Titanic (1997) (1 Viewer)

[Nelson Au]

My understanding is that the famous astrophysicist and host of PBS NOVA scienceNOW, Neil deGrasse Tyson commented to Cameron by email that the stars 100 years ago would not be in that position at that time of year and time of night. And he also said knowing how much a perfectionist Cameron is, he was surprised he missed that. Cameron seemed to take it with some aghast and was surprised some would care about that. So he fixed it to please him. The tone of voice from Cameron was very snarky, but that could have been him having fun with it, or he really was mad at Tyson.
I can see an astrophysist would wonder if those stars were right when he saw the film.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

^ Those shots are from the DVD, correct? It's not like I can pause the movie while it's playing in the theater and look but I'm also positive that that string is gone. While you no doubt know your stuff, I still wonder if the new stars (not the corrected one after the ship has sunk) aren't a result of the increase in resolution of seeing the movie in a theater rather than on DVD. If they're new, I wonder why Cameron chose to add that but leave other errors.
And I'm still saying that there is no difference in the flying scene.

Yes, they're from the DVD, the scenes in the film do go by quick but not so quick that the alterations can't easily be seen in the theater. As for the question of the stars not being seen because of lack of resolution that's not it, there simply are no stars in those shots in the original release, if it was a resolution issue the stars in long shots of the ship would not be visible, either, heck stars were easily visible even on VHS.
I should also note that in those shots with Billy Zane and Leo the stars appeared to be "blown out", meaning out of focus so they appeared larger, they would easily be visible if they were present on the original release DVD.
I really wish I had screenshots of the re-release to show you guys I'm not crazy lol.
EDIT: Unbelievable. I just did a search to see if I could find any news bits, articles or interviews about changes made to the film and they ALL say the same thing, that one scene and one scene only has been changed and that is the star field Rose sees while floating on the wood. This simply isn't the case, no matter what those sources say.

 

[TravisR]

I really wish I had screenshots of the re-release to show you guys I'm not crazy lol.

In 6 months, you'll be able to prove it with the Blu-ray. If I was going to bet, I'd say you're correct but until there's comparions of the 1997 vs. 2012 versions, I'll wait to say definitively.
One thing I thought MIGHT be different was the blue or green screen work behind Rose when she and Jack first meet. It looked pretty good on the re-release but I always thought that it looked a little rough (especially around her hair) in the original run and on video.
I'll be seeing the movie again this weekend so I'll keep my eyes peeled. Especially for the sliver of land behind the ship when they've "walked a mile around this boat deck".

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Yes please, please keep a lookout for the changes, I need to some corroboration here lol.
This will be my final word on the matter, I've seen this film more times than I care to count and have sampled it even more than that, I know it back to front, up and down and I swear to you that I saw what I saw. But like you said proof will come in due time, I still find it incredible that nowhere on the net can I find evidence of these alterations.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

John, I presume you know what you are talking about. No need to burnish your credentials
I would hesitate to call any of those things "changes" though, any more than a color tint decision is a change. The film, as I saw it a week ago, was the same film I saw in 1997. It looked sharper, and it certainly felt more familiar, but it was the same exact film.
Based on your feedback, I do presume there were some technical tweaks, perhaps made necessary by the 4k conversion.

 

[Tino]

I believe you too John. I know you are the Titanic expert around these parts since 97. I'll be seeing it one more time in IMAX and I'll play closer attention.
Jeez, you guys keep making me go back!

 

[Nelson Au]

Sorry to go off topic a little again. I saw this in the news, there are those who think the Cameron film is totally fiction. No such thing as the Titanic. It brings to mind the phrase, the youth of today.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57412589-71/in-praise-of-the-twitterati-who-think-titanic-never-happened/

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

To be honest I can kind of understand where they were coming from, a teenager today might never have been told about the real event or was never exposed to anything TITANIC related until this re-release, in school they never taught us anything about TITANIC and the disaster, I learned on my own.
It sucks that they never knew it was a real event but my hope is that when they do find out they'll search for more knowledge about it and over time gain the proper reverence for the ship and the victims.

 

[TravisR]

Sorry to go off topic a little again. I saw this in the news, there are those who think the Cameron film is totally fiction.

It's not? I saw that story and I have to imagine that a huge chunk of people who were saying that were kidding but you have to figure that some seriously didn't know.
They discovered the wreck when I was in elementary school and I've been fascinated by the event ever since then. One of the great things about the movie for me was actually 'seeing' the Titanic. Before the Cameron movie, the best you could do is A Night To Remember or a documentary where they had guys in tuxes or immigrant garb on a non-descript ship or they used the same handful of pictures of the ship. I'm still amazed by the grand staircase (and its sad destruction) whenever I see the movie. For me, history comes alive at that point.

 

[KPmusmag]

To be honest I can kind of understand where they were coming from, a teenager today might never have been told about the real event or was never exposed to anything TITANIC related until this re-release, in school they never taught us anything about TITANIC and the disaster, I learned on my own.
It sucks that they never knew it was a real event but my hope is that when they do find out they'll search for more knowledge about it and over time gain the proper reverence for the ship and the victims.

I learned about Titanic because of the musical THE UNSINKABLE MOLLY BROWN. My partents had the Original Broadway Cast album, the cover of which had a drawing of Tammy Grimes in a rowboat; I asked my mom why she was in a boat and she told me about the Titanic disaster. That picqued my interest and I went to the library (remember those?) to learn more about it.
I saw TITANIC in Imax 3D yesterday and loved it. I was totally swept up in the story and only noticed a bit of ghosting (I guess you call it) in the background a few times. What a huge project. TITANIC must have more than 800,000 frames all of which had to be vectored and all that. I know some of it can be automated, but still. I thought it looked very natural, in fact, the only other 3D movie I enjoyed this much was AVATAR. As for aspect ratio, I am pretty certain it was somewhere close to 1.78. I watched the DVD when I got home and there was definitely more sky and sea in the new version.
I have to say, however, that the trailer for MEN IN BLACK 3 was the worst 3D I have ever seen. Fake looking and cheesy. The 3D didn't seem round, if you will, it seemed like flat layers at varying depths, like one of those shadow boxes we made as kids where you cut out pictures, paste them in a shoebox, and look through a hole at the end to give a feeling of depth. I was astonished at how awful it looked. Maybe the preview version is not fully completed and rendered, but the preview does not inspire me to see it, that's for sure.
Can't wait for TITANIC on blu-ray.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

My first exposure to TITANIC was a videotape of the original National Geographic special narrated by Martin Sheen that my sister's then boyfriend brought over to show my brother, this was 1986. I had never heard of it until that day and I've been entranced ever since, to this day I still can't tell you what drew me to it so quickly and so strongly.
Yes, bring on TITANIC on BD! I have a feeling it won't be too long of a wait.

 

[Tino]

Hey John, that excellent National Geographic special, Secrets Of The Titanic, is being rereleased today remastered in widescreen. It also includes the new Robert Ballard special "Save The Titanic" airing on NatGeo this week. $14.99 on Amazon.
My first introduction to Titanic was watching A Night To Remember on tv back in the 70's and have been fascinated ever since.

 

[Tino]

Titanic doing great overseas. From boxofficemojo.com:
'Titanic 3D' Has Huge Opening Day in China
by Ray Subers
Titanic 3D
 
 
April 10, 2012
20th Century Fox International is reporting that Titanic 3D opened to an estimated $11.6 million from 2,400 3D screens and 66 IMAX 3D screens in China on Tuesday. That's Fox's best opening day ever in China, and it's more than double Titanic 3D's weekend debut in any of its other markets.
In 1998, Titanic earned around $44 million in China. Since then, the Chinese market has expanded significantly, and Titanic 3D should easily outgross the original release within the week.
Since opening on Wednesday, Titanic 3D has already made at least $53 million overseas, and that doesn't even count any of its other markets on Tuesday. That brings the re-release's worldwide gross to over $80 million, and it brings Titanic's total gross across all releases to $1.924 billion.

 

[WillG]

Sorry to go off topic a little again. I saw this in the news, there are those who think the Cameron film is totally fiction. No such thing as the Titanic. It brings to mind the phrase, the youth of today.

I remember when I was in High School, me and a group of friends went to see "Apollo 13" and one of the girls we were with mentioned something to the effect that, in her mind, it was a fictional story. My jaw dropped.
As for Titanic, I can imagine that it's not taught in many schools, but with the internet and all coupled with the popularity of the move, it seems staggering that people wouldn't know about it.
Also, out of curiosity, can someone explain to me the significance of Molly Brown? Not sure I ever understood it.
Another question, How long is Titanic supposed to be in theaters for? I would like to go see it, but am having trouble finding the time, so I would like to know what my drop dead is.

 

[TravisR]

Also, out of curiosity, can someone explain to me the significance of Molly Brown? Not sure I ever understood it.

She's mostly known in relation to the Titanic because she was one of the few people who wanted to return the lifeboats to pull people out of the water but the crew member in charge of the lifeboat refused. That part of the event is a good/easy way to illustrate the cowardice and heroism of the sinking so it tends to get used alot when it's dramatized or the actual event is talked about. That incident led to her eventual nickname, The Unsinkable Molly Brown (though I think it was only used after she died) and that catchy nickname is probably what led to the musical and movie based on her life.

 

[Michael Elliott]

I think a lot of people didn't realize the film was based on a true event. I remember seeing the film on its first release and I once went up to a girl who was just having a crying fit as if her parents had just died. I asked if she was okay. She was. She was just crying because of Leo. I then asked about all the others who died and she pretty much replied that it didn't matter because everything was fake except Leo. I then gave her a brief history that the Titanic was a real story minus Leo but I don't think she believed me.
It's strange but I went to the movies on Saturday, Sunday and Monday. Each time it seemed the majority of the people waiting in line for this were young kids who were either babies when it was released or at least a very young age to where they didn't see it.
I've been watching so many docs on the subject the past few months that I seem like one of the experts. If all goes well I'm going to see it on Saturday for obvious reasons.

 

[WillG]

She's mostly known in relation to the Titanic because she was one of the few people who wanted to return the lifeboats to pull people out of the water but the crew member in charge of the lifeboat refused

Ok, maybe I didn't pick up on the significance because I thought the crew member had a pretty good argument as well, that if they went back, the boat would have been swarmed with panicked passengers which could have led all the others on the boat sharing the same fate.

She was just crying because of Leo. I then asked about all the others who died and she pretty much replied that it didn't matter because everything was fake except Leo. I then gave her a brief history that the Titanic was a real story minus Leo but I don't think she believed me.

This person isn't your wife/other family member/close friend/child is she? Because if so, don't read the spoiler

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

I don't advocate violence against women, but, I can't deny it would have been real tempting in the above to have given that particular woman a slap based on the above.

 

[TravisR]

She's mostly known in relation to the Titanic because she was one of the few people who wanted to return the lifeboats to pull people out of the water but the crew member in charge of the lifeboat refused

Ok, maybe I didn't pick up on the significance because I thought the crew member had a pretty good argument as well, that if they went back, the boat would have been swarmed with panicked passengers which could have led all the others on the boat sharing the same fate.

Yeah, it's certainly understandable that he was in the middle of the ocean with no way to really know if anyone is going to be able to find them and he was in charge of the lives of about two dozen people so he had a point about erring on the side of caution. However, what the movie doesn't show is that before the ship sank, Captain Smith ordered all the half-filled lifeboats to return and he (and all the other lifeboats) ignored Smith. After the sinking, he got to be more and more panicked. Given the situation and that he was at the helm when the ship hit the iceberg, I can understand being scared and in a panic but when the Carpathia showed up, he said it was only there to pull bodies out of the water rather than pick up survivors and at that point, the people in the boat decided to start ignoring him and rowed for the rescue ship.

 

[KPmusmag]

Also, out of curiosity, can someone explain to me the significance of Molly Brown? Not sure I ever understood it.

Not to get way off-topic here, but Molly Brown was, is, a great American folk hero and was well-known up to a few generations ago. She had a real rags-to-riches story. Born in squalor, she was determined to make a better life for herself. She married for love, but her husband, J.J. Brown, had a nose for gold and became wealthy mining. Maggie, as she was known then, used her wealth to work for womens' rights, human rights, became well known in society, and even ran for Senate, all prior to the Titanic disaster. She believed that no one was instrinsically better than anyone else and had no fear in rubbing shoulders with the elite and European royalty. Surviving the sinking of the Titanic only added to her larger than life persona. A story that my parents heard had her ordering the other women on the lifeboat to row back for survivors at gunpoint. Although that story, apparently, was apochryphal, it demonstrates the kind of reputation she had engendered. If you are ever in Denver, you can tour the Molly Brown house that J.J. built for her in downtown Denver. History notes that there were many American millionaires on board the Titanic, so it is logical that Molly Brown would be included in the film for that reason. She is also an interesting study in contrast because, in a time when most women (like Rose's mother) believed they had no power, Molly was a determined individual who, wealth or not, was going to be true to herself and her ideals.

The movie version of THE UNSINKABLE MOLLY BROWN is, in my opinion, worth seeing for some beautiful Colorado scenery, Meredith Willson's music (he also wrote THE MUSIC MAN), and Debbie Reynolds' Academy nominated performance. Like THE SOUND OF MUSIC, it is highly fictionalized, but the basic events of the story did happen - including Molly accidentally burning money in the stove (which Kathy Bates as Molly recounts in the film TITANIC). Unfortunately, the one part of the movie that is very disappointing is the sinking of the Titanic - MGM must not have had much money to spend on that sequence as it looks like they did nothing more than empty an ice machine at Debbie's feet.

I would have been very disappointed had Molly Brown not been represented in Cameron's film, and I think Kathy Bates was the perfect actress to portray her. I also think her interaction with the fictional Jack was very logical; having come from poverty herself she knew first hand how difficult it could be to suddenly have to comport oneself among the wealthy and her counseling Jack and acting on his behalf seems very true to what we know of the real-life Molly Brown.

 

[Johnny Angell]

With all this talk about Cameron adding stars to the sky for this release I thought it would be appropriate to mention a Smithsonian Channel special I watched a couple days ago, entitled "Titanic's Final Mystery." It presented a Titanic historian (whose name I forget) who had done extensive research, going back to original documents which included survivor testimony and logs of ships that had been in the area in the hours and days surrounding the sinking.
Many survivors testified how clear the sky was and how very bright the stars were. Also mentioned several times was a "hazy" horizon. The survivors also testified how quickly the temperature had dropped. Several ships' logs supported the temperature drop.
It has long been a mystery why the ships lookouts only saw the iceberg about 30 seconds before the collision. On a clear night, they should have been able to spot it when it was 30 minutes away. Also, why did the Californian, a ship in the area, not come to the rescue?
The historian theorized that there was a mirage consisting of cold air on the bottom with a warmer layer on the top. It would be reversed in the desert. They showed stills and videos of mirages, including one in which a ship, even during the day, had a drastically different appearance because of the mirage effect.
On the night of the sinking, the mirage effect caused the sea to rise up visually, hiding the iceberg until it was too late. The mirage effect also caused the Titanic to look too small to the Californian. After all, the Titanic was the largest ship of it's time.
It was very convincing. It's the first time I had heard of the mirage effect and until it's rebutted, I'm sold. Amazing as it is to think it, the Titanic did not see an iceberg big enough to sink it until it was only 30 seconds away.
So did Cameron add the stars to make the film more historically accurate or did he just want it to look pretty?