Titanic is a frustrating film. Hauling in well over $1 billion worldwide (combined theatrical and video release), the movie is an obvious success. That doesn't mean it's clear from criticisms though, and there's plenty to go around.
The cause is the love story. Filling over half the film, it's out of place, unnecessary, and ruins the otherwise stunning recreation of the ship's single voyage. All of the detail, down to finding the same company's who created the materials for the real Titanic, is tossed aside for a fake story of two people who seem to have the right connections.
It's too convenient that Rose (Kate Winslet) and Jack (Leonardo DiCaprio) happen to come across everyone necessary to tell the story. As they're fleeing to the deck, they find the ship's designer Thomas Andrews (Victor Garber), stop to chat, and then take off again. It's unbelievably frustrating, both that the circumstances are so forced and the first half of the movie exists solely to have these two characters guide us to the end.
It gets worse as the ship goes down. Completely vertical and possibly seconds from death, Rose looks at Jack to say, "This is where we first met." This is the type of dialogue that nearly kills the drama of the actual event occurring around them. To think that James Cameron thought two fictional characters were necessary for an emotional pull at the end is one of the most absurd ideas in the history of Hollywood. There are thousands dying around them, but the audience should feel sorry for the stowaway.
However, the film is saved for what people came to see. The actual sinking is a stunning film achievement. The use of miniatures, full size sets, camera tricks, green screen, and of course that attention to detail make the entire movie a stunning piece, generic first half or not. It just keeps getting worse, and the sight of people jumping off the peak, hundreds of feet in the air as a last hope, is horrifying. The direction is superb, milking every ounce of terror from each shot.
In-between the segments of the actual event, Bill Paxton gets the story from Rose (Gloria Stuart), now 101 years old. These sections provide a few laughs, and break up the scenery, making this easier to watch in one sitting. It also puts a great emotional cap on the story.
Much like Pearl Harbor years later, this is an extended version of a story that didn't need to be. It could have been told in under two hours, and while it's unfortunate that didn't happen, the end result is worth fighting through. It's epic in the truest sense of the word. (**** out of *****)
.jpg?t=20130517094513)
Article comments
1 - Jake Ludington
And somehow, even in the special collector's edition the boat still sinks at the end.
Oops - I just spoiled the movie.
2 - Joanie
Gawd! I still can't watch more than 30 seconds of this dreck. Thanks for enduring it for me!
3 - Ken Edwards
Matt it is clear to me that you do not "get" this movie.
By your account, you would have rather seen a documentary by James Cameron. This would have been dry and would have been a huge flop.
At the most basic level, the love story was a means to an end. Sure, some of the interactions between people did not happen, but most of them did.
As horrific as the Titanic tragedy was, the story would not have resinated with the audience. Thus the love story connects the audience with the history.
I agree, this was a long movie to get through in one sitting. I remember in 1997 it was about the longest movie ever put in theater (if memory serves) and good lord it is still hard to watch it in one sitting today.
Can you imagine how hard it would be to watch with those 29 deleted scenes!
The 61 "follow the sinking ship" features as I call them (homage to "follow the white rabbit" in The Matrix) were wonderful to watch. It was also great that the DVD developers added a scene selection menu for this.
I hadn't seen this film since I got it on VHS (!) so it was great to watch Titanic again. And the amount of special features is just spectacular.
If only more directors would give so much setup on the commentary of the deleted scenes, not to mention actually give you a chunk of theatrical footage to get you grounded in the scene.
It is a shame the 4th disc did not come to the state side release. Why is is that the US never gets the good stuff? It always seems that way. You can import it of course. You would need a DVD player to play Region 2 and PAL.
It can be had for (about, last I checked anyway) $19.33 USD from the Amazon UK site.
Definatly one of the better produced DVD box sets that have come out, both for amount of content and production value of the DVDs themslves.
4 - Matt Paprocki
I didn't want a documentary. James Cameron had the perfect opportunity to create the most amazing recreation of human tragedy EVER. The previous Titanic films (Night to Remember comes first in mind) was great, but with the effects of the era and budget, it wasn't the be all end all. That's what this should of been.
Again, why spend $200 million for accuracy and NOT make the story accurate? How would the deaths of hundereds (thousands?) of people not work on an audience? There were many "characters" on the ship to follow. He created fake ones and in the end brings with it questions of authenticity. Sure, it's impossible to be 100% right, but to do what the writers did here is unforgivable.
5 - Dax Montana
As Ken already stated, it's clear that Matt doesn't "get" this movie.
It's a MOVIE, not a recreation of factual events exactly as they happened.
Hmmm...let's watch what the real people did...that sounds interesting. Oh look, they're eating dinner and chatting about their kids. Wait, now they're lounging on the deck, chatting about their jobs and how chilly the wind is. Oh boy, this part is really terrific, they're sleeping...but WAIT, some of them are STILL AWAKE (can you believe it!) and they're playing cards up in the lounge. Fascinating stuff. Gripping.
Matt, the only way a disaster movie can have any emotional impact is if the audience actually cares about the people involved. And the only way to care about the people involved is to get to know them, and realize that they share many of the same characteristics that we do. The fear of being trapped in a life not of our choosing. The desire to win the heart of someone we feel is far out of our league. The adventure and heartache and happiness of participating in a forbidden romance. The hope and promise of making that decision to shed your former life and face the unknown for the very first time.
If you skip all that, then you just have a two-hour boat-sinking flick that holds nothing more than visceral appeal. You have no reason to care about the people who are dying. Sure, it's sad that so many people died, but it's 100 times more emotional when you actually know a handful of them.
And at the end of the day, who's to say that these events didn't happen? Perhaps the scenes in present day didn't, but who's to say that two people didn't fall in love on that ship?
The chance that it DID happen is what makes this movie special.
Anyway, there's no point in arguing. Clearly the vast majority of people who saw the movie were touched by it (the positive word of mouth on this movie surpassed any in the history of film-making).
Perhaps you should stick to reviewing Stallone flicks.
6 - Subhra Roy
dear matt, i just read ur review.
do you think james cameron had any contractual obligation to show how many people, dresses, cutlery,chairs, tables funnels and propellers sank with titanic? no. he wanted a love story to magnify the tragedy. instead of facts, he gave us emotion. if you value facts more than emotions, quit reviewing film and find a job in a nice accounting firm.... :)