O2D I have no idea what I have just seen.Two ship captains want the same woman and we are quickly thrown into a soap opera style drama that doesn't make much sense.This woman has no reason to be in the movie and her part just takes away from the story. So the guy who loses the girl pays one of his sailors to sail with and kill the guy who got her.Does that guy ever get on the other ship?I don't have a clue.All the men are so boring and interchangeable that they could have switched roles mid-movie and I wouldn't have noticed. We never really see how the people die, probably because this was based on a true mystery.But that raises one huge question.Why even make the movie if you will only speculate half of the story?They had no problem fabricating the set up, why not show us the killer? Still better than anything Vince Vaughn has ever done.

dougdoepke Based on an actual happening, a mysterious sailing ship with no crew is discovered in the middle of the ocean. The movie unravels the puzzle behind the crew's disappearance. I wanted to shower after this 60-minutes. This has got to be the grungiest ship's crew in movie annals. The men actually look like they were shanghaied from a waterfront fleabag. Certainly, there was no attempt by the British production to sanitize the visuals, either the men or life aboard ship. Apparently, only an edited version of the 1936 original survives. Thus, the narrative is pretty choppy, leaving holes in the storyline (e.g. characters who just disappear without explanation). Still, between the fragmented narrative, the muddy photography, and the ugly, cramped shipboard, the effect is almost surreal. While, Lugosi's mystical traveler adds an additional slice of exotica. Too bad we'll probably never know what happened aboard the real Marie Celeste. I remember being fascinated as a boy by the mysterious account of a deserted ship with meals still lying on serving tables. It's as though the crew were suddenly plucked into thin air. Anyway, this movie account is pretty fanciful, but still manages an unsettling aura, thanks in large part to Lugosi's disturbing changes. This edited version is no artistic triumph but does manage a weird appeal all its own.

dadabigalow Well I woke early this morning and just finished viewing Image Entertainment's "Phantom-Ship" Bela Lugosi (1935). I must say I was pleasantly surprised to find that it was a pretty good. Especially since the only copies I've every seen for sale are unusually @ 'The Dollar Store" or in the Walmart 2$ bin, sandwiched in a triple feature combo DVD with the likes of "Coffin of Dr. Blood" and "The Screaming Skull".The DVD transfer was pretty good. I suspect it was made from a good 35mm print. I would have like to seen a special feature or 2 (Commentary, Maybe a small Feature on the "Making of" or the "Restoration of", like Image did with Kino on some of the other older films. On a Side-Note: Is it just me or is Edmund Willard (who played Toby Bilson) a spitting image of Lon Chaney Sr. I bet that wasn't by accident.I must say that the more Odd-ball rolls I've seen lately that Bela did in his lifetime. The more impressed I am with his acting. And the more disappointed I am in the Hollywood of the 30's. I single out the 30's from the 40's - 50's because that was where I think they missed the boat. (no pun intended) Bela had so much more to offer us.Today's Hollywood is always giving actor's a 2nd or 3rd chance to show us the greatness they are capable of. Look at Mickey Rourke in "The Wrestler". If Tom Hanks work in the 30's would we have ever seen anything from him after "Turner & Hooch"? He would be stuck making "Beethoven 6 in 3D" or "Marley & Me, Pt.II".Im not saying it's a great film, It has many flaws. But it was enjoyable to watch. As I watched the "Phantom Ship" especially Bela in the (I've killed one of my fellow men) scene. It started me thinking, what could Bela have done with the Spencer Tracy roll in "Captains-Courageous"? I suspect Hollywood owes Bela and the rest of the "Viewing Public" an apology.

chrismartonuk-1 Despite securing the star role - Bela is almost a background figure for almost the first half of this film. He is okay in what he does but it took Ygor to show he could do more than stand imperiously around with a commanding stare. He certainly brings pathos to Anton's last moments as he staggers about the abandoned ship shouting for his missing shipmates. The bulk of the narrative is held by a convincingly authoritative Arthur Margetson as captain Briggs. His upper class accent lends a subtle air of class conflict to the proceedings. George Mozart looks very much the Michael Ripper of his day with some nice comic touches at the card game and it is genuinely sad to see him so indifferently disposed of by the script. Many have complained about Harbens's sea shanty's but they help enliven an otherwise grim storyline and have the ring of authenticity about them. Denison Clift's direction varies with some fine moody photography to too many ill-handled stagy action sequences such as the murder of Grot and Lugosi slaying Dennis Hoey. Edmund Wllard steals the film as the brutal Bilson - you certainly wouldn't want to get on his wrong side on a sea voyage. The splendid book VAMPIRE OVER London: BELA LUGOSI IN Britain supplied an excellent account of the filming of Mystery of the Mary Celeste. In particular - it brings to light the missing scenes such as the Court of Inquiry in Gibralter and the twist ending which reveals that Briggs and Sarah survived to make it to a tropical island. Without it, it could be argued that the film lacks symmetry as Briggs and Sarah are the narrative centre of the plot only to be abruptly eliminated off-screen. This leads to an obvious bit of dubbing as Bela explains the swift changes to the plot to the helpless Bilson. Perhaps Karloff or Chaney jr might have been better cast in the role of Anton but Bela got himself a rare good payday for his working holiday in England. Lateon, Christopher Lee would complain about being poorly re numerated by Hammer. Ironic to think they would reward Universal's Dracula better than they would their own.