemed to peter out rather than deliver a climax, for a thriller (or at least a war time drama) I felt there was too little tension. The actual operation of the submarine and the technical side all felt very authentic but this did not compensate for the lack of plot, or genuinely interesting characters. The officers were all a little stiff, the crew were similarly generic, all of them have been seen many times before.Towards the end I felt the plot simply ran out of ideas and some of what happened bordered on silly. The story seemed to flirt with the premise it had created, rather than really go into it. I never felt this story got going, I appreciate it was television but there was far too much chatter. It was slow in places where it needed pace, or another twist and this was, for me at least, the other major failing; ultimately the story lacked imagination. What Ghostboat delivered was almost exactly what you expected, no more. There was no moment when I thought 'now that is interesting, I never saw that coming'.Despite these misgivings I thought it was not bad for a TV two parter. It was ambitious and though it failed to hit the target it was at the very least something different.

Ronnie Henderson Very average, and predictable.Some good moments though, but was let down by cheap and nasty CGI FX.This was, however a decent TV short drama which can was good to watch once. Doesn't quite have the longevity to persuade me to purchase the DVD to build my collection.This certainly won't be one of David Jason's more memorable roles as it doesn't have the charm and complexity of shows such as Open All Hours and Only Fools and Horses.As usual with ITV Dramas, the constant interruption of commercial breaks added to my disappointment of this programme. Although at some points my attention was drawn to the show, the frequent commercials were very off-putting and the temptation to switch over to an alternative channel was high.

munchkin78 Yet another brilliant bit of acting by Sir David Jason. As a lover of all this spooky and a fan of Jason I found myself glued to the screen.Ghostboat kept me riveted, the plot was good and the acting too. I particularly liked the way the crew were taking on the personalities of the crew which came before them. Commander Travis becoming "possessed" by the previous captain was good.However, i found the ending somewhat disappointing, a great build-up to an anti-climax.All told a great program, which should most definitely be shown again in a few years time.

carolyn montgomery A submarine lost in WW2 re-appears in 1981 and David Jason's character Hardy (The only survivor of it's last voyage) is asked to go back with a crew and retrace the steps of the Submarines's last journey (why? You may ask?...well obviously it wouldn't be much of a drama if they just found it and put it in a maritime museum :p) Anyway after the recent hype about the drama I did have high expectations but was disappointed. There was lots of submarine jargon which went over my head, so unless you have a particular history with or an interest in submarines, then I'm assuming most people would have the same problem... and so it got a little confusing.I wouldn't attack the plot too much because after all it is called 'Ghostboat' and so you expect it to be a little far fetched/supernatural so that's fine BUT... at the end when the Navy and the Russian Navy (or whatever they're called in Russia) closed the case on the strange goings on, there was no mention of and never any mention of, all the other boats they blew up along the way...and as for the hostile German aircrafts...well I can only assume that they were imagined? Now I know there were some grey areas as to which was going on in the past and which was in the present but Hardy did state that it was only 1943 inside of the sub and still very much 1981 outside... hence the reason why the Russians of 1981 were getting a little anxious at the sight of the sub on its radar... so I'm assuming that the boats they blew up were real and of 1981 too? But...if I did get too confused by all the submarine jargon...and completely missed something due to this fact...and anyone knows any different...please tell me? Thanks :-)