Idiot-Deluxe This one's worth watching once. "Around the World Under the Sea" is somewhat distinctive and unique, yet at the same time below average in most respects. It's strong suits are the striking underwater photography and it's ample serving's of unintentional humor that it frequently dishes out at it's viewers. When watching this goofy movie you're never any more then 8 to 10 minutes away from yet another ridiculous eye-rolling implausibility; where the laws of physics don't apply and when convenient for the plot pseudo-science intervenes and saves the day, time and time again. There must be a solid 10 or 12 extreme implausibilities in this movie (i.e. making it up as they go along), but that's also part of the reason why it's a fun film to watch. With all the ridiculous, unrealistic and illogical moments that this movie packs, it's rarely, if ever, dull. "Around the World Under the Sea" is one of the ultimate examples of high-tech being used in the most unrealistic of ways, completely by the whim of the writer and director - and you know what, because of such creative license it's often HILAIROUS! By the looks of it I don't think they hired a single technical adviser, when they made this flagrantly unrealistic underwater adventure farce, if they did they turned a deaf ear to them.Lloyd Bridges stars along with several marginal actors, including the "gold paint chick" from Goldfinger Shirley Eaton; also the ever versatile Keenan Wynn and a few other no-namer's. Wynn's character has to have one of the most unusual and entertaining entrances ever seen in any movie (watch the movie and see what I mean).One thing I noted is, I could have sworn I heard some music that sounds as if it where lifted -directly- out of the movie "Jaws"; but this movie pre-dates that (infinitely better) movie by 9 or 10 years. Did John Williams see this movie and takes notes? That's another thing, occasionally the soundtrack sported some provocative and effective music, which is often a strong-point in underwater films."Around the World Under the Sea" is just flat-out ridiculous and illogical nonsense from start to finish, which I don't think was the intent of it's creators at all, because you often get the feeling that they were striving realism - but fail.I must say that if you Do Not take this movie with any seriousness, you'll more than likely enjoy it, thoroughly. I know I did.

Koosh_King01 Following the destruction of much of coastal Turkey by a massive tsunami, American scientists Dr. Doug Standish (a mugging Lloyd Bridges) and Dr. Craig Mosby (Brian Kelly playing kind of a sexist jerk) lead the crew of the submarine Hydronaut in a race to plant seismic sensors along fault lines on the ocean floor to create an experimental earthquake detection system in order to prevent other coastal countries from suffering the same fate. The crew consists of geologist Orin Hillyard (Marshall Thompson), electronics expert Dr. Philip Volker (David McCallum doing a hokey German accent) and marine biologist Margaret Hanford (the fetching Shirley Eaton as what basically amounts to eye candy). Also along for the ride is reclusive survival expert Hank Stahl (a delightfully curmudgeonly Keenan Wynn).While at times enjoyable, Around the World Under the Sea is, alas, a bit on the boring side. It isn't that badly written, not for a movie of its type, anyway, but in its apparent drive to depict the science fiction elements as realistically as possible (in a "this is totally plausible" sort of way), it tends to bog down. We spend far too much time focusing on the Hydronaut crew planting the various sensors that midway through the film a montage of them doing it gets the bulk of that out of the way to make way for... well, not undersea adventure, that's for sure.There is some of that, but it's few and far between and mostly, when the movie isn't methodically showing us in detail how they do various scientific tasks, it basically plays out like a soap opera set on a submarine: Volker wants to do a salvage dive for some valuable crystals but is opposed (for some reason the movie never bothers explaining) by Stahl, and the two have an epic chess game to decide whether they'll do it (Volker cheats!); Hanford is ostensibly Hillyard's girlfriend at the start, but starts falling for Mosby despite him being kind of a sexist pig, and on top of this she's Volker's ex and there is unresolved tension between them. The movie seems to think that this is all more interesting than giant eels and erupting undersea volcanoes. It would be wrong.One thing of note is the sexism against Dr. Hanford that Craig Mosby has, and, to some extent, so does the movie. With comments like "she's as good with a skillet as she is with a scalpel," it at times feels like a movie from a much earlier film, far less tolerant of women in the workplace. When Hanford is late for the Hydronaut's takeoff, the chief concern regarding her is that they can't set sail without a cook (!). If nothing else, at least the poor woman gets support from Standish if no one else, who points out "She's a scientist and so are we" and doesn't find the idea of female astronauts at all unusual, and hires her on the spot even once he learns the mysterious and overqualified "M.E. Hanford" is a woman, whilst it is Mosby who objects to having a woman aboard the sub. Still, most of it just seems like lip service, as, despite Standish's insistence in her abilities, all supposed marine biologist Hanford ever really does is "woman" stuff like serving coffee while Stahl (who isn't even a scientist) does most of the specimen collecting and lab work.This nonsense aside, it has its moments. There's a close call where Hillyard is burned by an undersea vent and has to be rescued by Volker, as well as a giant moray eel which attacks the sub, and a fairly satisfying climax involving a giant underwater volcano and a rock slide which buries the sub, trapping our heroes and forcing them to use their quick wits to escape. Recommended for viewers with lots and lots of patience. For a far better and more enjoyable undersea adventure flick, see either 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea or Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea.

oscar-35 *Spoiler/plot-1966, Around the World Under the Sea, A crew of ocean scientists are trying to find the reason the Earth is breaking apart. They go to find out the problem and meet a giant eel that attack their atomic submarine. *Special Stars- LLoyd Bridges plays the lead undersea mariner. David 'Illya Kuriakin- UNCLE'McCallum, Keenan "Great Race' Wynn and Marshal "B-film male Lead King ' Thompson play crusty scientists and sub crew members. *Theme- the ocean is still unexplored for a very good reason.*Based on- Jules Vern early sea stories.*Trivia/location/goofs- Mr Bridges has become type cast as the consummate frogman since his Sea Hunt days in the late 50's. He has done better since in comedy like Zucker Bros "Airplane'.*Emotion- A strange attempt to combine science fiction with big hit disaster movie of the times. The addition of a monster under sea eel attacking the cast is the only interesting element of this flat film of wooden actors.

bayster912 I have seen this film only once - it was part of a holiday double bill with (I think, Captain Sinbad which starred Guy Madison). I must have been eleven at the time, and remember that my mother had agreed to take my younger brother and myself to see it at the ABC Haymarket cinema in Newcastle-upon-Tyne (happy days), on the strength of having seen the trailer, which made it look good. I remember to this day how I looked forward all week to seeing it, and how disappointed I was when I actually saw it. Seldom have I seen a film to compare, in terms of promising a lot and delivering nothing. Nothing happened of any consequence, until a scene between Lloyd Bridges and David McCallum - I recall the dialogue, something like 'where there are smaller fish there will be bigger fish' (sounds pretty innocuous now, I'm sure there must have been more menace in it than that). It must been pretty poor for me not to like an adventure film at the age of 11! And of course my poor Mum yawned her way through it too. She must have regarded it as a huge waste of money.