Agreed. The alternative ending is crap.
Oh, and Kate Winslet got naked.
Oh, yeah.
The best Titanic film?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Agreed. The alternative ending is crap.
Oh, yeah.
Now, her subsequent career would show that she actually does that quite a lot, but it was special (and never done quite as well since) in Titanic.
A Night to Remember.
I don't care for 1997's Titanic - too long and too melodramatic in places it didn't need to be. The tragedy is already terrible enough without all the other foolishness.
And by the way, another 'Titanic movie' is The Unsinkable Molly Brown.
I don't care for 1997's Titanic - too long and too melodramatic in places it didn't need to be. The tragedy is already terrible enough without all the other foolishness.
And by the way, another 'Titanic movie' is The Unsinkable Molly Brown.
The 1997 movie is the best.
Fantastic movie.
The romance story allowed Cameron to show the audience around the ship, but not make it a documentary. I think it worked very well
Fantastic movie.
The romance story allowed Cameron to show the audience around the ship, but not make it a documentary. I think it worked very well
Had they removed Jack and Rose, I might have gone with Cameron's Titantic because of the effects. But that "love story" was just way over the top to me. Kind of a "Tiger Beat" love story.
--Ted
--Ted
I could never get through the 1997 movie. All that silly romance crap with a lead actor who looked 12 years old. ugh.
Cameron's Titanic received fantastic reviews (mostly), enjoyed gigantic box office success, and won many well-deserved Oscars. But the director's awkward "I'm king of the world!" moment at the Oscars fueled an element of resentment and hostility toward the film, which is why so many people now claim to favor A Night To Remember and the made-for-TV productions.
I have to admit that A Night to Remember and Titanic (1997 - Cameron) are about equal in my mind. The first half of Titanic though is, as many have said, boring. I usually only watch the sinking portion willingly.
I still remember going to see it in the theatre though and my cousin - she's older - trying to cover my eyes during the drawing scene. I was like 9.
I still remember going to see it in the theatre though and my cousin - she's older - trying to cover my eyes during the drawing scene. I was like 9.
Cameron's Titanic
It was technically flawless. It was certainly the most life-like. The last half is a masterpiece. The movie was only slightly dragged down by the gross ordinariness of the love story and the mundane dialogue. The acting was very strong however.
It was technically flawless. It was certainly the most life-like. The last half is a masterpiece. The movie was only slightly dragged down by the gross ordinariness of the love story and the mundane dialogue. The acting was very strong however.
A Night to Remember is the best. The Cameron movie is a real piece of crap. One of the most phony, formulaic, calculatingly maudlin movies I've ever had to sit through. The writing was like an episode of "Dynasty." The characters were hackneyed. The sets looked good, but the CGI wasn't as impressive as people said.
How long did they slog around in that water, half an hour (seemed like an hour)? After a few minutes they would barely be able to move, in twenty minutes they would be dead or close to it.
LA Confidential was ten times the movie Titanic ever dreamed of being, but it seemed like that year everybody just accepted that Titanic would win the Oscar, and it did. God, I hated that movie.
--Justin
How long did they slog around in that water, half an hour (seemed like an hour)? After a few minutes they would barely be able to move, in twenty minutes they would be dead or close to it.
LA Confidential was ten times the movie Titanic ever dreamed of being, but it seemed like that year everybody just accepted that Titanic would win the Oscar, and it did. God, I hated that movie.
--Justin
This post perfectly illustrates the resentment I spoke of earlier. I'd forgotten about L.A. Confidential and its ardent fans. Obviously, they're still burning about losing the Oscar.
Disagree. I never cared for Cameron's version of the film. I didn't see his Oscar speech, and certainly wasn't aware of it when I saw the movie on video in 1998. I found the romance to be unbelievable and bordering on cheesy. Most of the effects were fantastic, but some of them didn't even hold up for me on video back then. The best part of the film has to be the historical stories that are shown through the many number of minor characters, but by shoe-horning in a fake and unbelievable narrative with Jack and Rose Cameron essentially delegated what I felt should have been the focus of the film to a supporting role. Pearl Harbor tried to emulate Titanic a few years later, and suffers from the same problems. Neither film is about what their titles seem to imply. They're both clichéd stories that happen to occur during the events the films should have been about.
Also disagree. To be honest, I had a vague idea at best as to who Cameron actually was, not being all that pop-literate then as now. I also didn't know about any of the hype or that it'd get nominated for and win a slew of Oscars; I just knew it was a long movie about the Titanic... and that was about it. I just didn't think it as a good movie. It was a big movie; it was a loud movie; it was a movie with a lot of SFX and a sappy love story. But a good movie? Perish the inference.
I don't really get this; should From Here To Eternity have been about the real events rather than the love story? Doctor Zhivago? Cameron chose to set a romantic drama against an historical backdrop; that's the most standard of fictional devices. The titles clearly centre the movie in a certain place, but it was never conceived nor marketed as a disaster film.
This post perfectly illustrates the resentment I spoke of earlier. I'd forgotten about L.A. Confidential and its ardent fans. Obviously, they're still burning about losing the Oscar.
I actually saw Titanic before LA Confidential and months before the Oscars, and I didn't see the Oscar telecast and whatever Cameron said. My low opinion of Titanic was established the minute the credits rolled and has not changed from that moment till now.
Of course, that's just my opinion. But feel free to characterize my motivations however it suits you, Bishop.
--Justin
I for one went into the movie theater only wanting to experience the terror and the historical atmosphere of the sinking. Granted back then I was only about 13 but even as I watched it 8 years later I think Cameron's excessive attention to visual detail triumphed over his lack of attention to the story and dialogue. None of the two other Titanic movies (ANTR and 1953) made me felt genuinely the anxiety and then the abject terror. I think for Titanic the ship itself dwarfs any human experience so the love story despite it being quite prominent has always been relegated to some hidden locker in my brain when I watch Titanic. The same would also happen even if the human story was more historically accurate or more interesting. I was looking for an painstakingly accurate recreation of the ship and its sinking and only Cameron Titanic managed to achieve that.
Quite frankly Pearl Harbor didn't make me feel anything other than digust.
This was the best I think that the Rose & Jack stuff (as you said) was great. I love romance.
Titanic was a much better film than Pearl Harbor, this is true. Pearl Harbor was a thriple threat. The screenwriter of Braveheart and the director of Armageddon try to emulate Titanic; that the picture was a colossal trainwreck in every respect was inevitable. Pearl Harbor had really only one beneficial corrollary: I bought Tora! Tora! Tora! soon after; which I loved at the time. That's a pretty good example of the reverse kind of film; which makes no concessions as to giving plots emphasizing characters the audience can relate to and focuses instead on the politicking and military manouvring leading up to and including the event itself.
Similar threads
