Attaboy John!Inspector Hammer! said:YES!! Looks like I'll be seeing it in IMAX tomorrow! My friend called me today and told me that her local theater will have it in IMAX starting tomorrow, we had planned to see it this weekend and I was prepared to see it in RealD 3D again but now I get to see it in IMAX woo hoo!
My opinion of films have changed many times over the years. When I first saw The Matrix, I hated it.DellaStMedia said:Just thought I'd throw a little water on the fire of Titanic from someone who actually hated the movie....
I remember seeing it in the theater and not only not enjoying anything, acting, story, direction, etc (other than the drawing scene - what can I say I was going horny teenager) I remember thinking how lame the special effects were. They never seemed real to me. It wasn't like Terminator 2, which blew me away. There were flybys of the ship with people on it, and I thought the people looked like 2D cutouts instead of real people. In fact, I started wondering why more physical models weren't used. Oh well, I know I'm in the minority for not liking the film. Did anyone have one feeling on the film when they initially watched it, and then have it changed when they re-watched? My wife loved the film the first time she saw it, then got it on VHS, and couldn't sit through it again. While another friend of mine hated it the first time, and saw it in 3D recently and he said it was fantastic!
I understand what you mean but I think the reason why the effects in T2 still look pretty great is because they are of a shiny liquid metal man so they don't have to look like a real person. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure that Titanic was the first movie to use digital people and face/head replacement and while they're not perfect (especially by today's standards), they're still groundbreaking work.DellaStMedia said:
While it was only for a couple of seconds Jurassic Park was the first to attempt a digital face replacement for Ariana Richards when she fell through the ceiling of the kitchen. When the Raptor jumps up and snaps at her, that was a stunt woman and at one point she looks up into the camera so ILM placed Ariana's face over her face. But yes TITANIC was the first to use it for a long period with the camera lingering on the actors faces.TravisR said:
In my mind, that dude is one of the most underrated actors around. He had the extremely difficult task of replacing David Duchovny on The X-Files and he ended up being great on the show. Also, he gave an excellent performance in his arc on The Sopranos and his role in Copland.DellaStMedia said:
Patric was fantastic in Copland! I think both he and Ray Liotta deserve more credit in that film than they get, not to mention the film itself.TravisR said:
Yeah, I went back and looked at both DVDs and the stars aren't there. As bizarre as it sounds, I guess Cameron left almost everything alone except for correcting and adding stars in a handful of shots. I guess he wanted to satisfy that rabid subset of Titanic fans who are also astronomers.Inspector Hammer! said:
I have to agree with you on that point. This actually bothered me more seeing it recently than it did in 1997. I think it would have been entirely plausible and perhaps more human had Rose simply had to struggle with knowing that she would hurt Zane but that she simply wanted a different life than he had to offer. At least Cameron had the good sense to cut the 5 minute long sequence where David Warner chases the lovers through the dining room trying to retrieve the diamond. That was really too much. I mean, he's worried about the diamond with freezing cold water rising above his knees? That being said, the footage of the dining room slowly flooding, with the plates floating of the tables, etc. is very impressive to watch and eerie to say the least. That sequence must have cost a fortune to film but Cameron recognized it didn't work and cut it.Michael Elliott said:
