A Few Words About A few words about... Titanic (1 Viewer)

[Kain_C]

Chuck, if you notice at the bottom of my post, I stated that I did not hate Titanic. Did you miss that? Also, your point about those other films succeeding demonstrates my point quite well. Titanic was NOT a tough sale at all. It looks like you are confusing the ability to attract audiences with the ability to entertain audiences, the latter which I had no comment about. As far as attracting different demographics, THAT WAS EXACTLY MY POINT!

If I did not make that clear, I meant to state that Titanic and Pearl Harbor are both very similiar in alot of ways. I'm not a big fan of Titanic, because it is a very, very cliched love story, but I do like the actual Titanic sinking. I like it infinitely better than Pearl Harbor. It's my opinion, alright?

Jeff, your opinion cannot be right or wrong. If you liked Pearl Harbor...great! I did not. If you liked or disliked Titanic or feel it's just ok...that is also ok, despite what others may say.

 

[RobertR]

Hollywood wishes that such a "cookbook" approach could guarantee huge boxoffice success, but it doesn't.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Usually, when the naysayers show up, I just tell myself "they missed the boat, they miss the boat..."

I think Leo and Kate gave good enough performances to allow the vast majority of viewers to suspend their disbelief for a good 3+ hour long film, and go on a journey of personal discovery, class distinctions, and re-wakening of the fire of attraction that can fuel a lifetime of love in a very short span of time, cut short by that fateful date with an iceberg.

Not only were the story elements, action sequences, and the acting performances good enough to capture the imagination of a consistent number of movie-goers in Titanic's run from December to April, week in, week out, but obviously something clicked with that collective consciousness that can't be explained by personal anecdotes of the movie featuring, in their eyes, a cliched love story in the midst of an epic disaster. Sometimes, a person's reaction to art is a reflection of that person's own views on such issues and concepts dredged up by a work of art.

The movie simply "works" for so many others, a population that defied simple genre demographic classifications, and crossed over many categories of movie-goer and enjoyed unprecedented success at the box office. How does this happen to a film with a "cliched love story" that didn't work for a vocal minority, one that even has the naysayers claiming multiple viewings of such a cliched spectacle, but nonetheless compelled multiple viewings anyway.

The heart of the matter is that the film is the very distillation of love, and the strength of such a motivating force that can compel people to act outside of their own self-interest and self-preservation, and embrace the notion that preserving the lives of loved ones in the face of a monumental disaster, forged from bonds formed from opening one's heart to one another, is worthy of the ultimate personal price. Self-sacrifice based on love is the core of why this film hits its mark for so many viewers, and it is what keeps the viewers coming back for more. Its popularity comes from that universal yearning by people still wanting to believe in such a strong love, especially in the face of overwhelming odds for unexpected survival during a catastrophic event.

The cultivation and culmination of the love affair of Jack and Rose onboard the Titanic demonstrating how love proves to be that totally illogical force that convinces people to put the welfare and happiness of their loved one, first and foremost, before their own needs for safety and preservation, is why "Titanic" succeeds where other big-time blockbusters fail in garnering an emotional connection with its intended audience, or fail to meet box office expectations, and are quickly forgotten in the public's collective consciousness within a month. Titanic was that one film which was sustained by that underlying core love story which proved universal enough to "hoodwink" the masses, week after week after week... Cameron got it right, as evidenced by its impressively consistent run at the theaters.

 

[Jeff Whitford]

BRAVO Patrick!!! You should have written some of the liner notes on the disc as you summed it up almost perfectly.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Very well said, Patrick!

 

[Tino]

Riiight.

A $200 million 1912 period romance with no major stars plagued by rumors of cost overruns, production problems, and scheduling changes and bad buzz.

Yeah, that's a real easy sell.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Titanic was a bit of a joke in 1997. It was on it's way to Ishtar-like proportions, in the entertainment media, at least. This wind started to shift with the Fox Japanese premiere in November (and that is a story itself - Paramount and Fox feuding over the world premiere). Once people saw it, it started getting 4 star reviews. The opoosite of the other films (which people were dying to see), it gained acceptance with viewers as it was seen. I think once the reviews were good, Fox and Paramount figured they could make a little profit on it. But it was never, ever, ever expected to achieve a fraction of what it did. Tino is correct..common "wisdom" predicted a failed epic just two months before release.

Patrick, excellent summary. You mention what really drives my love of the film...a nexus of epic tragedy and sorrow, with the divine transformative power of love. In Titanic, simple is good. The real magic of the film, as Patrick captures, is the spark and eternal aspect of your first true love. The movie itself bathes you in that feeling, and allows it to remain eternal with it's conclusion.

None of this means anyone has to like it. None of this means anyone's opinion is "wrong". I merely wanted to respond to general claims made. Kain, it sounded like you were equating PH and Titanic in terms of directorial responsibility. If you weren't, my apologies. If you want to equate the love story, that's a personal opinion only, and that's your choice (I think Kate Winslet and Leo DiCaprio are so far beyond Ben, Josh, and Kate B. it's not even relatable). But to question the accuracy is something that can be disproven.

My opinion is that Titanic differs from Pearl Harbor in two major fashions: 1) Pearl Harbor is a compromised studio film attempting the "recapture" what Titanic found organically. Titanic was the work of a director with vision. 2) Bay isn't a fraction of the director Cameron is. Bay's best film (The Rock) isn't a patch on Cameron's worst (True Lies, IMO, which is a 3.5/4).

YMMV,
Chuck

 

[DeeF]

Glenn Erickson has posted his review, which eloquently expresses my feelings about the film.

http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s1778tit.html

 

[Tino]

Sorry Dee, but I thougt that DVD review is just another of the endlessly similar ones which concentrate too much on the "reviewers" opinion of the film and less on the actual reason I read DVD reviews, which is to learn about the transfer and extras, which that review merely skims- sixteen paragraphs about the film and four about the disc.

I really wish DVD reviews would concentrate on the DVD, instead of an excuse to pick apart the film.

But hey, whatever floats your boat (no pun intended).

 

[Haggai]

Yeah, Glenn Erickson is much more of a film reviewer than a disc reviewer, that's the nature of pretty much all of his reviews. He doesn't usually concentrate much on AV quality or extras. But Dee was linking to him with the film review specifically in mind, which is on topic with the various exchanges about the film itself in this thread.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I don't think that comparison to the 1953 flick makes sense. The entire film is only about half as long as the 1997 one, and it covers the sinking in about half an hour. By contrast, the 1997 flick spends about half its length on the sinking, so that's around 90 minutes. I don't think the 1997 movie gives short shrift to the sinking at all...

 

[Ira Siegel]

I recommend Thumbtanic.

 

[DeeF]

We watched Titanic (1953) and A Night to Remember (1958) last night. The first one is surprisingly good! The details of the disaster, and their technical presentation isn't the best, but the drama is superior, and very economical (it won the Oscar for Best Screenplay that year).

A Night to Remember is splendid, of course, somewhat of a triumph technically, though now overshadowed by the 1997 version of the story.

Here's Glenn Erickson's review of the DVD of Titanic (1953):

http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s922tita.html

 

[Jordan_E]

After watching him in The Aviator (which has become one of my favorite movies of the past few years) I will give Leo more of a chance in re-watching TITANIC when I get the new edition. But the movie will be shut off before that dreaded song starts!

 

[Nick Martin]

Just so I'm clear, do you all hate the Celine Dion song because of the music, or just her singing it?

 

[Dave Mack]

Also the version at the end of the film is slightly different from the way overproduced single and "video" version. If you compare them, the one on the film has no electric guitar lead, much subtler drums and less reverb on the vocals and a different ending note vocal-wise. If you hate the song, it ain't gonna matter but it's a bit subtler on the actual film itself. Obviously for the version for her album they (over)produced it much more. The actual melody is fine IMHO, it's the same one used a few times before in the film to good effect IMHO. Celine can be annoying but she can sing her ass off too. I never blame a film or a song itself if it gets overplayed to death. But that's just me. When I first saw the film the song played fine in context. And the whole Loew's Astor Plaza audience stayed as well so not everyone hated it at the time. 6 months later, nobody could stand the song anymore and it became very fashionable to bash the film.

d

 

[TonyDale]

TITANIC in 30 Seconds

One of my favorites.

 

[Tino]

Really? I thought the 1953 version (which I own for many of the same reasons you mentioned ) was terrible, and the most undeserving Oscar winner for Best Screenplay ever. I do agree with you on A Night To Remember. A marvelous film and every bit as good as Cameron's Titanic, though on different levels.

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

I believe that's one of the features on the 4th disc that r1 is not getting.

 

[TonyDale]

Grrrrr.....arrrggghhhh.....