Looking back, I can't believe I did.
I went to see it because everyone else my age was going to see it. I was in college. It was the hot movie to see, the #1 film for months.
I remember my older cousins didn't go to see it - I probably should have listened to their advice. They said, "why are they making this and exploiting this event?" One of my cousins said, "There's no better version than A Night To Remember (my cousin was so right - I love that movie).
I like the score by James Horner, any of his scores are brilliant. But that's about it. The story? Please. There's a reason the writers were not nominated for an Academy Award.
Over 10 years later, I can't watch it without being critical of it. Almost everything about it bothers me. Let's start with the length. Too long. 3 hours. And no intermission. Did they need to have all those boring sea expedition scenes with Bill Paxton? And what happened to Leo DiCraprio's friend, the one he got on the ship with? You never see him again. I wanted to learn more about him; would have made for a better story.
The movie Unsinkable Molly Brown was even a better "Titanic" movie; in that film, you just see a few quick scenes showing the ship sinking; it's not all drawn out and over-the-top like Cameron stretched it out to be, showing people slamming against the propellers, Poseidon-esque.
Another film that took place on the ship was a version with Barbara Stanwyck and Robert Wagner - that movie was even better because you didn't just have one sappy teenage puppy love story but you got to know other, more mature characters. Oh don't get me started with that so-called love story. How phony. Nobody falls in love in just a few hours like that. That's not love. It's lust. That movie is like a bad relationship.
Ahh. There's my rant about Titanic for the year.
This is a great series of posts.
ReplyDeleteOh... and I agree with your re-evaluation of "Titanic." I never have understood why people think it's so great.
Yeah, I know. It really appealed to teeny-boppers at the time. It might not have won so many Oscars if it weren't such a weak year.
ReplyDeleteI haven't watched the movie in a while. I always skip the first part, until Rose is on the actual ship telling her story. Also, I always have nightmares about boats sinking, which I remember having since I was 4. I hate watching that ship sink. It's terrible.
ReplyDeleteYeah, this is a tough movie to get through...for SO MANY REASONS!!
ReplyDeleteI never liked Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet, as a couple.. For me there was no on screen chemistry.
ReplyDeleteBy the way.. I love the world map located on your side bar. I hope you do not mind if I add it to my sidebar over at: Noir and Chick Flicks..
Hi Dawn! I know what you mean about them being a couple.
ReplyDeleteSure - try the globe if you'd like; I just found it yesterday and just wanted to try it. I don't know if I will keep it.
Tom
Tom: I concur. I went to see “Titanic” only because I had been a member of the “Titanic Historical Society” for decades. My membership was a lifelong manifestation of interest in Titanic since reading the famous Walter Lord book when it was first published. And my wife and I pass Titanic’s remains twice each year when visiting England.
ReplyDeleteAs I have posted elsewhere “the sinking of Titanic was close to theater, in real time, in three acts. The time it took to sink approximated that which it takes to perform a play. Ice, then heroism and cowardice, acceptance and denial shared the decks. Death took no holiday, heeded no class. The rich drowned among the poor, although not in the same number.”
So what did Cameron do to needlessly further dramatize one of the greatest dramas of the twentieth century? He added a jewel robbery at sea. 2700 people at peril and we are to be concerned about Leonardo Di Caprio, no less. I think the Roy Ward Baker film is by far the best film version. And the Broadway musical that appeared close to the time of the Cameron film was quite moving in its own way. I saw it twice. Best. Gerald
Tom: A brief postscript. Lest my THS friends think I have lost my bearings, the number of those at peril was 2227 I believe. Thank you. Gerald
ReplyDeleteDear Gerald, thank you for the comment. I recall my initial fascination with the shipwreck remains when reading about the new discoveries in the mid 1980s; the details were published in a fascinating Reader's Digest cover story, which I'm sure you remember.
ReplyDeleteA few years ago, there was also a traveling museum exhibit showcasing many of the found items such as the tableware. I saw this exhibit at the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry in June of 2000. But I did not see the musical version. Now I'm intrigued.
As far as film versions, I agree with you with A Night To Remeber. There was also a made-for-television movie that also aired a few months before the Cameron film, and I remember watching and enjoying this one, too. I believe it aired in the Spring of 1997. Catherine Zeta Jones played one of the passengers, and George C. Scott was the captain.
I've never seen James Cameron's Titanic and do not plan to. "A Night to Remember" and "Titanic" with Stanwyck are both extremely good movies with differing perspectives - good to watch close together. Maybe in the same week, not on the same day! Too intense. Toward the end of Titanic, when the passengers were in lifeboats watching the boat sink, Stanwyck's performance is wonderful.
ReplyDeleteSupposedly true anecdote: Naturally, it was all filmed in a big tank on the backlot, but Stanwyck said it all came to her how horrible it was for those people in the cold ocean back in 1912 and she couldn't stop crying.