U hit it on the head geek.! 2 thumbs up! I dont think Donald pleasance really didn't get whole lot of attention until playing the Dr of Michael Myers in Original and subsequent many reprisals of ""Hallowen" . I had even forgotten about him in the Great Escape until I started watching it more on movie channels or is it because I graduated in 1977 right after Carrie and just before Halloween which had least 1 or 2 actors in both . In any case he still did a great job of making you kind of detest him in it. Looking like he lost it , going crazy in fantastic voyage. ! I did see fantastic in the theater and I didn't see many as kid only if my mom took me ti that James bond movies most of my favorites were sci-fi or had great amount of Sci fi or tricks in them !
I remember seeing this in the theater when it was released. I was 7 years old and thrilled! The same day, after seeing the film, I purchased the comic book adaptation at the corner store! It was 12 cents well spent.
I agree. Films like Fantastic Voyage and the 1953 War of the Worlds are two of my all time favorites. The practical effects employed by both seem to me to be somehow more honest, and far more creative, than CGI....although I won't decry CGI entirely, because when you can use that technology to present a living dragon interacting seamlessly with living actors....thumbs up..I'll watch that!
@@scottmiller6495 Agreed! A great story is a great story! You don't care about the quality of the special effects because you're enthralled by the story.
Director: "In this next take, you need to stop avoiding pulling the crystals from her breasts." All four men: "Done." Raquel Welch: "Could I see my contract again??""
I love this film it's terrific and quite believable! It won 2 academy awards for 1966 and it deserved it, stellar acting, great story and incredible special effects 😀👏😀
Fantastic Voyage is my favoritest movie in the whole wide world!! I can’t say enough good things about it!! I’ve been a devotee every since I was 7-I’m 53. I have a copy of the script, but I don’t need it because I have committed it to memory. I remember wondering how Benes felt through all of this. He had a clot in his brain, as anyone who’s watched this movie well knows. Through different reasons, I developed the same condition. We both had subdural hematomas-only his was on his right eye and mine was on my left one. Mine didn’t need surgery though. A few weeks’ bed rest and now I am okay. Had a headache and my left eye hurt, but that went away. Benes and I are “eye” brothers.
the filmmaker once again brought up his plans to produce a remake of the 1966 tour-through-the-human-body “Fantastic Voyage,” a project Cameron and his partner Jon Landau have toyed with for over a decade. “We’ve been developing it for a number of years, and we plan to go ahead with it very soon,” Cameron said. “Raquel Welch is not available, but we think we can make a pretty good movie.”
I went to see this in the theater as an 11 year-old and was absolutely captivated by the effects! To this day I still think about the antibodies attacking them. When I get something in my eye I imagine those little buggers going after the speck.
I was 11 years old, when my father took me to see this at a theater. Loved the design of the Proteus. I snagged a couple of DVDs I found at a Grocery Outlet....maybe 10 years ago. Paid around $5.99 each for them....so gave one to my dad & kept one for myself.
I remember seeing that with my father in the theater when it first came out (1966). So I was 10, and he was 38. He was a physician, and I remember him saying, "Good Grief, the antibodies are coming after her!
Asimov also explained the miniaturization technology in his novelization, as best he could. It's been almost 50 years since I read that book, but if I recall correctly, he explained that selectively removing atoms from objects would simplify them too much for humans to live through the process, and that decreasing the space between electrons and atomic nuclei would still leave miniaturized objects with all their original mass, and said it was a process involving "higher dimensions" instead. In a sense, objects only *seemed* smaller because they were "farther away" along an axis beyond the three spatial dimensions we're accustomed to. He also included a small miniaturizer on board the sub so the crew could shrink the air molecules that they siphoned out of Benes' lungs. Without that, the molecules would have been too large for the crew to breathe. He really thought things through!
He also made allowances for the water around the submarine as it is shrunk. Asimov was a giant of science-fiction because he was extremely attentive to detail. That's one of the things I love about him!
Reply to @@TheUnapologeticGeek: Yeah, he had the waldo that handled the syringe push the water out until the sub was inside the needle, then inject as little as possible, didn't he? That was good thinking, although the movie itself did a reasonably good job when it came to handling that sub. That procedure would probably be too drawn-out for today's audiences, but personally, I loved every scene with the miniaturizer in it. That machine was COOL!
He also got around the problem that even when the Proteus had been dissolved by the white cells, there were enough atoms to kill the patient as they deminiaturised. Instead, he simply had one cell swallow the sub and follow them out of the eye.
Even if they were "farther away" along a different dimensional axis wouldn't they still have their original mass? You'd certainly be smaller but wouldn't you still weigh the same as you normally would at full size? If you were to sit in the palm of someone's hand you'd punch right through it like a nail through wood.
Randle here in Texas! This will always have a special place in my heart because it brings back memories of watching it at my late grandmother's house as a youngling 🤗
A grand work , that I saw as a child and to this day I share it with my friends who tout the wonders of CGI , to me this still holds my attention. A remake would be a waste it may look better but it will never be the same.
NYC 4:30pm Movie right after school in the 1970s. Monster Movies, SciFi, and WWII Classics. When Fantastic Voyage came on, the Earth stopped spinning. Look it's Raquel Welch in a scuba suit!!!
Yeah..."Inner Space" I did watch it when it came out. I can't tell you now anything about it. But I can go on and on about Fantastic Voyage because I watched it over and over on television in my childhood and it sticks in my memory.
In the days where one could simply stay in the theatre house, and watch the film again for free, I, as a 13 year old, sat through 5 full showings in one long day, getting home at about 10pm. I drank this up!
If I heard that correct, it is that they did not account for the vessel Proteas growing to full size in Benes' brain. No. The antibodies would annihilate the Proteas whilst it was still microscopically miniature, as they would do to anything, be it organic or inorganic, which is in their realm and in their miniscule size range. But then you have it as why the antibodies did not do that when the Proteas was in transit through the circulatory systems. For that you assume that the Proteas was in a certain state of motility, that the propulsion enacted a given antibody deterrent which Dr. Michaels [ Donald Pleasance ] circumvented per sabotage and screwing around with the mechanisms.
This film taught me a lot at an early age about human biology. And I don't just mean Raquel... I also labored for years under the misconception that Asimov's book was the origin of the film. I even remember being peeved that they changed elements for the film, as one does. Luckily, I didn't require the Proteus to surgically remove the foot from my mouth...
I was 6 years old in 1966. My mom took me, and a bunch of my butthead friends to our local Drive-In theater to see a Double Feature. The Fantastic Voyage, and the new Bat Man movie. Bat Man was huge at the time. Being 6 in 1966, I wasn't desensitized to blood, and gore as we are today. I was mesmerized by The Fantastic Voyage. It freaked me out a little by actually seeing the inside of a human body. This was my first introduction to "Guts". The Bat Man movie also freaked me out when the villains' turned humans into piles of powder. That bothered me. On the way home, my mom accidentally ran over a bunny rabbit not far from our house. We all felt horrible about it, but out of curiosity, the next day we all walked up the road to where the bunny was killed. That was the first time I ever saw real "Guts". I remember those two days vividly. A 6-year old's introduction to the real world.
A very imaginative, and well-executed film. Asimov also mentions brownian motion in the novel, but sort of elids over the implications. One trivial bit that always bugged me is how the CMDF logo is partly covered by the lapels of some of the uniforms. The word "Combined" in "Combined Miniature Defense Force" is an interesting one; I don't know if it denotes an international alliance similar to NATO or if it's used like the word "Joint" is currently, to suggest CMDF provides support to different branches of the US military.
As a kid watching this on telly in the 80s, i loved it, but used to hate the bit where the white cells get pleasance! Not half so scary when you're an adult. Great movie though!...
Fantastic Voyage is a classic adventure film I always will enjoy and I think it stills holds up today of course science fiction had come a long way since the 60s but films like this has opened the doors in film making and will go down in history thank you to FOX FILMS. 📽📽🎬🎬📽📽🎬🎬😉😉😉
Love this movie . Truly a classic. When i was a kid i saw this movie and got scared when the antibodies attacked Raquel Welch. Years later, now its my favorite scene.
Love this movie. Saw it on TV when I was a kid. The only problem I had (even as a kid) was I kept wondering what would happen to all that water they injected into him when it went back to normal size. 😁
Incredible movie and although I think the effects are astonishing and believable (particularly given we really don't know what things would look like from the perspective of a tiny internal viewer) its the ideas and drama of blood flow, brain activity, white blood cell attacks, that makes the imagination soar in this totally unique and original film masterpiece.
I read a preview in "Look" or was it "Life" magazine. Couldn't wait to see the movie. Saw it at the Lyric and loved it. But even as a ten-year-old, it bugged me that the submarine eaten by the omeba would've exploded the patient's head in real life.
Actually, it's even worse....they shrunk something like 30 gallons of saline solution it the oversized hypodermic in the second stage of shrinking the Proteus to injection size...and injected it into Benes. All that fluid would've enlarged to full size at the same time...his whole body would've exploded!
I saw this film as a kid , having a fever , that night i had scary nightmares, i dreamt was inside my own lower lip, i can still feel that feeling, my parents took me downstairs but couldnt get me out of it. After that the nightmare kept returning, i was scared to go to bed. I havent seen the film since but its nice to see this now!
Great review. As for the unrealistic premise: In 1966 the idea of a camera going into an orifice where the doctor, and the patient, could see what's going on via a TV screen, and the doctor correcting medical issues, would also seem ridiculous. Today it's routne and everyone of a certain age should have at least one of said procedures.
@@LordGreystoke Yes, but nano technolody is a reality. I find it interesting how humans are limited but human inventions have advanced so far. Shrinking a biologial entity seems well in the fantasy arena. Knocking out a minature copy of an object with a 3D printer seems plausible.
A movie similar to this is "The Shrinking Man" (read the novel by Richard Mattheson). Not to be confused with the Incredible Shrinking Woman... or tv series Land of the Giants..
I first heard of this film in probably '75 or '76. It was Christmastime and my parents had some neighbors over to play cards. I was in the living room in the dark with the tree, and there was a program on TV about sci-fi films and I saw some scenes. The white cell ingesting Pleasence scared the hell out of me. Fast forward to 1981 and I was in middle school and found the novel at the local library and read it. I was always 'into' science and had a microscope and the book was fascinating. Then, on February 14, 1983 it was shown on TV by a local station. Watching the opening credits I saw a word I'd never seen before: CinemaScope. I had to ask my dad about that one. The film was fascinating but disappointed me a bit as I had in my mind's eye what the visuals should look like...but it didn't curb by enthusiasm. I found it on every new home video medium: VHS, Laserdisc, DVD (twice) and then Blu Ray. I really love this film despite the horrible scientific inaccuracies. It's a real favorite around this house.
Most of the Sound Effects were used in Irwin Allen productions such as Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, Lost in Space, Time Tunnel and Land of the Giants.
Many of the sets and props from 20th Century Fox's "FANTASTIC VOYAGE" (1966) were also used by producer, Irwin Allen, who used the "FANTASTIC VOYAGE" set in "The Derelict", the second episode of CBS's "LOST IN SPACE" in 1965, and the other various props that also turned up in later episodes of the series.
I love the reference in "Community", when Troy worries about Abed getting trapped in a fantasy in his head and the others having to shrink down in a submarine and go into his bloodstream.....
I think the movie holds up quite well. yes the special effects not like todays but they have a nice organic feel to it. I would not make any changes. I remember seeing this movie when it first came out, I was 8. One part creeped me out, I briefly went out to lobby but then came back in (I forgot what part). I do distinctly remember immediately identifying with the red and blue corpuscles but didn't know which came from the lungs and which going to. Perhaps a good investment my mom made for me getting an encyclopedia set which I read about corpuscles including the body defenses of white corpuscles and anti-bodies. Looking back maybe others needed to hear the dialog from the actors but watching the anti-bodies in action was not something far fetched. Of course everyone talks about Rachel Welch, later when watching the movie on late night TV, the cringe moment was when Stephen Boyd comments when Rachel setting up laser, "how come someone like you not minding the home instead" or something implying an occupation of a surgeon's assistance on such a mission is no place for a woman. Characters for the story were excellent as we see the top surgeon as a brilliant but wants to do things his way and the hell with guvmint policies. Then the scene when they are in the ear canal, everyone in OR has to be extremely quiet. But then a nurse causes scissors to drop while getting a towel for a physician sweating on the forehead. The sound for the Proteus crew is enormous shockwaves, good illustration of what goes on in the ear canal. The antibodies only go after Rachel as she was the one that damaged the ear components, not the others. I think lots of other interesting stuff such as the map board on the Proteus.
I'm pretty sure many aspects of Disneyland's ADVENTURES THRU INNER SPACE were inspired by this film; though the "shrinking" in that ride went down to the atomic level... The lack of science behind the miniaturization process bothered Asimov so much that the sequel to his novelization of the film was mostly written to explain how it MIGHT be possible to shrink a submarine and crew down to a size where it could travel thru the bloodstream; and it reads like it. Long on technobabble, short on characterization; or plot, which was nearly identical to the first book and the film...
Your film has done really good when it is so well-known that low-brow and kids-aimed pop culture comedy shows from Futurama to SpongeBob SquarePants, Totally Spies, and Invader Zim do episodes which reference the concept. Disney did a similar spoof concept of course with "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids".
I would volunteer in a heartbeat (geddit?) if it meant being in a confined space with Ms Welch! I was one of those (10 year olds) who read the book before seeing the film, so had fewer questions than most in the audience (Asimov was so informative). Spellbound by its visuals, only repeated when I saw Close Encounters, some years later. Still one of my faves, and a regular view (along with Forbidden Planet - ten years earlier).
I first saw this movie at age13 or 15 through a friend that lived in the same neighborhood and watched it a few times. I must admit this movie was ahead of its time in every way you can think of. The special effects was brilliant and well made, I stiil would watch it today 40yrs later.
Dr. Micheals screaming at the end, horrified me as a young man. I would watch the movie all the way to that point and then run out of the room and hide in my bed covering my ears with a pillow. I still find that scene disturbing.
Loved this when I saw it on TV (in the '60s and '70s), but I was always annoyed as I got a little older that the oxygen they got from the lungs--which would have them breathing molecules a million times too large--was still breathable, and the fact that we're told everything that shrinks will automatically grow when time was up, but they leave a dead bad guy and the dissolved ship inside the body!
I never knew what this movie was before. And now I see: it is that one Futurama episode haha I love your voice over goddamn it your videos are so well put together. Something I admire is you talking about other movies linked by themes and other details like the people working on it that links back to the original movie. I'm bad at that kind of thing I think but it's really well done in your videos. You make it so that the behind the scenes elements to these films also create a narrative outside of the films themselves
This is a fun movie...60s style sci-fi with a mix of Cold War intrigue. I enjoyed this one...at the time state of the art SFX & of course the gorgeous Rachel Welch 😉👍👍👍. They also had a Saturday morning cartoon that was pretty good. CinemaScope made a much improved visual experience along with new age soundtrack. This one is probably due for a remake.
When Raquel Welch got attacked by the antibodies it made me freak out to the point I won’t go swimming inthe ocean outbid fear of being attacked by jellyfish
I was an 8 year-old kid in 1966 and desperately wanted to see One Million Years B.C. But the movie wasn't playing in my town. However, this movie was. I remember how gobsmacked I was by the visual effects - and how I didn't want it to end. Spoiler: At 8 years-old, I totally missed Donald Pleasence being the heavy, until the big reveal at the end. I couldn't believe he just hijacks the submarine. I remember this movie had a cool laser weapon/prop that showed up in other films. I also remember going out and getting the novel, which was adapted from the shooting script by author Issac Asimov. Probably the first science-fiction book I read as a kid. This movie made a big impression on me, and probably helped to propel me into a science career.
Incidentally, Raquel Welch starred in Fantastic Voyage and One Million Years B.C. - both movies released in 1966, launching her career. In 1967, she was in Fathom, a spy thriller where she plays Fathom Harvill, a dental hygienist by day, who moonlights as a secret agent. This was just a vehicle to get her on the screen, in a bikini . . . again. But it kind of works. The parachute sequences are spectacular, and as spy movies go, it's right up there with all the other James Bond rip-offs of that time.
You did such a great job. Nice review with a lot of unknown facts. I don’t know if I’d like to be shrunk down but as a teenager watching this movie for the first time I wanted to help get that stuff off of Welch’s wet suit! 😁
This movie is incredible, the first part is kind of James bond-ish but once they ae shrunk it quickly picks up. I love the practical effects, even when they aren't all too convincing.
Loved this film as a kid as an adult it’s still enjoyable but the things technically make it less believable. If you shrink something it doesn’t reduce mass, they wouldn’t have been able to lift the sub to the enlarged needle and besides the wreckage of the sub and the abandoning of the laser gun I’m sure 50 or so gallons of water would have splattered the patients body all over the OR when it enlarged
A fantastic film in many respects but I never could get past the part where the submarine stayed in the body and did not return to full size.... killing the patient and everybody else. That part of the script left a gaping hole for me.
Fun Fact. Richard Fleischer is the son of Cartoon Producer Max Fleischer famous for producing Betty Boop , Popeye the Sailor , & Superman cartoons. 🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩💘💘💘💘💘💘💘😍😍😍
This movie is fantastic (no pun intended), so as “Monsters of the Deep” (1962). Note: “Monsters of the Deep” is a movie I made up, it’s not real. But if it is real, would you possibly do a review on it?
@@guymorris6596 Well, I have to word this carefully, but hear me out. Monsters of the Deep is basically about a group of men (plus a woman) sent off by Dr. Alan Columbus to track down sea monsters and hunt treasure.
Love this movie. Probably influenced me more than any other sci fi. The music, the effects, the whole idea of a human body themed adventure fascinated me as a kid. And of course Raquel Welch 😃 Nowadays of course, the situation in the movie of removing a blood clot in the brain would be resolved with administering thrombolysis drugs, or performing a hyperacute thrombectomy, foregoing all this miniaturisation nonsense 😜
Amazing film but it was indeed a glaring error in the script to not remove the hulk of the Proteus from Benes's brain after it was consumed by the white corpuscle. Even the presumedly crushed body of the deceased Dr. Michaels alone would have killed Benes once it enlarged, never mind the sub's considerably larger, fragmented mass. They should have taken a cue from Issac Asimov and fixed that, as he did in the novelization, since his plans would've been known prior to the film's completion.
Actually, if you think about it, there was a bigger problem nobody seems to realize. They shrunk something like 30 gallons of saline solution in that over-sized hypodermic during the 2nd phase of shrinking the Proteus down to injection size. It was injected with the Proteus into Benes. All that fluid would've exploded his body when it grew back to normal size.
I always wondered about the same things in it. Just figured we'll the antibodies ate them up before they enlarged but really if the was a true story there wasn't .enough time for ship and Dr Michael's body to be consumed before enlargement don't you think ? The movie ending was just left short of rest of story to explain. And all the hype about raquels scene with men tearing off the crystals was fairly looking like uh uh-bunch of men having ther way with a very busy young lady and with her heavy breathing whoa! Way I looked at it. But it's Really always the Sci fi,effects and sounds too attracted me to it.
Also I might add ,when I had to watch it several times since i didnt see it more until my later 40's or 50' s born in 1959 gues I was 7 buy I don't remember seeing any of it til couple yrs later in theater so there may had been a 2nd showing I know I didn't go to any theater until 68 or 69 but went to the admiral twin drive in as a kid I never knew what was playing we were on the swings below the screen I. Front of it.which admiral twin drive in end up being in the movie outsiders, I thought I was part of it. By the 80's But I needed to get more clear exactly what was the damage to benes, what was they actually doing to repair it with the lazer? It was still to muddied muddled to me . But the ending should had More to explain what happen to proteus and Dr Michael's body . But we've had tons of movies we as movie buffs wants to go on to explain what happens to the characters when they end the movie while we're still wanting to see more. I don't like it ,having to say just shutdown story over because of costs time limited 1 hr 45 minto 2hr .then I figured out why they want time to add the stinking commercials ads to TV showings which I personally think sticks in my crawl which I loath ads of any kind just hate period and didng think internet could be more worse to make me scream ill go out of my way To not purchase something playing same ad over and over that I just deleted t seconds before It comes up Disgust me if they only knew that they lost a customer or future customer cuz of that crap . To all Hollywood or any social network google ,FB etc don't play the ads numerous times to your detriment or your clients!!
Great coverage of the movie. You really did your research because that story about removing the green-stuff from Raquel was only in the director's auto-biography, I think.
I *redacted*ing love this movie, so this video was a fun viewing. Can't wait for EARTH VS THE FLYING SAUCERS. (Totally guessing, but it feels like a reasonable guess. ) Back in the day, when I had an Atari 2600 knockoff system (worked just as well), one of my games was the Fantastic Voyage game. I don't recall ever winning it, but it was fun in its 8-bit way. I can also proudly say that I have been on the former Epcot ride, and have been through the Aorta 2 or 3 times. In his "Only Travel Book You'll Ever Need," Dave Barry advises, "Never eat bloatwurst before going through the aorta." While not being prone to motion sickness, I will concur that this is very good advice.
I grew up in Orlando, and my brother actually worked in the Wonders of Life pavilion, which is where Body Wars was located. I rode it at least a dozen times myself. 😁
Thanks for the comprehensive overview, including some discussion of that Dali connection, and acknowledging Bixby (and Otto Klement who actually didn't do all too much on the script: Bixby was very generous with Klement, who was his agent, and often bent much farther over backwards to promote him). The concept was SOOOO unusual for its time. I had other ideas about the cast in some of the parts: No offense to Welch, but maybe someone not as overtly eye-candy-y would've helped make the film come across as a more serious venture. But I can understand the studio's need for someone like her to be in the film. Wasn't too crazy about Steven Boyd (kind of too generic of a lead) or Jack Albertson, in both cases nothing against their abilities, but, somehow they don't command interest, or a hint of, what?---gravitas...or something. But the major problem for me---and it could've been solved easily, tho maybe no one else cared the least---was the sense of "there are 'floors' and a standard "up and down" orientation to most all of the scenes in the body. I would've imagined a far more ambiguous orientation to the interiors, with the Proteus not always "flying" in an often straight horizontal position relative to the camera. The scenes in the brain really suffer in that way, as so many of the neurons hang vertically like drapes instead of at all kinds of busy angles. If I had the time and was more motivated, I'd dink with those things by rotating and re-cropping some of the images, or add a more "float-y" feel to the camera framing. Just a for fun fix-up (of course, it could just be me, and this doesn't bother anyone in the least...and I'm just a madman! ;-7 Ok, guess I'm getting carried away...Or maybe I need to BE carried away! Thanks again for going over this film. Indeed a unique one, and among the first of the newer era of filmed SF. I DO like it, in spite of my quibbles. Or nitpicks...or whatever those things are that're floating around in my brain. (Where's the Proteus when i need it??!)
As 'nonsense' as the idea is, it is also odd that they have the disclaimer at the very intro of the film. In Sci-Fi there are three main ways that Shrinking is accomplished- 1.) The Orgainism/Mechanism LOSES MOLECULES as it shrinks. This has the advantage of keeping the weight scalable, but at some point, Organic or Structual failure will occur. While a Human Being would probably look the same if shrunk down to the size of a Legoman, it is unlikely they would be able to live and think with such a massive shedding of the actual cells of their body, and of course, shrunk down to the size used in the film, they would be a few cells that would fit perfectly into the patient's body, utterly useless. At least though, it takes away the danger of 'growing back'. ^_^ 2.) A process is invented where the spaces BETWEEN atoms & molecules is reduced. As many (hopefully) know, most of the structure of what we are made of is empty space. We can't pass through things because of the rapid movement of subatomic particles, kind of like trying to stick your hand through a moving bicycle wheel, even though the wheel is mostly empty. The advantage of this process is the organism or structure retains its full complexity. However, it also would retain its full WEIGHT. This is the method apparently used in the film (Though more accurately in the book adaption), but the problem of weight and density is ignored. If it weren't, the crew and sub would be utterly immune to the antibodies or white blood cells in the film. Or at least, no more vulnerable that WE would be to individual examples of them at our full size. So it would be impossible for a single white cell to digest the Proteus. Heck, the entire operation would likely not work, as a Ten Ton Sub would just sink like a Razor right through the needle and the patient. (The Ant-Man Films are also supposed to use this method, which is how they are 'Super-Strong' at reduced size, but it's accuracy is wildly inconsistent, bordering on incoherent. For practical purposes, it may as well be the next method.) 3.) This actually fits more into 'Fantasy' than Sci-Fi, as this shrinking process involves setting up an Energy Field around the object that scales all nearby atomic particles to the same relative size. This is EFFECTIVELY what many stories do, to avoid all the tremendous problems 'Reducing the space between particles' actually causes, even if they say otherwise. As far as I know, this 'Field Generation' method has never actally been used fully, and remains theoretical. The bottom line is, that it's a neat idea, but how to accomplish it would require a technology way beyond us, likely for centuries to come. A MUCH more plausible method of micro-interaction, would be to create nano-scale robots, that we could then remotely access, either by a kind of Virtual Reality interface, or a direct Brain-Control-Interface. That method could give us much the same perspective, without all the impossibilities or dangers actual shrinking would cause.
If the studio was at all interested in doing so, they could bring in a few effects people to clean up some of the compositing mattes, eliminate the occasional glimpse of the flying/aka swimming wires and such. I don't think Fox execs would find any value in doing that, though.
Great movie, classic stuff. Remember seeing it as a kid and being well impressed. Never looked at cotton wool the same way since! Dont trust cotton wool ever! ;)
I literally put a clip of it in the video. I should have put in the part where the ship expands inside the patient, because I had mentioned that little plot detail earlier.
At the moment, it seems unlikely. The last director attached was Guillermo del Toro, who is infamous for having more projects canceled than made, and that was before Disney bought Fox. Now that Disney has it and is pretty content to stick with Ant-Man, it’s probably not in active development right now.
Hi unapologetic geek you should review the movie Fahrenheit 451 from 1966 and tell me what you think about it. I would love to hear your perspective on it.
@@TheUnapologeticGeek thank you I just recently subscribed to your channel. I love your videos. They’re really interesting like I’m still slowly trying to build up things. I need to start my RUclips video and more retrospective things like my childhood and my point of view of related to these items so stay tuned whenever I do.
I forgot to put a thanks in the credits, so a special thanks goes out to Randle over at No Market Media for helping make this video happen!
7:41 THUD! (I dropped my banana) Don't worry about it. We all drop our banana when someone utters Raquel Welch. lol
@@moviesignsol 😂😂😂
U hit it on the head geek.! 2 thumbs up! I dont think Donald pleasance really didn't get whole lot of attention until playing the Dr of Michael Myers in Original and subsequent many reprisals of ""Hallowen" . I had even forgotten about him in the Great Escape until I started watching it more on movie channels or is it because I graduated in 1977 right after Carrie and just before Halloween which had least 1 or 2 actors in both . In any case he still did a great job of making you kind of detest him in it. Looking like he lost it , going crazy in fantastic voyage. ! I did see fantastic in the theater and I didn't see many as kid only if my mom took me ti that James bond movies most of my favorites were sci-fi or had great amount of Sci fi or tricks in them !
I remember seeing this in the theater when it was released. I was 7 years old and thrilled! The same day, after seeing the film, I purchased the comic book adaptation at the corner store! It was 12 cents well spent.
Honestly, the somewhat outdated effects are what make the film even more charming. I'm a sucker for that sort of thing in old sci fi films
I agree. Films like Fantastic Voyage and the 1953 War of the Worlds are two of my all time favorites. The practical effects employed by both seem to me to be somehow more honest, and far more creative, than CGI....although I won't decry CGI entirely, because when you can use that technology to present a living dragon interacting seamlessly with living actors....thumbs up..I'll watch that!
Me too!
Add Forbidden Planet and Logan's Run to that list!
@@ramonepedgio5964 And Day the Earth Stood Still 1951 and When World's Collide 1951 !!!!!
@@scottmiller6495 Agreed! A great story is a great story! You don't care about the quality of the special effects because you're enthralled by the story.
Director: "In this next take, you need to stop avoiding pulling the crystals from her breasts."
All four men: "Done."
Raquel Welch: "Could I see my contract again??""
I love this film it's terrific and quite believable! It won 2 academy awards for 1966 and it deserved it, stellar acting, great story and incredible special effects 😀👏😀
the sets and special effects still hold up for me. a product of it's time but still oozes style
Amen
Even better if you still have a good old CRT.
Fantastic Voyage is my favoritest movie in the whole wide world!! I can’t say enough good things about it!! I’ve been a devotee every since I was 7-I’m 53. I have a copy of the script, but I don’t need it because I have committed it to memory. I remember wondering how Benes felt through all of this. He had a clot in his brain, as anyone who’s watched this movie well knows. Through different reasons, I developed the same condition. We both had subdural hematomas-only his was on his right eye and mine was on my left one. Mine didn’t need surgery though. A few weeks’ bed rest and now I am okay. Had a headache and my left eye hurt, but that went away. Benes and I are “eye” brothers.
the filmmaker once again brought up his plans to produce a remake of the 1966 tour-through-the-human-body “Fantastic Voyage,” a project Cameron and his partner Jon Landau have toyed with for over a decade.
“We’ve been developing it for a number of years, and we plan to go ahead with it very soon,” Cameron said. “Raquel Welch is not available, but we think we can make a pretty good movie.”
I went to see this in the theater as an 11 year-old and was absolutely captivated by the effects! To this day I still think about the antibodies attacking them. When I get something in my eye I imagine those little buggers going after the speck.
I was 11 years old, when my father took me to see this at a theater. Loved the design of the Proteus. I snagged a couple of DVDs I found at a Grocery Outlet....maybe 10 years ago. Paid around $5.99 each for them....so gave one to my dad & kept one for myself.
I remember seeing that with my father in the theater when it first came out (1966). So I was 10, and he was 38. He was a physician, and I remember him saying, "Good Grief, the antibodies are coming after her!
I remember watching this movie as a little kid......scared me to death and I have never forgotten it since then....at 58 I plan to watch it again
Despite being a lot younger than you, I remember being terrified by this movie myself.
I remember watching this movie as a kid, too, and it was pretty intense, but then there was Raquel Welch ....
Asimov also explained the miniaturization technology in his novelization, as best he could. It's been almost 50 years since I read that book, but if I recall correctly, he explained that selectively removing atoms from objects would simplify them too much for humans to live through the process, and that decreasing the space between electrons and atomic nuclei would still leave miniaturized objects with all their original mass, and said it was a process involving "higher dimensions" instead. In a sense, objects only *seemed* smaller because they were "farther away" along an axis beyond the three spatial dimensions we're accustomed to. He also included a small miniaturizer on board the sub so the crew could shrink the air molecules that they siphoned out of Benes' lungs. Without that, the molecules would have been too large for the crew to breathe. He really thought things through!
He also made allowances for the water around the submarine as it is shrunk. Asimov was a giant of science-fiction because he was extremely attentive to detail. That's one of the things I love about him!
Reply to @@TheUnapologeticGeek: Yeah, he had the waldo that handled the syringe push the water out until the sub was inside the needle, then inject as little as possible, didn't he? That was good thinking, although the movie itself did a reasonably good job when it came to handling that sub. That procedure would probably be too drawn-out for today's audiences, but personally, I loved every scene with the miniaturizer in it. That machine was COOL!
I think the movement of atoms around the submarine-the “Brownian Motion” was discussed.
He also got around the problem that even when the Proteus had been dissolved by the white cells, there were enough atoms to kill the patient as they deminiaturised. Instead, he simply had one cell swallow the sub and follow them out of the eye.
Even if they were "farther away" along a different dimensional axis wouldn't they still have their original mass? You'd certainly be smaller but wouldn't you still weigh the same as you normally would at full size? If you were to sit in the palm of someone's hand you'd punch right through it like a nail through wood.
-"a test message from the Proteus, sir. Miss Peterson has smiled."
-"Well, that's an auspicious sign."
Randle here in Texas! This will always have a special place in my heart because it brings back memories of watching it at my late grandmother's house as a youngling 🤗
William Boyd had one of the sweetest most mellifluous sounding voices ever heard in cinema.
In the novelization Isaac Asimov actually explains the miniaturisation technique in some detail.
A grand work , that I saw as a child and to this day I share it with my friends who tout the wonders of CGI , to me this still holds my attention. A remake would be a waste it may look better but it will never be the same.
My thoughts exactly.
NYC 4:30pm Movie right after school in the 1970s. Monster Movies, SciFi, and WWII Classics.
When Fantastic Voyage came on, the Earth stopped spinning. Look it's Raquel Welch in a scuba suit!!!
Yeah..."Inner Space" I did watch it when it came out. I can't tell you now anything about it. But I can go on and on about Fantastic Voyage because I watched it over and over on television in my childhood and it sticks in my memory.
In the days where one could simply stay in the theatre house, and watch the film again for free, I, as a 13 year old, sat through 5 full showings in one long day, getting home at about 10pm. I drank this up!
That’s impressive.
If I heard that correct, it is that they did not account for the vessel Proteas growing to full size in Benes' brain. No. The antibodies would annihilate the Proteas whilst it was still microscopically miniature, as they would do to anything, be it organic or inorganic, which is in their realm and in their miniscule size range. But then you have it as why the antibodies did not do that when the Proteas was in transit through the circulatory systems. For that you assume that the Proteas was in a certain state of motility, that the propulsion enacted a given antibody deterrent which Dr. Michaels [ Donald Pleasance ] circumvented per sabotage and screwing around with the mechanisms.
This film taught me a lot at an early age about human biology. And I don't just mean Raquel...
I also labored for years under the misconception that Asimov's book was the origin of the film. I even remember being peeved that they changed elements for the film, as one does. Luckily, I didn't require the Proteus to surgically remove the foot from my mouth...
I was 6 years old in 1966. My mom took me, and a bunch of my butthead friends to our local Drive-In theater to see a Double Feature.
The Fantastic Voyage, and the new Bat Man movie. Bat Man was huge at the time. Being 6 in 1966, I wasn't desensitized to blood, and gore as we are today.
I was mesmerized by The Fantastic Voyage. It freaked me out a little by actually seeing the inside of a human body. This was my first introduction to "Guts".
The Bat Man movie also freaked me out when the villains' turned humans into piles of powder. That bothered me.
On the way home, my mom accidentally ran over a bunny rabbit not far from our house. We all felt horrible about it, but out of curiosity, the next day we all walked up the road to where the bunny was killed. That was the first time I ever saw real "Guts". I remember those two days vividly.
A 6-year old's introduction to the real world.
A very imaginative, and well-executed film. Asimov also mentions brownian motion in the novel, but sort of elids over the implications.
One trivial bit that always bugged me is how the CMDF logo is partly covered by the lapels of some of the uniforms.
The word "Combined" in "Combined Miniature Defense Force" is an interesting one; I don't know if it denotes an international alliance similar to NATO or if it's used like the word "Joint" is currently, to suggest CMDF provides support to different branches of the US military.
As a kid watching this on telly in the 80s, i loved it, but used to hate the bit where the white cells get pleasance!
Not half so scary when you're an adult.
Great movie though!...
Fantastic Voyage is a classic adventure film I always will enjoy and I think it stills holds up today of course science fiction had come a long way since the 60s but films like this has opened the doors in film making and will go down in history thank you to FOX FILMS. 📽📽🎬🎬📽📽🎬🎬😉😉😉
We need a top 10 list of Sci-Fi eye candy. I'll start it off. Jeri Ryan as Seven Of Nine on Star Trek Voyager.
Marina Sirtis as Counselor Deanna Troi.
Mila Jovovich as Leeloo
Love this movie . Truly a classic. When i was a kid i saw this movie and got scared when the antibodies attacked Raquel Welch. Years later, now its my favorite scene.
Love this movie. Saw it on TV when I was a kid. The only problem I had (even as a kid) was I kept wondering what would happen to all that water they injected into him when it went back to normal size. 😁
Incredible movie and although I think the effects are astonishing and believable (particularly given we really don't know what things would look like from the perspective of a tiny internal viewer) its the ideas and drama of blood flow, brain activity, white blood cell attacks, that makes the imagination soar in this totally unique and original film masterpiece.
I read a preview in "Look" or was it "Life" magazine.
Couldn't wait to see the movie.
Saw it at the Lyric and loved it.
But even as a ten-year-old, it bugged me
that the submarine eaten by the omeba would've exploded
the patient's head in real life.
Actually, it's even worse....they shrunk something like 30 gallons of saline solution it the oversized hypodermic in the second stage of shrinking the Proteus to injection size...and injected it into Benes. All that fluid would've enlarged to full size at the same time...his whole body would've exploded!
I saw this film as a kid , having a fever , that night i had scary nightmares, i dreamt was inside my own lower lip, i can still feel that feeling, my parents took me downstairs but couldnt get me out of it. After that the nightmare kept returning, i was scared to go to bed. I havent seen the film since but its nice to see this now!
How scary for you then - and what a laugh now!
It scared me too as a kid myself.
The sets were also borrowed by Irwin Allen for an episode of Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea (the diving bell is swallowed by a whale).
Great review. As for the unrealistic premise: In 1966 the idea of a camera going into an orifice where the doctor, and the patient, could see what's going on via a TV screen, and the doctor correcting medical issues, would also seem ridiculous. Today it's routne and everyone of a certain age should have at least one of said procedures.
What about shrinking?? That remains preposterous.
@@LordGreystoke Yes, but nano technolody is a reality. I find it interesting how humans are limited but human inventions have advanced so far. Shrinking a biologial entity seems well in the fantasy arena. Knocking out a minature copy of an object with a 3D printer seems plausible.
I remember watching this as a kid, and being spellbound by it. It's neat to learn the backstory behind the creation of the film!
A movie similar to this is "The Shrinking Man" (read the novel by Richard Mattheson). Not to be confused with the Incredible Shrinking Woman... or tv series Land of the Giants..
Forget about the sub growing out of the guy's head. The miniaturized air that leaked from the sub would have blown him up like a balloon.
I first heard of this film in probably '75 or '76. It was Christmastime and my parents had some neighbors over to play cards. I was in the living room in the dark with the tree, and there was a program on TV about sci-fi films and I saw some scenes. The white cell ingesting Pleasence scared the hell out of me. Fast forward to 1981 and I was in middle school and found the novel at the local library and read it. I was always 'into' science and had a microscope and the book was fascinating. Then, on February 14, 1983 it was shown on TV by a local station. Watching the opening credits I saw a word I'd never seen before: CinemaScope. I had to ask my dad about that one. The film was fascinating but disappointed me a bit as I had in my mind's eye what the visuals should look like...but it didn't curb by enthusiasm. I found it on every new home video medium: VHS, Laserdisc, DVD (twice) and then Blu Ray. I really love this film despite the horrible scientific inaccuracies. It's a real favorite around this house.
I am 71 & have seen this movie 4 times at least, thanks for posting your review!
Most of the Sound Effects were used in Irwin Allen productions such as Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, Lost in Space, Time Tunnel and Land of the Giants.
Many of the sets and props from 20th Century Fox's "FANTASTIC VOYAGE" (1966) were also used by producer, Irwin Allen, who used the "FANTASTIC VOYAGE" set in "The Derelict", the second episode of CBS's "LOST IN SPACE" in 1965, and the other various props that also turned up in later episodes of the series.
When we see bit of cell animation that is Richard Fleischer basically thanking his dad
I love the reference in "Community", when Troy worries about Abed getting trapped in a fantasy in his head and the others having to shrink down in a submarine and go into his bloodstream.....
I think the movie holds up quite well. yes the special effects not like todays but they have a nice organic feel to it. I would not make any changes. I remember seeing this movie when it first came out, I was 8. One part creeped me out, I briefly went out to lobby but then came back in (I forgot what part). I do distinctly remember immediately identifying with the red and blue corpuscles but didn't know which came from the lungs and which going to. Perhaps a good investment my mom made for me getting an encyclopedia set which I read about corpuscles including the body defenses of white corpuscles and anti-bodies. Looking back maybe others needed to hear the dialog from the actors but watching the anti-bodies in action was not something far fetched.
Of course everyone talks about Rachel Welch, later when watching the movie on late night TV, the cringe moment was when Stephen Boyd comments when Rachel setting up laser, "how come someone like you not minding the home instead" or something implying an occupation of a surgeon's assistance on such a mission is no place for a woman.
Characters for the story were excellent as we see the top surgeon as a brilliant but wants to do things his way and the hell with guvmint policies. Then the scene when they are in the ear canal, everyone in OR has to be extremely quiet. But then a nurse causes scissors to drop while getting a towel for a physician sweating on the forehead. The sound for the Proteus crew is enormous shockwaves, good illustration of what goes on in the ear canal. The antibodies only go after Rachel as she was the one that damaged the ear components, not the others. I think lots of other interesting stuff such as the map board on the Proteus.
I never get tired of this movie. A bona fide classic!
I'm pretty sure many aspects of Disneyland's ADVENTURES THRU INNER SPACE were inspired by this film; though the "shrinking" in that ride went down to the atomic level...
The lack of science behind the miniaturization process bothered Asimov so much that the sequel to his novelization of the film was mostly written to explain how it MIGHT be possible to shrink a submarine and crew down to a size where it could travel thru the bloodstream; and it reads like it. Long on technobabble, short on characterization; or plot, which was nearly identical to the first book and the film...
Your film has done really good when it is so well-known that low-brow and kids-aimed pop culture comedy shows from Futurama to SpongeBob SquarePants, Totally Spies, and Invader Zim do episodes which reference the concept.
Disney did a similar spoof concept of course with "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids".
I would volunteer in a heartbeat (geddit?) if it meant being in a confined space with Ms Welch! I was one of those (10 year olds) who read the book before seeing the film, so had fewer questions than most in the audience (Asimov was so informative). Spellbound by its visuals, only repeated when I saw Close Encounters, some years later. Still one of my faves, and a regular view (along with Forbidden Planet - ten years earlier).
I first saw this movie at age13 or 15 through a friend that lived in the same neighborhood and watched it a few times. I must admit this movie was ahead of its time in every way you can think of. The special effects was brilliant and well made, I stiil would watch it today 40yrs later.
Dr. Micheals screaming at the end, horrified me as a young man. I would watch the movie all the way to that point and then run out of the room and hide in my bed covering my ears with a pillow. I still find that scene disturbing.
Those screams were real...The effect of the White Blood Corpuscle was achieved by using dish soap and Donald got it right in his eyes!
Brilliant, this was one of my favourite movies as a child.
Loved this when I saw it on TV (in the '60s and '70s), but I was always annoyed as I got a little older that the oxygen they got from the lungs--which would have them breathing molecules a million times too large--was still breathable, and the fact that we're told everything that shrinks will automatically grow when time was up, but they leave a dead bad guy and the dissolved ship inside the body!
I never knew what this movie was before. And now I see: it is that one Futurama episode haha
I love your voice over goddamn it your videos are so well put together. Something I admire is you talking about other movies linked by themes and other details like the people working on it that links back to the original movie. I'm bad at that kind of thing I think but it's really well done in your videos. You make it so that the behind the scenes elements to these films also create a narrative outside of the films themselves
This is a fun movie...60s style sci-fi with a mix of Cold War intrigue. I enjoyed this one...at the time state of the art SFX & of course the gorgeous Rachel Welch 😉👍👍👍. They also had a Saturday morning cartoon that was pretty good. CinemaScope made a much improved visual experience along with new age soundtrack. This one is probably due for a remake.
When Raquel Welch got attacked by the antibodies it made me freak out to the point I won’t go swimming inthe ocean outbid fear of being attacked by jellyfish
I was an 8 year-old kid in 1966 and desperately wanted to see One Million Years B.C. But the movie wasn't playing in my town. However, this movie was. I remember how gobsmacked I was by the visual effects - and how I didn't want it to end. Spoiler: At 8 years-old, I totally missed Donald Pleasence being the heavy, until the big reveal at the end. I couldn't believe he just hijacks the submarine. I remember this movie had a cool laser weapon/prop that showed up in other films. I also remember going out and getting the novel, which was adapted from the shooting script by author Issac Asimov. Probably the first science-fiction book I read as a kid. This movie made a big impression on me, and probably helped to propel me into a science career.
Incidentally, Raquel Welch starred in Fantastic Voyage and One Million Years B.C. - both movies released in 1966, launching her career. In 1967, she was in Fathom, a spy thriller where she plays Fathom Harvill, a dental hygienist by day, who moonlights as a secret agent. This was just a vehicle to get her on the screen, in a bikini . . . again. But it kind of works. The parachute sequences are spectacular, and as spy movies go, it's right up there with all the other James Bond rip-offs of that time.
@@mxbishop Also loved her in the cheese film Kansas City Bomber!
"When a passing bird absconded with it". Just imagine where it got dropped...
You did such a great job. Nice review with a lot of unknown facts. I don’t know if I’d like to be shrunk down but as a teenager watching this movie for the first time I wanted to help get that stuff off of Welch’s wet suit! 😁
I'll help you remove the antibodies that attached themselves to Raquel's suit. It's a dangerous job but someone has to do it. Haha.
@@guymorris6596 😁👍
This movie is incredible, the first part is kind of James bond-ish but once they ae shrunk it quickly picks up. I love the practical effects, even when they aren't all too convincing.
Great review! BTW- If you have not seen the new TCM HD copy it is a revelation! Incredibly clear and bright!!!!!
Loved this film as a kid as an adult it’s still enjoyable but the things technically make it less believable. If you shrink something it doesn’t reduce mass, they wouldn’t have been able to lift the sub to the enlarged needle and besides the wreckage of the sub and the abandoning of the laser gun I’m sure 50 or so gallons of water would have splattered the patients body all over the OR when it enlarged
A fantastic film in many respects but I never could get past the part where the submarine stayed in the body and did not return to full size.... killing the patient and everybody else. That part of the script left a gaping hole for me.
One of my all time favorite sci-fi movies! I would love a really smart remake!
Fun Fact. Richard Fleischer is the son of Cartoon Producer Max Fleischer famous for producing Betty Boop , Popeye the Sailor , & Superman cartoons.
🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩💘💘💘💘💘💘💘😍😍😍
This movie is fantastic (no pun intended), so as “Monsters of the Deep” (1962). Note: “Monsters of the Deep” is a movie I made up, it’s not real. But if it is real, would you possibly do a review on it?
What is your movie about ?
@@guymorris6596 Well, I have to word this carefully, but hear me out. Monsters of the Deep is basically about a group of men (plus a woman) sent off by Dr. Alan Columbus to track down sea monsters and hunt treasure.
Another great, fact-filled review! I'm a huge sci fi buff, but I always learn new stuff from your work. Thanks!
Thank you! That's one of my main goals, so I'm glad I'm succeeding in finding information that a lot of people don't know.
Love this movie. Probably influenced me more than any other sci fi. The music, the effects, the whole idea of a human body themed adventure fascinated me as a kid. And of course Raquel Welch 😃
Nowadays of course, the situation in the movie of removing a blood clot in the brain would be resolved with administering thrombolysis drugs, or performing a hyperacute thrombectomy, foregoing all this miniaturisation nonsense 😜
Great adventure Was 18 when it came out, Really liked it.
Just found you're channel. Great content.
At 10:19; LOL, a bit of a tough morsel. ;-)
Amazing film but it was indeed a glaring error in the script to not remove the hulk of the Proteus from Benes's brain after it was consumed by the white corpuscle. Even the presumedly crushed body of the deceased Dr. Michaels alone would have killed Benes once it enlarged, never mind the sub's considerably larger, fragmented mass. They should have taken a cue from Issac Asimov and fixed that, as he did in the novelization, since his plans would've been known prior to the film's completion.
Actually, if you think about it, there was a bigger problem nobody seems to realize. They shrunk something like 30 gallons of saline solution in that over-sized hypodermic during the 2nd phase of shrinking the Proteus down to injection size. It was injected with the Proteus into Benes. All that fluid would've exploded his body when it grew back to normal size.
I always wondered about the same things in it. Just figured we'll the antibodies ate them up before they enlarged but really if the
was a true story there wasn't .enough time for ship and Dr Michael's body to be consumed before enlargement don't you think ? The movie ending was just left short of rest of story to explain. And all the hype about raquels scene with men tearing off the crystals was fairly looking like uh uh-bunch of men having ther way with a very busy young lady and with her heavy breathing whoa! Way I looked at it. But it's Really always the Sci fi,effects and sounds too attracted me to it.
Also I might add ,when I had to watch it several times since i didnt see it more until my later 40's or 50' s born in 1959 gues I was 7 buy I don't remember seeing any of it til couple yrs later in theater so there may had been a 2nd showing I know I didn't go to any theater until 68 or 69 but went to the admiral twin drive in as a kid I never knew what was playing we were on the swings below the screen I. Front of it.which admiral twin drive in end up being in the movie outsiders, I thought I was part of it. By the 80's But I needed to get more clear exactly what was the damage to benes, what was they actually doing to repair it with the lazer? It was still to muddied muddled to me . But the ending should had More to explain what happen to proteus and Dr Michael's body . But we've had tons of movies we as movie buffs wants to go on to explain what happens to the characters when they end the movie while we're still wanting to see more. I don't like it ,having to say just shutdown story over because of costs time limited 1 hr 45 minto 2hr .then I figured out why they want time to add the stinking commercials ads to TV showings which I personally think sticks in my crawl which I loath ads of any kind just hate period and didng think internet could be more worse to make me scream ill go out of my way To not purchase something playing same ad over and over that I just deleted t seconds before It comes up Disgust me if they only knew that they lost a customer or future customer cuz of that crap . To all Hollywood or any social network google ,FB etc don't play the ads numerous times to your detriment or your clients!!
Great coverage of the movie. You really did your research because that story about removing the green-stuff from Raquel was only in the director's auto-biography, I think.
I think that it was Dr. Micheals who sabotaged the lazer.
Enjoyed the film special effect was excellent for time.managed get copy on dvd for vintage film collection
I *redacted*ing love this movie, so this video was a fun viewing. Can't wait for EARTH VS THE FLYING SAUCERS. (Totally guessing, but it feels like a reasonable guess. )
Back in the day, when I had an Atari 2600 knockoff system (worked just as well), one of my games was the Fantastic Voyage game. I don't recall ever winning it, but it was fun in its 8-bit way. I can also proudly say that I have been on the former Epcot ride, and have been through the Aorta 2 or 3 times. In his "Only Travel Book You'll Ever Need," Dave Barry advises, "Never eat bloatwurst before going through the aorta." While not being prone to motion sickness, I will concur that this is very good advice.
I grew up in Orlando, and my brother actually worked in the Wonders of Life pavilion, which is where Body Wars was located. I rode it at least a dozen times myself. 😁
Wasn't there a whole commercial series based on this idea?
Thanks for the comprehensive overview, including some discussion of that Dali connection, and acknowledging Bixby (and Otto Klement who actually didn't do all too much on the script: Bixby was very generous with Klement, who was his agent, and often bent much farther over backwards to promote him). The concept was SOOOO unusual for its time.
I had other ideas about the cast in some of the parts: No offense to Welch, but maybe someone not as overtly eye-candy-y would've helped make the film come across as a more serious venture. But I can understand the studio's need for someone like her to be in the film. Wasn't too crazy about Steven Boyd (kind of too generic of a lead) or Jack Albertson, in both cases nothing against their abilities, but, somehow they don't command interest, or a hint of, what?---gravitas...or something. But the major problem for me---and it could've been solved easily, tho maybe no one else cared the least---was the sense of "there are 'floors' and a standard "up and down" orientation to most all of the scenes in the body. I would've imagined a far more ambiguous orientation to the interiors, with the Proteus not always "flying" in an often straight horizontal position relative to the camera. The scenes in the brain really suffer in that way, as so many of the neurons hang vertically like drapes instead of at all kinds of busy angles. If I had the time and was more motivated, I'd dink with those things by rotating and re-cropping some of the images, or add a more "float-y" feel to the camera framing. Just a for fun fix-up (of course, it could just be me, and this doesn't bother anyone in the least...and I'm just a madman! ;-7
Ok, guess I'm getting carried away...Or maybe I need to BE carried away!
Thanks again for going over this film. Indeed a unique one, and among the first of the newer era of filmed SF. I DO like it, in spite of my quibbles. Or nitpicks...or whatever those things are that're floating around in my brain. (Where's the Proteus when i need it??!)
Fantastic Voyage, so thats what it called... i watched this on tv in the 90s and dont know what the title since...
The submarine was way cool, my fave thing in the movie!
RIP Raquel Welch🥀
Amazing special effects ever for this shrinking a nuclear submarine down to sub atomic level WOW…………..
As 'nonsense' as the idea is, it is also odd that they have the disclaimer at the very intro of the film.
In Sci-Fi there are three main ways that Shrinking is accomplished- 1.) The Orgainism/Mechanism LOSES MOLECULES as it shrinks. This has the advantage of keeping the weight scalable, but at some point, Organic or Structual failure will occur. While a Human Being would probably look the same if shrunk down to the size of a Legoman, it is unlikely they would be able to live and think with such a massive shedding of the actual cells of their body, and of course, shrunk down to the size used in the film, they would be a few cells that would fit perfectly into the patient's body, utterly useless. At least though, it takes away the danger of 'growing back'. ^_^
2.) A process is invented where the spaces BETWEEN atoms & molecules is reduced. As many (hopefully) know, most of the structure of what we are made of is empty space. We can't pass through things because of the rapid movement of subatomic particles, kind of like trying to stick your hand through a moving bicycle wheel, even though the wheel is mostly empty. The advantage of this process is the organism or structure retains its full complexity. However, it also would retain its full WEIGHT. This is the method apparently used in the film (Though more accurately in the book adaption), but the problem of weight and density is ignored. If it weren't, the crew and sub would be utterly immune to the antibodies or white blood cells in the film. Or at least, no more vulnerable that WE would be to individual examples of them at our full size. So it would be impossible for a single white cell to digest the Proteus. Heck, the entire operation would likely not work, as a Ten Ton Sub would just sink like a Razor right through the needle and the patient.
(The Ant-Man Films are also supposed to use this method, which is how they are 'Super-Strong' at reduced size, but it's accuracy is wildly inconsistent, bordering on incoherent. For practical purposes, it may as well be the next method.)
3.) This actually fits more into 'Fantasy' than Sci-Fi, as this shrinking process involves setting up an Energy Field around the object that scales all nearby atomic particles to the same relative size. This is EFFECTIVELY what many stories do, to avoid all the tremendous problems 'Reducing the space between particles' actually causes, even if they say otherwise. As far as I know, this 'Field Generation' method has never actally been used fully, and remains theoretical.
The bottom line is, that it's a neat idea, but how to accomplish it would require a technology way beyond us, likely for centuries to come. A MUCH more plausible method of micro-interaction, would be to create nano-scale robots, that we could then remotely access, either by a kind of Virtual Reality interface, or a direct Brain-Control-Interface. That method could give us much the same perspective, without all the impossibilities or dangers actual shrinking would cause.
If the studio was at all interested in doing so, they could bring in a few effects people to clean up some of the compositing mattes, eliminate the occasional glimpse of the flying/aka swimming wires and such. I don't think Fox execs would find any value in doing that, though.
Saw this in the theater with my brother along with planet of the apes-great day for science fiction cinema 😊😊😊😊
Great movie, classic stuff. Remember seeing it as a kid and being well impressed. Never looked at cotton wool the same way since! Dont trust cotton wool ever! ;)
I always wanted to go.
The perfect drive-in movie.
But I still love the movie
Great video, thanks mate.
No mention of Drastic Voyage?
It was an episode of Archer. Such a great show.
I literally put a clip of it in the video. I should have put in the part where the ship expands inside the patient, because I had mentioned that little plot detail earlier.
I remember Fantastecchh Voyage, Craptastic Voyage, and even Faptastic Voyage.
Will someone TELL ME ....... will THE FANTASTIC VOYAGE REMAKE HAPPEN?????
At the moment, it seems unlikely. The last director attached was Guillermo del Toro, who is infamous for having more projects canceled than made, and that was before Disney bought Fox. Now that Disney has it and is pretty content to stick with Ant-Man, it’s probably not in active development right now.
Fantastic Voyage, Fantastic movie 👍
Hi unapologetic geek you should review the movie Fahrenheit 451 from 1966 and tell me what you think about it. I would love to hear your perspective on it.
Great suggestion!
@@TheUnapologeticGeek thank you I just recently subscribed to your channel. I love your videos. They’re really interesting like I’m still slowly trying to build up things. I need to start my RUclips video and more retrospective things like my childhood and my point of view of related to these items so stay tuned whenever I do.
Great movie fond memories of this one thanks for sharing.
A movie that begs to be remade!
No remake but keep it as it's original version because all remakes end up like trash.
well done ...
Certainly one of my favourites, I also very much enjoyed Asimov's novelisation and the sequel
It was written by Asimov, so was intelligent.
fantastic voyage movie made me spfx prop maker for projects unlimited.
cool video.
She did fine