So, Uh ... Titanic's 10th Anniversary? (1 Viewer)

[Chuck Mayer]

I was initially very skeptical of Titanic being Cameron's film after True Lies. It just seemed stupid to make a film because of how A Night to Remember captured you. Keep in mind, I was in my very early 20's. So I paid it little mind in 1996 (the year I graduated college) and most of 1997. I was a huge Cameron fan, but figured this was a lark before he got back to action and sci-fi.

In the summer of 1997, taking a girl to see The Lost World, I walked by a theater showing a trailer of Titanic, and I remembered it was supposed to come out that summer. I hadn't given it any thought, but something about hearing it made me curious, so I watched the second half of the trailer. I was pretty impressed with the scope and the scale (it was the action/sinking part of the trailer), and decided it might be worth keeping tabs on. But nothing else followed that, and I didn't see a trailer again until late November.

In September of 1997, I moved to Virginia Beach for my lovely young Naval career, and moved in with two buddies. Their boat deployed before Christmas, so I was living alone in a town with no friends for the fall of 1997. We were at sea almost all of November 1997. We pulled into Puerto Rico during the middle of the month, and I bought myself an Entertainment Weekly (being the fan of movies that I was). The cover story was on Titanic, specifically how much it cost, the acrimony between Fox (it was Fox's movie, but they had sold DOMESTIC rights to Paramount) and Paramount. As cost overruns hit, Paramount refused to help pay for them, so Fox was stuck with the bag. To stick it to Paramount, Fox had the international debut before the domestic one in Japan. A month before. But the article did point out that the people who saw it had been pretty happy with it, as was Jim Cameron. The article started and finished with an anecdote about a razor on Jim's editing computer that said "Use if Movie sucks". He was editing out a million dollar scene (the extended flooding of the 1st Class dining room). It had a few pictures, and I was somewhat transported by them, and by the story of the film (which I hadn't known before). It seemed wildly romantic to me. So I read that article about 20 times over the next two weeks. It was a movie to look forward to. (and I still have that same EW )

So I pull back in to VA Beach for a long Thanksgiving weekend. I hit the local Sam Goody to try and find the Star Wars:SE LD set for my months-old new LD player, and while in there, I see the newly released Titanic score. And it's by James Horner, who I revere at the time for his recent Oscar-winning Braveheart score. So I buy it sight unseen the day before Thanksgiving (or the day after). I want to see the film and I love Horner, so let's do it. After Thanksgiving, I went to go see Alien:Resurrection with one of my roommates (the stupid one, like me), and what trailer plays before it? A brilliant Titanic full trailer (there were two trailer playing in Nov/Dec) which showcases the story. After that, the movie plays like a blur, and the trailer consumes me, still 4 weeks away For the details mongers among you, it was the trailer that started with Braveheart music and Peter Coyote narrating.

I actually paid for A:R just to watch the trailer and walk out before the feature after that. I hunted around the area for the right theater, finally finding one with stadium seating (I'd never seen a film in stadium seating). It was the Strawbridge 12 if anyone knows VA Beach. It was brand new at the time. My roommates deployed, and it was just me and the CD, waiting for December 19th.

More to follow

 

[SD_Brian]

The first time I saw Titanic in the theater I was sitting in front of what may have been the two dumbest teenage girls on the planet. I swear to God one of them actually said, "I can't believe it hit the iceberg!" Even though it's a well known historical fact, even after the opening moments of the movie that showed the boat sitting on the bottom of the ocean AND after that whole computer animation piece explaining how, when, and where the boat would hit the iceberg, she still couldn't believe the boat hit the iceberg. Then, toward the end of the movie when they are looking for survivors and Kate Winslet is floating out in the middle of the ocean, this same girl nearly had a panic attack because she was worried Kate wouldn't call out and be rescued. I had to fight the urge to turn around and say to her, "Do you remember at the beginning of the movie when they showed Rose and she was 101 years old? I think she'll be OK!"

 

[Nick Martin]

That's too funny.

 

[Kevin Grey]

Indeed- it's about a mile from my parents' house and where I saw my first viewing of Titanic (on the 20th if I remember correctly) as well as my second and third viewings of the movie.

 

[TravisR]

Similar story here. I came home from college for Thanksgiving and saw the Titanic score in Circuit City and there was one copy. I collect soundtracks so I bought it on the spot because I figured I'd never see that CD in a store ever again (since I was still positive the movie was going to fail). About a month later, it sold a zillion copies and further proved I have no idea what will and won't catch on.

EDIT: Chuck, I'm pretty sure that I grabbed the Star Wars SE laserdiscs that weekend too.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

So anyways, I opened the CD the night I got it, and feel asleep listening to it. I distinctly recall the lyrics to the Dion song on the inside print under the actual CD. From the moment I saw the little B&W image under the words, it was obviously that Leo's character wasn't going to make it. That was never in doubt to me But I did listen to the CD a few times between then and the film. I actually petitioned any of my local friends (most of whom were Navy) to check it out with me, and bought all of their tickets. So the month dragged and dragged. I did have to go to a local bookstore and order the "James Cameron's TITANIC" book about the movie. It wasn't expected to be even a modest hit, so they weren't planning to stock it. But I was enchanted and excited for the film, so I splurged. I basically set myself up to be quite disappointed in the film, having hyped the bejesus out of it in my mind. I even watched the E! Premiere Special (which was woefully insipid and asked lots of retarded questions - see if you can find what they asked Der Schwarzenfuhrer).

But the day finally came, and I had to race from work to get there. Imagine my surprise when there was an actual LINE to get in, and the film itself had sold out. But we got decent seats (in the stadium section), and settled in for the three hour haul.

And I just felt completely transported. Admittedly, the film is manipulative, and I was certainly pretty lonely that fall, but every scene and every character worked for me. I can't disagree with criticism of much of the stodgy dialogue and some of the hokum that rewatches clearly illustrate, but the picture absolutely worked for me. It still does, because I think it contains a very primal romanticism that plays to the ideals we keep in the back of our hearts.

The film was a technical marvel, and while it seems hard to believe now, the film received absolutely RAVE reviews from every quarter. Even opening weekend, bad buzz began to turn to awards buzz. But that weekend was well before the hype kicked in (and it would, in a way completely unseen before 1998). All the stories revolved around the raw power of the film, the turning of a certain disastrous bomb into a potential money earner. This thing might make it's budget back!?!

My father had always been fascinated by cruise liners, and we lived in Maine in 1986. That's just a few hours north of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute (WHOI), the HQ for Ballard's expeditions. I was living there when they found the Titanic, though I didn't understood it's power then. Over that Christmas holiday, I read Sir Walter Lord's seminal work (A Night to Remember) as well as Ballard's Discovery of Titanic. I literally, for a few weeks, became an expert on the chronology of the disaster

More to follow

 

[Chuck Mayer]

So why did the film hold such power?

What Titanic represented to me was a confluence of two major passions: the macro-fascination with the disaster (which is really a study of group human behavior) and the fictional story Cameron used to deliver the experience.

Cameron took the most vulnerable romantic and passionate experience most people ever have (their first true love), set at a time before cynicism and reality set in (teenagers and young adults are often unguarded in their emotions), and idealized that love, and then he froze it in amber for all time. He then validated that emotion by having it intertwined with the actual event, and making it central to someone's life. All too often, adults tell young people experiencing these raw emotions that they "aren't in love", or they'll understand it one day. We mean well when we say that, but we are lying to ourselves. They are in love, as best they understand it, but they don't have the emotional barriers to deal with it or put it in context. Titanic makes those moments forever and meaningful. They take the innocent first love and make it transformative.

I think that resonates very strongly with a huge cross-section of folks, and it's why I think attributing teenage girl longing as the cause of doubling the next closest contender's BO a bit short-sighted. The film's reach was much longer than that.

Technically, the film was a marvel. Every red cent the filmmaker spent was on-screen, and then some. Cameron's films are expensive, but they look it, and in the right ways. Dialogue aside, the script was ingenious in investing the audience in the ship and her passengers, as well as showing the ship off, stem to stern, in organic scenes. By no means flawless, Cameron is still a masterful storyteller, because he understands precisely why some conventions have the power they do. Audiences, young and old, smart and stupid, responded to almost every piece of dialogue exactly the way Cameron wanted.

EDIT (this section should be in this post, not the next one):
The trick of the film is that it is completely Rose's story. Jack is the exact same character when we are introduced to him as he is when Rose says goodbye. He is the ideal first love. He is not possessive, he celebrates Rose as she is, and helps her to see herself. He is non-judgemental (a CRITICAL quality for a young woman), and his interest and support allow her to become what she wants to be. In short, Jack is a plot device to get Rose from A to B. DiCaprio's actually makes him imperfect (in a perfect way) and mostly believable. It's no award-winning performance, but it's extremely effective, and not many young actors could have pulled it off. And what makes that really work is a solid performance by a luminous Kate Winslet. It's certainly not her strongest role (nor her most romantic - that's Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind), but it's tailor-made for her strengths. She was the right age for it as well.

Yet MORE to follow

 

[Nick Martin]

Why is the dialogue considered clunky or awkward?

Is it because it doesn't sound like a typical "period piece"?
I've never been one to critique such things. I'm no critic and don't ever care to be, so that's why I honestly don't understand this.

 

[SD_Brian]

Some of the dialogue may come across as clunky because there is a tug-of-war going on between Cameron's modern sensibilities and his efforts to write in the more formalized dialogue familiar to fans of Merchant-Ivory period pieces. James Cameron is not Merchant-Ivory, nor would I want him to be. His dialogue gets the job done and it probably worked better for mass audiences than had it not retained that "clunky" quality.

That said, the clunkiest example of dialogue I can remember from the movie is the scene where Rose is unpacking the paintings she has brought on board.

"What's the artist's name?"
"Something Picasso."
"Something Picasso? He won't amount to anything!"
"Let's put the Degas in the bedroom."

The problem with this particular dialogue is that it sounds like it was written in the 1990's, with the benefit of hindsight over the historical values of such paintings. This sort of ironic-hindsight dialogue is something that seems to appear a lot in period films made recently. There is always a reference to some sort of pop-cultural touchstone that modern audiences will recognize but people who actually lived during that time period wouldn't have made a fuss over. See also: Robert Downey Jr. showing off his Pong game to an amazed Jake Gyllenhal in Zodiac or Russell Crowe learning about microwave ovens in American Gangster. It's also noticable in any recent movie set between the 1950's-1970's: whenever a doctor or pregnant woman appears onscreen they will always be smoking (pregnant women will typically have a cigarette in one hand and a drink in the other).

 

[Chuck Mayer]

One of the very first threads I started at HTF was this one I definitely pushed a bit back at "serious" films, something I would never do now. But most of my points still represent my thoughts on the film.

I won't speak any more about the film, because I blathered a bunch in these posts about it in 2001, and most of what I would say is in there. It was a nice little discussion between folks who vehemently disagreed on the film itself I'd like to think I've grown quite a bit as a movie watcher since 2001, but I still view Titanic through the same eyes I did then. I'm pretty happy about that.

Early 2008 (edit: 1998 ), the post-release hype built to a fever pitch. I deployed in February, so I missed the very worst (and that is the correct word - worst) of it. I did see the film's power in the international markets. Everywhere we pulled into in the Med was playing Titanic, and pictures and magazines littered the markets. The film became ubiquitous. But before it was an "event", it was just a movie. I had to wait a week to see Titanic again, but I ended up seeing it four more times in theaters (alone every time...nerd!) between Jan/Feb. I bought the LD, and even the dts LD. I even remember getting juiced for the DVD when it FINALLY came out.

I certainly burnt out on the film a bit, but when the 3 discer hit, I gave it a few whirls. It quickly reminded me why I had loved it so much

Great movies transport, and very few have done it as effectively as Titanic for me. It still hovers around my "favorite movies ever", and while people look at me askance when I tell them, it's OK. They might not have seen it ten years ago today, but I did.

And it was really something to see then.

 

[SD_Brian]

I saw it opening day in 1997--curiously, it was raining that day too (in Tucson), just like it is today (in San Diego) and I think you are absolutely correct on this point. Whenever I run across someone who despises Titanic, I ask them when they saw it and they almost always say it was after the movie exploded or it was 8 months after the movie opened or when the media saturation was at it's most ridiculous, etc. It's never "cool" to like something that's popular so the backlash was inevitable.

Seeing Titanic after that much build-up could only lead to a disappointing viewing experience. It's like watching Citizen Kane for the first time after hearing for years from every conceivable source that it's the greatest movie ever made: the actual experience becomes diluted by the hype.

 

[Jonathan Burk]

Wow. Has it really been 10 years since "The Postman" came out? It seems like only yesterday...

 

[Nick Martin]

Forget Postman, this year nobody bothered to celebrate the 10th anniversary of this:



How could anyone forget?

 

[SD_Brian]

Speed 2: Cruise Control's 10th Anniversary also managed to pass under the radar. Wow, 1997 was a good year for box office disasters, wasn't it? Ironic that the highest grossing movie of the year was about a sinking ship.

 

[Nick Martin]

A sinking ship destined to sink Cameron's career...who's laughing now?


Tomorrow Never Dies also opened 10 years ago today too.
Beat Titanic for number 1 at the box office opening weekend if I recall.
I quite like that one, despite not being a 007 fan.

 

[ZacharyTait]

Who wins the Super Bowl, Pats or Packers?

I saw the movie after the Academy Awards when I finally told myself that I better get it over with. To my surprise, it was a masterpiece, one of only 2 that I saw in 1997 (the other being L.A. Confidential(where's the thread on that?)).

I got totally swept up in the story and the romance and the final third was tense as hell despite knowing what was going to happen to the ship and the majority of the people.

Weird trivia: This movie and The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King both won 11 Oscars and both contain Benard Hill who was Captain Smith in Titanic and King Theoden in LOTR!

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Whoops. Maybe the hype will be crazy again in 2008

And the Cowboys win the Super Bowl, silly. Against the Steelers.

 

[TravisR]

More weird trivia: David Warner holds the record for most #1 box office weekends in a row since he was in Scream 2 (which opened at #1 the week before Titanic came out) and then Titanic was #1 for a dozen or more weeks in a row.

 

[BrianShort]

Has it been 10 years already? I saw this 4 times in the theater, and once on a plane in 1998, but not once since then. I suppose now I'd better just hold out for the inevitable Blu-ray release! I really haven't had a desire to see it, which is strange considering I really liked it when it was in the theater. I actually remember the first time I saw it, it was slightly disappointed, but I chalk that up to reading too much pre-release hype. I found later I kept thinking about it after it was over, so I went again, and again, and one final time.

The backlash too for this movie is like nothing I've ever seen... even years later it still seems "uncool" to like it... maybe why I haven't seen it in almost 10 years. I know I have a different taste in movies now, so I'm curious to see how I'll react when I do finally see it again.

Brian

 

[Nick Martin]

The backlash against this film is entirely pathetic, and I can't for the life of me understand why any rational person would fall prey to it - sort of believing the anti-hype so to speak.