Deep into a solo voyage in the Indian Ocean, an unnamed man (Redford) wakes to find his 39-foot yacht taking on water after a collision with a shipping container left floating on the high seas. With his navigation equipment and radio disabled, the man sails unknowingly into the path of a violent storm. Despite his success in patching the breached hull, his mariner's intuition and a strength that belies his age, the man barely survives the tempest. Using only a sextant and nautical maps to chart his progress, he is forced to rely on ocean currents to carry him into a shipping lane in hopes of hailing a passing vessel. But with the sun unrelenting, sharks circling and his meager supplies dwindling, the ever-resourceful sailor soon finds himself staring his mortality in the face.
While floating in the middle of the Indian Ocean, a sailor himself to make a journey of discovery, his ship accidentally impacts with a container ship. The impact makes the hull be punctured, water spills gradually into the compartment. Not only that, he still faces big upcoming storm. When standing in front of the vast ocean, being disoriented, losting ships, seeing the anger of Mother Nature, how does he pass? . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Tracie S (kr) wrote: Hilarious and yet can make you tear up! A movie you can watch with the entire family
Ritchie D (gb) wrote: This movie was funny to watch the one line that made me laugh was when Jim asked Evil, ''Do you have a girlfriend?'' ''No i prefer prostitutes because they are cheaper'' haha
Kevin M W (ag) wrote: Ridley Scott's con movie outing is charming, but overplayed, which serves to give away the ending long before the end. Kinda ruined it for me. And the main con in the piece never questions the actions of his subordinates, which he calmly tells us, is his main job. And so, meh.
Jessica H (it) wrote: It's hard not to find something you like about this film.
Aaron M (es) wrote: I love a good old fashioned thriller just like these. Id never seen this one but knew the ending, didnt ruin what was a very enjoyable movie. Its clever and pulls you in right til the end.
Paul M (nl) wrote: The first time I saw this, I hated it. Now, after re-watching this film, I kind of liked it the second time. I enjoyed it a lot. It's a soup opera, yeah, but it's a good soup opera. If you get that in your head, you'll have a good time watching this. You may even shed a tear or two by the end.
Trevor B (jp) wrote: An exciting event that you never heard about.
Gary R (de) wrote: There are a lot of reason of why NBA players should do commercial instead of doing a movie. But for this movie gives a perfect example why.
Steve H (ca) wrote: angry, acerbic, dark humored anti-war film
Dylan D (nl) wrote: *batteries not included has left a legacy that embodies good-spirited movie magic. It's an endlessly lovable movie, built around a simple premise that becomes fantastical and serves to only reinforce core human values. It's very well made, enjoying direction that underscores its qualities and performances that accentuate its humanity.
Orlok W (gb) wrote: It's working title was The Blaxorcist, which says it all--Wild Blaxploitation Twist On The Exorcist!!
Anna L (ru) wrote: Pretty good. Liked Finney's work.