Oscar-winning documentary based on Rachel L. Carson's pioneering study of ocean life chronicled in her award-winning and best-selling 1951 book of the same name.Oscar-winning documentary based on Rachel L. Carson's pioneering study of ocean life chronicled in her award-winning and best-selling 1951 book of the same name.Oscar-winning documentary based on Rachel L. Carson's pioneering study of ocean life chronicled in her award-winning and best-selling 1951 book of the same name.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Won 1 Oscar
- 1 win total
Don Forbes
- Self - Commentator
- (voice)
Theodore von Eltz
- Self - Commentator
- (voice)
- (as Theodor Von Eltz)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
6.0443
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Featured reviews
The first true underwater documentary
This is from a well known book by Rachel Carson, so I don't know why this film is not well-known. It took home the Academy Award as best documentary. I suppose the later work of Cousteau just eclipsed it. Never the less, this is a well done film, well worth watching.
10llltdesq
Excellent underwater camera work
This won an Academy Award for Documeentary Feature and most definitely deserved to win. The whole project is well-executed and the underwater camerawork is particularly worthy of mention. Holds up very well after almost fifty years. Turner Classic Movies usually shows this a few times a year. Highly recommended.
Good underwater camerawork, if a little disturbing
This is probably the first documentary made on life that makes its home under the water. Today, it doesn't really look like much, but for its time, there were really no other resources for learning more about undersea animals, other than going to the sea yourself or having a book. The film shows a number of extremely beautiful wonders that exist beneath our oceans, but few people have had the pleasure of seeing, such as tremendously tall growths of seaweed that can be over 100 feet in length, resembling a submerged jungle, coral reefs, and sea anemones. The film doesn't just focus on underwater things though. There's also a segment that shows how turtles hatch on land, then attempt to make a dash for the shoreline on the beach. Sadly, many of them die and are eaten by birds in the process. Also shown are seals and gannet birds. The reason why I say it's a little disturbing is because of how the interactions between the divers and some of the animals go in the movie. In particular, there's one moment when someone grabs a small shark and cuts open its midsection with a knife in only a matter of seconds, leaving it to die of blood loss. Even one of the posters I saw for the movie depicts this. Nowadays, this type of behavior would be unacceptable and divers would only take the animal's life as a last resort if it was threatening to attack a diver. Other than that, it's pretty good. If looking at the vibrant and stunning life of the ocean interests you, try to find a copy of this. The ocean is so huge and vast there are things in it we still don't know about.
When you see this and nature documentaries from the 1970s and beyond, the differences are huge.
It's a real shame that the copy of "The Sea Around Us" that was shown on Turner Classic Movies is in great need of restoration. Due to the effects of time on nitrate film stock, the film is often too dark or muddy or faded...and it's a shame as the original color film must have wowed audiences.
The film is named after Rachel Carson' book and her name in in the opening credits. However, I have not read the book and assume it differs significantly because there isn't much in the way of plot...just lots of clips of various sea creatures.
When you watch the film today, you also will probably notice that the style is very old fashioned and sensationalistic. Instead of using scientific jargon, the film often tries to amaze viewers and the language is often ridiculous. Moray eels and octopi are described with such florid words as 'killer', 'murderous' and 'cruel'...none of which are true about these relatively benign creatures. This isn't too surprising because this is how many early nature documentaries were...such as Jacques Cousteau's "The Silent World" or the Disney nature films of the 1950s. I suspect much of the sensationalism also was because Irwin Allen made this film...the same guy who loved disaster films and bigger than life stories.
Overall, some excellent early underwater cinematography combined with some very unscientific and sensationalistic material...such as showing a diver knifing a shark to death or using ridiculous narration meant to entertain and not educate. Some of the sea life is misidentified or misrepresented. A real mixed bag.
The film is named after Rachel Carson' book and her name in in the opening credits. However, I have not read the book and assume it differs significantly because there isn't much in the way of plot...just lots of clips of various sea creatures.
When you watch the film today, you also will probably notice that the style is very old fashioned and sensationalistic. Instead of using scientific jargon, the film often tries to amaze viewers and the language is often ridiculous. Moray eels and octopi are described with such florid words as 'killer', 'murderous' and 'cruel'...none of which are true about these relatively benign creatures. This isn't too surprising because this is how many early nature documentaries were...such as Jacques Cousteau's "The Silent World" or the Disney nature films of the 1950s. I suspect much of the sensationalism also was because Irwin Allen made this film...the same guy who loved disaster films and bigger than life stories.
Overall, some excellent early underwater cinematography combined with some very unscientific and sensationalistic material...such as showing a diver knifing a shark to death or using ridiculous narration meant to entertain and not educate. Some of the sea life is misidentified or misrepresented. A real mixed bag.
early color ocean doc
It's an early documentary about the ocean. The color film has its limits but the film takes it to that limit. It starts with the biblical Genesis and volcanic reds. It continues with a lot of God and a lot of nature. It has some amazing microscopic creatures and that cinematography is good even for today. It must have awed audiences at the time. It would win the Oscar for best documentary. Granted, much of the footage must have been filmed in a tank although there is plenty of open ocean work. As part of the old ways, they do show capturing of a shark. More than half of the film is about people including the fishery rather than the natural world. It does show some giant crabs. I've never seen crabs that big. Modern environmental films would skip some of this. All in all, some of this leaves me awe-struck and would inspire future nature films. Then it ends with a gut punch. I didn't realize that global warming science was discussed so early on.
Did you know
- TriviaAccording to an article in the January 20, 1953 edition of the Los Angeles Daily News, about 1,620,000 feet of 16mm color film was collected from 2,341 sources for use in this film.
- Quotes
Commentator: It has been established beyond all reasonable doubt that the great Arctic change of climates started somewhere about 1900 and has spread so rapidly that small glaciers have already disappeared, and the big ones are melting at a startling rate.
- Crazy creditsAt the end of the film, "The End?" is displayed on screen with a question mark while an off-screen narrator speaks the last lines: "What is the fate of the world? Is this the end?" The question mark then disappears, leaving "The End" and the film closes.
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Rachel L. Carson's The Sea Around Us
- Filming locations
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime
- 1h 2m(62 min)
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content


