The picture is apparently loosely based on actual real-life events regarding the sinking in 1968 of the Russian submarine K-129. The Wikipedia website states: "K-129 was a Project 629A (NATO reporting name Golf-II) diesel-electric powered submarine of the Soviet Pacific Fleet, one of six Project 629 strategic ballistic missile submarines attached to the 15th Submarine Squadron based at Rybachiy Naval Base, Kamchatka, commanded by Rear Admiral Rudolf A. Golosow. In January 1968, the 15th Submarine Squadron was part of the 29th Ballistic Missile Division at Rybachiy, commanded by Admiral Viktor Dygalo. K-129's commander was Captain First Rank V.I. Kobzar. K-129 carried hull number 722 on her final deployment during which she sank on 8 March 1968. It was one of four mysterious submarine disappearances in 1968; the others being the Israeli submarine INS Dakar, the French submarine Minerve (S647) and the US submarine USS Scorpion (SSN-589). The Soviet Navy deployed a huge flotilla of ships to search for her but never found her wreck. The United States attempted to recover the boat in 1974 in a secret Cold War-era effort named Project Azorian. The vessel's position 4.8 kilometres (3.0 mi) below the surface was the greatest depth from which an attempt had been made to raise a ship. The cover story used was that the salvage vessel was engaged in commercial manganese nodule mining."
Website Box Office Flops, which is "A Database Of Films That Failed At The Box Office", says of this movie: "RCR Media financed Phantom for $18 million and K5 Intl. sold foreign territories, which wasn't more than a handful of them. The submarine thriller staring Ed Harris and David Duchovny grossed just over $100k outside of the US. RCR originally tapped Sony to distribute the pic's domestic release, but RCR Media ended up self distributing Phantom in the US and went big with a 1,118 screen release - which opened to a disastrous $508,000, posting one of the worst per screen averages of all time at $454 for the weekend - placing far outside the top 10 at #23. Phantom's theater count was reduced to 407 in its second weekend and posted an 88% decline in its second weekend with a $61,050 weekend and ended its run after just three weeks with $1,034,589. Self distributing would see RCR receive a small percentage of the gross from theater chains (Regal Cinema pays out only 34% to independent labels) and they would see back about $400k, which would barely put a dent in the modest marketing spend. Phantom went straight to video in most major markets, including the UK, Germany, Italy and Australia."
Exterior and on board scenes took place on and in the former Foxtrot class B-39 soviet submarine which is a museum ship at the Maritime Museum of San Diego in San Diego, California.
The picture is dedicated to director Tony Scott who received a very special thanks credit and who passed away the year the movie was made before it debuted in 2013.
Although mostly guessed at, some of the premise in this film actually echoes some of what only recently has been revealed of just how close the Soviet Union was to a similarly submarine launched nuclear weapon in the 1962 'Cuba' missile crisis:
in that the character that is caught in the missile silo trying to defuse it, is not far different to what has only just recently been revealed by Russian writer, Serhii Plokhy (in "Nuclear Folly"; '21.):
then, Soviet sub 'B-59' crew had experienced two days of U.S. 'practice' (although Soviet crew didn't know that) depth charges, with inside, intense heat and toxic levels of CO2: on surfacing for air, was strafed by U.S. tracer bullets and flares: the sub commander convinced this was an attack of an already begun war, gave a torpedo launch order - which was nuclear armed:
it was prevented by first, US destroyer commander realizing the predicament likely to soon occur, so had flashed an apology to the sub on the fighter's aggressive reaction: but which was only seen, because the sub's signal's officer had got stuck in the shaft of the sub's conning tower.
Just behind him was the whole sub task force commander, (Vasili Arkhipov), who with that knowledge gave the slimmest of opportunity in which he countermanded the order.
Had a nuclear torpedo been fired, it is likely that then U.S. President John F. Kennedy would have had to have retaliated with strike against Soviet targets - with inevitable consequences of escalation.
That averted decision-making in the 'crisis' can be considered in mere minutes.
in that the character that is caught in the missile silo trying to defuse it, is not far different to what has only just recently been revealed by Russian writer, Serhii Plokhy (in "Nuclear Folly"; '21.):
then, Soviet sub 'B-59' crew had experienced two days of U.S. 'practice' (although Soviet crew didn't know that) depth charges, with inside, intense heat and toxic levels of CO2: on surfacing for air, was strafed by U.S. tracer bullets and flares: the sub commander convinced this was an attack of an already begun war, gave a torpedo launch order - which was nuclear armed:
it was prevented by first, US destroyer commander realizing the predicament likely to soon occur, so had flashed an apology to the sub on the fighter's aggressive reaction: but which was only seen, because the sub's signal's officer had got stuck in the shaft of the sub's conning tower.
Just behind him was the whole sub task force commander, (Vasili Arkhipov), who with that knowledge gave the slimmest of opportunity in which he countermanded the order.
Had a nuclear torpedo been fired, it is likely that then U.S. President John F. Kennedy would have had to have retaliated with strike against Soviet targets - with inevitable consequences of escalation.
That averted decision-making in the 'crisis' can be considered in mere minutes.