PDA

View Full Version : Why don't people like Titanic? What was wrong with it?



underthecity
07-01-2009, 05:21 AM
I really like some period films, and Titanic is a great example. Like most people, I was very familiar with the history of Titanic (the ship) and very much enjoyed the movie and setting.

Granted, Leonardo DiCaprio tended to montone his way through the movie, but I personally had no problems with the story itself of Rose and Leo, simplistic as it may have been.

I saw it in the theater twice and still like watching it on the TV screen. However, it seems I am in the minority.

So, what's wrong with it?

KTC
07-01-2009, 05:22 AM
I actually hate everything to do with that boat. I feel I always have. Why? I don't really know, but I suspect overkill.

maestrowork
07-01-2009, 05:29 AM
It's ostentatious and excessive. But that's what "epic" is about. Kind of like Transformers.

scarletpeaches
07-01-2009, 05:31 AM
THAT scene redeemed the entire movie.

I shall now pass the torch on to tt42, who shall explain.

dolores haze
07-01-2009, 05:31 AM
I liked it. Especially when the ship goes down. That bit was awesome!

CACTUSWENDY
07-01-2009, 05:31 AM
I liked the movie for the most part. Liked the story line about the love stuff, but really liked the visual stuff. Everything from the decor of the period to the sinking of the ship. On the big screen it really brought it to life.

Judging from the money it made and the repeat times folks have viewed it I find it hard to believe that the majority did not like it. Where did you get your facts from on this dislike?

underthecity
07-01-2009, 05:37 AM
Where did you get your facts from on this dislike?
Wellllll, I was perhaps unclear, but I was referring to the majority of posters on the movie/TV threads on AW, not the general movie-going audiences. The current rating on imdb is 7.3, which is actually not all that tremendous.

firedrake
07-01-2009, 05:37 AM
I enjoyed it, especially the sets and the costumes.

Not so crazy about DiCaprio, too boyish looking to carry off the whole manly thing. I normally like Billy Zane but he was a bit OTT in the villainous fiance role.

thethinker42
07-01-2009, 05:39 AM
THAT scene redeemed the entire movie.

I shall now pass the torch on to tt42, who shall explain.

Backseat scene. Sexiest, most understated sex scene in the history of film. (Well, okay, mild exaggeration, but you get the idea) The hand on the back window said a thousand words.

Love it. Love it. LOVE. IT.

The rest of the movie was entertaining and I've never quite grasped the vehement hatred towards it. Quite honestly, I think it's in the same category as The Blair Witch Project: Hyped to the high heavens, everyone talking about it, everyone seeing it and raving about it...then everyone getting sick of it. Neither film made buckets of money because people hated them...I think people just got tired of them. Not everyone liked it, of course, but I can't even count the number of people who despise either film now, even though I distinctly remember them RAVING about them years ago.

Chalk me up as an unrepentant fan of both films.

rhymegirl
07-01-2009, 05:43 AM
I did not like it.

Too corny I guess.

Oh, and one more thing. It beat Good Will Hunting for best picture that year. I much preferred Good Will Hunting.

shawkins
07-01-2009, 05:43 AM
I quite liked the movie. I was big into Titanic stuff when I was a wee nerd, and I get the feeling Cameron was as well. There's a bunch of easter egg type historical nuggets scattered throughout the movie (e.g. the chef dude who was balanced on the stern with Kate Winslet at the end when the ship went down claimed to have actually done so). That kind of stuff was fun.

Also I've loved the guy who played Billy Zane's butler ever since Waxwork.

Cyia
07-01-2009, 05:54 AM
I could have done without the entire 1st half of that movie. The second half isn't bad.

raburrell
07-01-2009, 05:58 AM
I have a thing about drowning. And schlock. Both give me a weird visceral reaction.

MissKris
07-01-2009, 06:02 AM
Because people love to profess that they hate things the general public (read: the little people) likes.

I liked it, and I hate a lot of commercial films. I agree with tt42 that the hand on the steamy back window was . . . sensationally erotic. A wonderful scene.

I also liked the costumes and the period glamour. The ship was meant to be the most luxurious thing on the water at the time and so lent itself to beautiful scenery.

I didn't like that Leo's character died in the end, but, oh well.

DeleyanLee
07-01-2009, 06:08 AM
Honestly, I think the problem for many people who hate the movie hate it because it's billed as "a Romance" when, in fact, it's a love story.

The main focus of Titanic is Rose's growth as a person, her finding the strength within herself to stop being a doormat and to be a full person who explores and enjoys life to the fullest. Jack was the impetus for her transformation, but he obviously wasn't the love of her life because she found a man to marry, have children and share her life with. That was obvious because she had a granddaughter with her in the framing story.

It all has to do with viewer's expectations, honestly. Those who were open to a good story and hadn't prejudged it enjoyed it. Those who had a preconception of it being a romance usually hate it with a passion.

Of course, while I enjoyed the movie immensely, I did get massively sick of "My Heart Will Go On" by Celine Dion. Took me almost a year before I could listen to that song without changing the station.

mscelina
07-01-2009, 06:09 AM
My major problem with Titanic?

I cheered when DiCaprio died. Yep, I'm a romantic through and through.

KTC
07-01-2009, 06:10 AM
Because people love to profess that they hate things the general public (read: the little people) likes.




This is not always the case. Sometimes people are just repulsed by things. I hated Titanic because I was way sick of the story before the movie even came out. AND I despise Celine Dion...I prickle when I hear her. I try to like and dislike based on my likes and dislikes, not on other people's likes and dislikes. That's just silly.

thethinker42
07-01-2009, 06:13 AM
My major problem with Titanic?

I cheered when DiCaprio died. Yep, I'm a romantic through and through.

When I saw the movie in the theatre, during that scene someone yelled out "JACK FROST!" And I almost died laughing.

mscelina
07-01-2009, 06:14 AM
Yep. The sound of his frozen fingers cracking as she pried them off her and left him to sink into oblivion as part of the deep sea food cycle was outstanding. If I could figure out how to get that sound on my cell phone, I'd make it a ring tone.

But my favorite sound in the movie was the dude bouncing off the propeller after a twenty story fall. *grin* Totally awesome.


Granted, Leonardo DiCaprio tended to montone his way through the movie, but I personally had no problems with the story itself of Rose and Leo, simplistic as it may have been.


By the way, undercity, the fact that you couldn't remember DiCaprio's character name is fairly important. When a character, a lead character, in a movie or play is forgettable, it makes the whole movie suffer. While Winsett did an outstanding job playing Rose and Billy Zane was amazing as the tortured pig fiance, Jack was a forgettable character, a stock character with cariacture instead of character. By the end of the movie, no one could blame Rose, the Rose that she'd become, for ditching him. She'd surpassed him in a matter of days while he remained the same. DiCaprio could have done much, MUCH more with the character than he did and all the bang-flipping-out-of-the-eyes in the world wasn't going to save a character that he'd not provided with much depth from the get-go.

KTC
07-01-2009, 06:16 AM
My daughter loved the movie at the time. I teased the shit out of her...called him Leofarto DiCrapio. She hated me long time.

scarletpeaches
07-01-2009, 06:16 AM
She's got good taste then.

You guys are all bastiges.

thethinker42
07-01-2009, 06:17 AM
Yep. The sound of his frozen fingers cracking as she pried them off her and left him to sink into oblivion as part of the deep sea food cycle was outstanding. If I could figure out how to get that sound on my cell phone, I'd make it a ring tone.

But my favorite sound in the movie was the dude bouncing off the propeller after a twenty story fall. *grin* Totally awesome.

HAHHAHAAH One of my friends always talks about wishing there was an outtake of: "Jack...Jack...there's a boat...Jack, there's- *SNAP*" *Rose looks at snapped-off arm in disbelief*

:D

And the prop bounce was awesome...

KTC
07-01-2009, 06:19 AM
She's got good taste then.

You guys are all bastiges.


Oh...he's not Leofarto DiCrapio when he's in Basketball Diaries...he dressed (dumbed) down for Titanic.

dclary
07-01-2009, 06:24 AM
The film was boring. The best part of it was DiCrapio popsicled.

Shadow_Ferret
07-01-2009, 06:25 AM
Why do I hate it? Because the main story was complete fiction. And I have to ask Why? Why did they need to do that when there were so many wonderful and tragic REAL LIFE stories to choose from that night.

I'm somewhat obsessed with the Titanic and this movie pisses me off no end.

Cranky
07-01-2009, 06:25 AM
Well, much as I dislike Titanic, I have to say it's mostly because of Leo, and for the reasons mscelina describes. The second half of the movie is where things get interesting, and I liked the special effects.

But Leo overshadows those things...I just looked at it and thought, "Is THIS who are the girls are freaking out over? Seriously?" Ugh. Kate Winslet is awesome, as is Kathy Bates, who, in a tiny role, barely more than a cameo, did better work than ol' Leo, and he had lots of room.

rugcat
07-01-2009, 06:26 AM
Maybe people are down on it because it was hyped as THE GREATEST MOVIE EVER!! which of course it wasn't.

I thought it was a well made film and good entertainment.

mscelina
07-01-2009, 06:28 AM
Actually, tossing back in there--the character actors in the movie were for the most part amazing. AMAZING. Cameron did outstanding research for the movie and the effects were incredible and he had a hell of a script.

he was just missing a truly strong actor to take on that role. Now realize, the way the role is written it's intended to be a young girl's ideal--especially a repressed girl who dreams of rebellion. He's the perfect 'punishment' boyfriend and that's how DiCaprio played him. In the hands of another actor, however, I think the role could have developed into something much more. That scene in the water should be heartbreaking. It should be shattering--at least, shattering something more than Jack's fingers.

Cranky
07-01-2009, 06:30 AM
All fluff, no substance from him.

maestrowork
07-01-2009, 06:30 AM
I agree DiCaprio got all the accolades for playing a forgettable character (much like what's his name in Twilight because of the teenage girl factor). Meanwhile, Kate Winslet was the true star and she did an outstanding job, but she was completely overshadowed by Leomania. I mean, for god's sake, she even got naked (hubba hubba) and she didn't even show a skinny bone.

The supporting actors were all excellent, from Kathy Bates to Frances Fisher to Gloria Stuart to Victor Garber.

The boat's sinking, however, is spectacular. I just wish they would skip all that melodrama. The story didn't need that AT ALL.

scarletpeaches
07-01-2009, 06:31 AM
I wish to come out as someone who cries like a bitch every. Damn. Time she watches this fillum.

There. I said it.

firedrake
07-01-2009, 06:36 AM
Actually, tossing back in there--the character actors in the movie were for the most part amazing. AMAZING. Cameron did outstanding research for the movie and the effects were incredible and he had a hell of a script.

he was just missing a truly strong actor to take on that role. Now realize, the way the role is written it's intended to be a young girl's ideal--especially a repressed girl who dreams of rebellion. He's the perfect 'punishment' boyfriend and that's how DiCaprio played him. In the hands of another actor, however, I think the role could have developed into something much more. That scene in the water should be heartbreaking. It should be shattering--at least, shattering something more than Jack's fingers.

QFT.

AnnieColleen
07-01-2009, 06:42 AM
I did get massively sick of "My Heart Will Go On" by Celine Dion.

This. Living in a women's dorm the year it came out...hearing the song all up and down the halls, chatter about it everywhere, etc. At least one of my friends had a shot from the movie as her computer wallpaper. Way overkill.



We did get some fun spoofs out of it, though.

Near, far, wherever you are,
You will hear this annoying refrain.
Once more you'll open the door
And again hear this song
Yes this song, it goes on and on.And one of my friends discovered that that song has the same chords as Red Red Wine, Blue Moon, I Will Always Love You, and Heart and Soul. That made for an interesting round!

chicklitreview
07-01-2009, 06:42 AM
I don't think I personally know of anyone who hates the movie, but for myself, I love it. I've watched it at least a dozen times. I wouldn't consider it the greatest movie ever, but is on the list of some of my favorites.

Exir
07-01-2009, 06:44 AM
I liked the Titanic. The thing about the love story is that it is very archetypal. Nothing unique. Also, I don't think the love story was the main point of the movie. It is a reflection of the suffering that everyone on the Titanic has faced in one form or the other. A kind of case study, if you get what I mean. This makes it much more effective than, say, filming it as a pure disaster movie and not going into any depth with any of the character's story. It was a character we as an audience could focus on.

PS: definitely not representative of Leonardo DiCaprio's skill at acting. See him in Blood Diamond and The Aviator.

rhymegirl
07-01-2009, 06:45 AM
My daughter loved the movie at the time. I teased the shit out of her...called him Leofarto DiCrapio. She hated me long time.

Ha! We call him Leonardo Decapitated

dgrintalis
07-01-2009, 06:52 AM
Me, too.


I wish to come out as someone who cries like a bitch every. Damn. Time she watches this fillum.

There. I said it.

The two scenes that hit me hardest were during the sinking. The Irish mum telling her children a bedtime story and the old couple holding each other in bed while the water starts coming into the room.

scarletpeaches
07-01-2009, 06:52 AM
I choke, absolutely fucking choke, when Rose goes to Jack again at the end.

Cranky
07-01-2009, 06:56 AM
Me, too.



The two scenes that hit me hardest were during the sinking. The Irish mum telling her children a bedtime story and the old couple holding each other in bed while the water starts coming into the room.

Yes, that part did grab me where I lived, I have to say.

MissKris
07-01-2009, 07:07 AM
I try to like and dislike based on my likes and dislikes, not on other people's likes and dislikes. That's just silly.
Of course that's just silly, but that doesn't mean people don't do it. And by "people" I am not singling you out.

Ugh, Celine . . . Can I just forget that she had anything at all to do with the movie?

ETA: I don't think I ever cried watching it, but I respect those who do. And those who admit it. Good on ya.

Jersey Chick
07-01-2009, 07:24 AM
Those two scenes wreck me. And I get the lump in my throat when the one boat goes back to fish people out of the water and one of the first bodies they find is a mother and infant and the crewman says, "We waited too long,"....

I saw it 3 times in the theatre - once with my mom, once with my girlfriends, and once with my husband.

I like Titanic - I've been into it since I was a little kid and my grandfather built a model of it (my mom still has it). Ever since, I've been fascinated by the story.

DiCaprio's character could have been played by any actor - he was so bland he was beige - but I like the rest of the cast.

backslashbaby
07-01-2009, 07:30 AM
I liked very much of it - the costumes, the ship itslef, the sinking! - but I'm not a fan of cliched love stories or repressed rich girl stories. I still enjoyed it, but the true stories of the Titanic are so much more compelling to me.

They really did lock the gates to the steerage areas, I think I read. It's been a while. Would you have made people turn the not-full lifeboats back when you knew you'd get swamped and maybe killed? And two hours ago you were.... oh, yeah, fancy necklace stuff. I just don't like the juxtaposition of such cliche with such fierce reality. Mundane is fine, of course, but cliche makes me feel too removed from the characters.

And, hey, that armoire was big enough for two, dammit! That killed me. I still blubber at the end every time, but I can hardly look at that huge ole armoire. Aaaaack.

Claudia Gray
07-01-2009, 08:23 AM
I liked a lot of it, and I think it's wrong to dismiss DiCaprio as an actor -- he's done astonishing work in films like "What's Eating Gilbert Grape" and "The Aviator" -- because he played it so straight in "Titanic." Apparently he tried several times to give a twist to the character, and Cameron insisted that he wanted a straight romantic lead, period.

The best review of "Titanic" I ever read was that it was made with "a poet's eye and a tin ear." So much of it is beautiful and dynamic, but so many of the lines are painfully clunky, and Cal is such a one-dimensional villain that you're more likely to laugh at him than fear him.

That said, I think it's a good movie. Even the schmaltz works, because the stakes are so high and the tension is ratcheted up so effectively that no emotion seems overdone. The sketch scene is genuinely quite sexy; the performances are good across the board (well, Billy Zane, but what did he have to work with?) Also, there's one thing Titanic gets right that no other disaster movie I've ever seen understood: Those people don't know the ship is going to sink.

Think about it. In every other disaster movie, we learn about people, all of whom are in these troubled situations, and then the big disaster catalyst comes along to make them resolve these things one way or another. And there are always these harbingers of doom that allow the audience to feel very smug and safe -- like we'd know better. Not Titanic. That ship looks beautiful and wonderful. When the great engines start working, it's a thrill; you don't get to feel smug, because you KNOW if you'd been there, you'd absolutely have wanted to be on board too. And Jack and Rose aren't waiting for a catalyst to change their lives -- they meet and court and rebel before the ship ever hits the iceberg. If the ship had made it to port, you'd still have a movie with plot movement. Now, that's nicely done.

Honestly, I think a lot of people just bash it (and Leo) because they were so popular.

Cranky
07-01-2009, 08:32 AM
Well, I'm not bashing DiCaprio per se, but rather his performance in this particular movie. Whether or not Cameron wanted it that way doesn't matter to me...it was off-putting in some ways, but mostly forgettable. Doesn't mean he hasn't done good work elsewhere, of course. But here? Ugh. Just Ugh.

blacbird
07-01-2009, 08:55 AM
Well, much as I dislike Titanic, I have to say it's mostly because of Leo,

Having not seen Titanic, except in snippets, and not having perused the entirety of this thread, I wish to come in defense of Leo (though not for this performance). The guy has perhaps taken on some unfortunate and unfitting roles (Gangs of New York being another), but a big paycheck is always desirable. But he can most definitely act. Notable performances include Catch Me If You Can, and especially an astonishing performance as a mentally retarded teenager in What's Eating Gilbert Grape?, the latter of which earned him a justified Oscar nomination.

caw

Cranky
07-01-2009, 08:57 AM
Pssst. Take a look at the post above ya, bbird. :)

Chumplet
07-01-2009, 09:46 AM
I liked it at the time. I saw it in the theatre and enjoyed the story. Movies have changed a lot over the years, so although Titanic was a blockbuster, we've been lucky to see some better stuff since then. We've see a lot of crap remakes, too.

Sure, Leo could have done a better job with Jack and I'd like to hear suggestions on who would have suited the role better.

I like how Leonardo matured as an actor. He managed to dodge the 'movie star' persona IMO.

Accuracy? Meh. Movies are fiction, even the ones based on real stories.

The last scene when Rose goes back to meet Jack gets me every time.

Samantha's_Song
07-01-2009, 11:17 AM
It's each to their own, but I absolutely bloody love the film Titanic. I've always had a fascination with the history of Titanic, and when the film came out my husband and I went to see it three times in two weeks, in fact I'd have gone every night if we could have afforded it. - This comes from someone who, before Titanic, last went to the cinema when Apocalypse Now was showing. We haven't been back to the cinema since Titanic either.

The film was everything the trailers said it would be, and so much more. It had everything I could have wished for: historically-based, a love story, tension, humour, action, a wonderful soundtrack, and the film was majestic.
I'm also not embarrassed to say that we were standing in the queue in front of Woolworths, at 12 o-clock at night, to buy the DVD when it came out, and we got the book and T-shirt etc to go with it too. :tongue When we got home, we put the DVD on and watched the whole thing through before we went to bed. My hubby loves this film as much as I do, which isn't bad considering car-chases are more his thing.

Samantha's_Song
07-01-2009, 11:22 AM
Me too - I go over all goose-pimply, from head to foot, and cry.


The last scene when Rose goes back to meet Jack gets me every time.

Celia Cyanide
07-01-2009, 05:36 PM
Granted, Leonardo DiCaprio tended to montone his way through the movie,

This is why I hate it. Leonardo DiCaprio is a very good actor, and he gets put down all the time because of this dumb role. It was certainly his least interesting role, but he did the best he could with it. Kate Winslet wasn't that interesting, either, and neither was Kathy Bates. They had some good actors, and they didn't use them. That dialog was pretty crappy, but as bad as it was, there was some that was even worse, and Kate and Leo refused to use it.

I still wouldn't call it a bad movie, and I did enjoy it. There is a lot about it that's good. But I have always had a grudge against it, because up until that point, he was known for roles like What's Eating Gilbert Grape?, Total Eclipse, and The Basketball Diaries.

Kathleen42
07-01-2009, 05:50 PM
The current rating on imdb is 7.3, which is actually not all that tremendous.

That's actually a rather good rating for IMDB.

maestrowork
07-01-2009, 05:57 PM
I wouldn't trust IMDB ratings since they're usually bumped up or down by Internet zealots -- anyone could rate the films so you get a lot of "it really sucks" trolls or the "popular" films get a lot of "10 - greatest film in history" votes.

Exir
07-01-2009, 06:17 PM
www.metacritics.com

Much better.

maestrowork
07-01-2009, 06:39 PM
www.metacritics.com

Much better.

derail/ Transformers got 61, and Transformers ROTF got a 35. Hmmmm....

BenPanced
07-01-2009, 06:44 PM
Why does anybody not like something everybody else does? Why does somebody like something else somebody else doesn't? Why doesn't everybody like everything? Why doesn't everybody hate everything? Why does it matter?

Celia Cyanide
07-01-2009, 06:49 PM
I agree DiCaprio got all the accolades for playing a forgettable character (much like what's his name in Twilight because of the teenage girl factor). Meanwhile, Kate Winslet was the true star and she did an outstanding job, but she was completely overshadowed by Leomania. I mean, for god's sake, she even got naked (hubba hubba) and she didn't even show a skinny bone.

I disagree. He didn't get accolades for that movie at all. That movie was nominated in every category EXCEPT best actor. I think Kate Winslet is a great actor too, but her character was not very interesting, either. And what difference does it make that she got naked? I do it in movies all the time. It really has nothing to do with the quality of the performance.

Celia Cyanide
07-01-2009, 06:53 PM
Why does anybody not like something everybody else does? Why does somebody like something else somebody else doesn't? Why doesn't everybody like everything? Why doesn't everybody hate everything? Why does it matter?

Probably not, but I do think it's interesting to hear why. You probably don't know this (LOL) but I love the movie Dark Knight, which is a movie that the majority of people did at least like. I have been known to seek out negative reviews, because I think it's interesting to hear about why some people hated it. Because most people don't like it as much as I do, but I very rarely meet anyone who hates it.

maestrowork
07-01-2009, 06:54 PM
The "naked" remark is tongue in cheek, if you don't realize that already.

We'll just agree to disagree. I think out of all the actors, Leo did the most unremarkable job -- that may be Cameron's problem rather than Leo's since he's a good actor -- I was very impressed with his earlier work. But he's the one who became the "heartthrob" because of all the teenage girls. Winslet got the short stick.

Celia Cyanide
07-01-2009, 07:05 PM
The "naked" remark is tongue in cheek, if you don't realize that already.

Oh, I know! I just never get any credit for being naked in movies! ;)


We'll just agree to disagree. I think out of all the actors, Leo did the most unremarkable job -- that may be Cameron's problem rather than Leo's since he's a good actor -- I was very impressed with his earlier work. But he's the one who became the "heartthrob" because of all the teenage girls. Winslet got the short stick.

I think it IS Cameron's problem, because I've seen just about everybody in this movie give better performances than they did here, including Susie Amis, who was great in Two Small Bodies. IMO, the most annoying one was Kathy Bates, whom I LOVED from Misery. But I also think the script was to blame. The structure was fine, but the dialog was too on-the-nose for me.

Leonardo did get very famous because of this movie, but he didn't get much respect. I remember hearing someone complain that Titanic only won best picture because of his popularity...I was like, um, yeah...because teenage girls really have a lot of pull at the academy!

Julie Worth
07-01-2009, 07:11 PM
Loved it the first time around, but I couldn't see it again. Especially not on a screen less than 65 feet.

Jcomp
07-01-2009, 07:53 PM
Loved it the first time around, but I couldn't see it again. Especially not on a screen less than 65 feet.

This is pretty much how I feel on it. I haven't watched it a second time all the way through since it left theaters. I thought it was good and still do, but it's not something I'm interested in sitting through.

I also think Ferret's point about them creating a fictional story for a historical event with plenty of great stories to choose from is fairly valid. It's not like WW2 or some other enormous, unwieldy moment that lets you sneak in something entirely fictional into the proceedings and people accept it. This is a relatively compact and isolated moment that has been analyzed inside and out time and again. It just felt gratuitous to create all new characters and this shoehorned love story into a situation that came pre-packaged with all the drama you could ask for.

All that said, I'm far from a hater, and I still think it was a good movie, just not something I'd ever voluntarily sit through again. Some movies, once was enough.

maestrowork
07-01-2009, 10:38 PM
On the other hand, it is fiction and not a biopic/documentary. I think historical fiction is okay even for something like that. I mean, there are over 1000 passengers on the ship and many didn't have a story written about them. So I think it's within the realm of fiction even though the Titanic tragedy is so well documented. I think it's a bit unfair to be hung up on the facts instead of looking at the movie as a movie, and judge it by its own merits.

In fact, I like it that Cameron framed the story in a way that it's plausible. Jack was lost to the sea -- and he was never a registered passenger. Rose and Billy Zane are two fabricated characters, sure (Rose also changed her name to Rose Dawson) but I think that's part of the intrigue of historical fiction: fictional characters who interact with historical figures.

The problem with following a "true" story of "real" people on the ship is that then it becomes a documentary, or else someone is going to scream, "That's NOT how it happened to my grandmother!" And the idea of doing a fictional story of a "real" person is even more risky and would piss off far more people. They've included enough real people and their true stories to compliment the fictional one, and I kind of like that.

Shadow_Ferret
07-01-2009, 11:06 PM
Then call it something else. Why Titanic? If you're not telling the stories that actually happened, why couldn't it be Poseiden Adventure III or something? Were they just trying to cash in on Titanicmania?

And if you are going to use a real life backdrop, get your facts straight. For instance, Lake Wissota is a manmade lake in Wisconsin that didn't exist yet.

Celia Cyanide
07-01-2009, 11:17 PM
Then call it something else. Why Titanic? If you're not telling the stories that actually happened, why couldn't it be Poseiden Adventure III or something? Were they just trying to cash in on Titanicmania?

That's what historical fiction is. It was about fictional characters, but also about an event that really happened.

AmandaAcidic
07-01-2009, 11:18 PM
I loved it. So you're not alone.

maestrowork
07-01-2009, 11:19 PM
But it was the sinking of Titanic. The ship wasn't called Poseidon. They did include real characters like Captain Smith, Thomas Andrews, Molly Brown, etc. The boat did sink at around 2:20 AM. They did lock the gates in the steerage. Andrews and Smith did go down with the ship. Etc. etc.

I think other than the fictional characters and core story, Cameron did try to get the story right -- he's obsessed with the history of Titanic.

The rest is part of why it's called historical FICTION.

Ed, other than the fictional story part, what did you find wrong about the film?

Samantha's_Song
07-01-2009, 11:23 PM
Hmm, in the film, U571, they had Americans deciphering the first letters of the Enigma machine, whereas we all know the people who did this were actually Polish and not American.


Then call it something else. Why Titanic? If you're not telling the stories that actually happened, why couldn't it be Poseiden Adventure III or something? Were they just trying to cash in on Titanicmania?

Edit... All Hollywood's historically based films are lies, so what's wrong with two pretend characters?

Shadow_Ferret
07-01-2009, 11:30 PM
torical FICTION.

Ed, other than the fictional story part, what did you find wrong about the film?

You mean if they had deleted every scene with Dicrapio and Winslet and just concentrated on the real events?

The last part of the movie was very good.


Hmm, in the film, U571, they had Americans deciphering the first letters of the Enigma machine, whereas we all know the people who did this were actually Polish and not American.

Edit... All Hollywood's historically based films are lies, so what's wrong with two pretend characters?
I hate ALL films that are historically inaccurate.

Samantha's_Song
07-01-2009, 11:33 PM
Ya know I luv ya Mr ferret, but I'm so glad we don't live together, because I'd have to give you a good spanking. :tongue :D


You mean if they had deleted every scene with Dicrapio and Winslet and just concentrated on the real events?

The last part of the movie was very good.

Samantha's_Song
07-01-2009, 11:35 PM
They're just entertainment, that's all, like all those fiction novels we write. I know a Scot's lass who hates the film Braveheart, whereas lots of other people love that too.


I hate ALL films that are historically inaccurate.

Shadow_Ferret
07-01-2009, 11:41 PM
I understand that fiction is made up. I guess I have a hangup about history. It's so facinating in its own right why do you need to add fictional elements to it. But even if it is well done, my biggest pet peeve are historical inacuracies. Shows sloppiness in the research. Obviously they didnt' care enough to get it right, so why should I?

maestrowork
07-01-2009, 11:41 PM
Ed, you've just discredited every single historical fiction out there, film or not.

I'm expecting a mob of angry historical fiction writers at your door. Better prepare.

maestrowork
07-01-2009, 11:44 PM
I understand that fiction is made up. I guess I have a hangup about history. It's so facinating in its own right why do you need to add fictional elements to it. But even if it is well done, my biggest pet peeve are historical inacuracies. Shows sloppiness in the research. Obviously they didnt' care enough to get it right, so why should I?

Are you saying just because something has history in the backdrop, that it HAS to be factual -- nonfiction? That it has to be a documentary or nonfiction account of the history?

Again, apart from the fictional characters and events surrounding those characters, what did James Cameron get wrong about Titanic? I mean, if you have to criticize him for distorting history and being sloppy in his research, then you must give us some examples.

Otherwise, you're missing the point about historical fiction (and you will not read my WIP since it's set against the Pacific War and it's fictional).

Shadow_Ferret
07-01-2009, 11:44 PM
Ed, you've just discredited every single historical fiction out there, film or not.

I'm expecting a mob of angry historical fiction writers at your door. Better prepare.

I guess that's why when it comes to history, I stick with non-fiction.

Samantha's_Song
07-01-2009, 11:47 PM
Run, Ferret, run! :Hug2:


Ed, you've just discredited every single historical fiction out there, film or not.

I'm expecting a mob of angry historical fiction writers at your door. Better prepare.

maestrowork
07-01-2009, 11:48 PM
I guess that's why when it comes to history, I stick with non-fiction.

Are you saying you won't read or watch any story with true history as backdrops? Saving Private Ryan? Apocalypse Now? Bonnie and Clyde? Ben Hur?

That's, of course, your preference and it's fine. But that alone doesn't make Titanic or any historical fiction bad simply because they put fiction around historical events.

scarletpeaches
07-01-2009, 11:49 PM
I'm kinda with Fuzzface AND Ray on this one.

If something definitely did or did not happen, you should write accordingly, or you'll look lazy and talentless. *coughDanBrowncough*

If something COULD HAVE happened, you can write about it, if there's no incontrovertible (sp?) evidence to the contrary.

But if you have glaring mistakes in your writing, I don't care if it's fiction. The suspension of disbelief is gone and I'll find another author or screenwriter who knows his arse from his elbow.

Millicent M'Lady
07-01-2009, 11:49 PM
Titanic infuriates me for possessing some of the clunkiest and most heavy-handed dialogue I have ever heard in a film.

At times it is visually stunning and the scenes of the old couple lying together and the mother reading to her children as the boat goes down really got to me. It's kind of telling though that these two short events got to me more than the death of Jack.

The thing that really makes me hate this film (and I have done since I watched it as a thirteen year old girl) is Rose's last sentence to Jack. Had the writers any sense of subtlety?!

"I'll never let go Jack"... Crack, snap, splash. I mean, come on! This made me snort at the cinema at 13, much to the annoyance of my hysterical friend and it still makes me snort in annoyance now.

Sorry for the rant but you did ask!:D

Shadow_Ferret
07-01-2009, 11:50 PM
Again, apart from the fictional characters and events surrounding those characters, what did James Cameron get wrong about Titanic? I mean, if you have to criticize him for distorting history and being sloppy in his research, then you must give us some examples.


I gave you the lake example. And honestly, if you're really curious, you can go to IMDB and look up all the factual inacuracies. I don't think I need to restate them here.

And as I stated on the first page, I have a particular fondness for the Titanic and her stories, so making something up in this context really does irk me. Generally, I'm not this picky about a period piece.

ETA: And yeah, I hate Saving Private Ryan, too.

Shadow_Ferret
07-01-2009, 11:56 PM
Titanicas the boat goes down

Ship, dammit! Ship!

Gah, another pet peeve. :D

Jcomp
07-01-2009, 11:56 PM
I'm kinda with Fuzzface AND Ray on this one.

If something definitely did or did not happen, you should write accordingly, or you'll look lazy and talentless. *coughDanBrowncough*

If something COULD HAVE happened, you can write about it, if there's no incontrovertible (sp?) evidence to the contrary.

But if you have glaring mistakes in your writing, I don't care if it's fiction. The suspension of disbelief is gone and I'll find another author or screenwriter who knows his arse from his elbow.

Word.

My latest beef right now is in the 2012 trailer, three seconds in they refer to the Mayan's as "Mankind's earliest civilization." Gotdammit, even if you forgot all about Mesopotamia from grade school, take five seconds to google it and come up with the real answer.

I too am no fan of gross historical inaccuracies, particularly when given the Dan Brown "No, this is all fact and we're educating the ignorant masses" treatment.

donroc
07-01-2009, 11:56 PM
I could not and still do not see deCaprio as man enough to interest a real woman -- a mothering type or teenager perhaps. If Cameron had selected a Clive Owen or equivalent I might have believed the romance.

How many here have seen the earlier B&W Kenneth Moor and 20th Century Fox Titanic films? Each had wonderful qualities, better acting for the most part imo, and were good enough for their era and to be enjoyed again.

scarletpeaches
07-01-2009, 11:59 PM
Word.

My latest beef right now is in the 2012 trailer, three seconds in they refer to the Mayan's as "Mankind's earliest civilization." Gotdammit, even if you forgot all about Mesopotamia from grade school, take five seconds to google it and come up with the real answer.

I too am no fan of gross historical inaccuracies, particularly when given the Dan Brown "No, this is all fact and we're educating the ignorant masses" treatment.

Oh man, I am so fuggin' happy right now. The coolest guy on AW just worded one of my posts. :TheWave:

Jcomp FTW!


I could not and still do not see deCaprio as man enough to interest a real woman -- a mothering type or teenager perhaps. If Cameron had selected a Clive Owen or equivalent I might have believed the romance.

I was twenty-one when the film first came out and I'd have done di Caprio then and I'd do him now. I am neither a mother type or a teenager.

Clive Owen, incidentally? I could force myself but meh.

dgiharris
07-02-2009, 12:00 AM
I have no preconceptions about Titanic before I saw.

Overall, I thought it was a pretty good movie, a touch long but certainly not deserving of the hatestorm that seems to ensue whenever you mention it.

I think we have a tendency sometimes to be contrarians. If something becomes really popular there is always a portion of the populace who will hate it for no other reason than it being popular.

I'm guilty of that sometimes as well. But not in the case of Titanic. On a scale of 1 - 10, I give it a 8.

Mel...

Millicent M'Lady
07-02-2009, 12:03 AM
Ship, dammit! Ship!

Gah, another pet peeve. :D

Sorry, my bad. I was just being flippant. Forgive me? :)

Jcomp
07-02-2009, 12:05 AM
I think we have a tendency sometimes to be contrarians. If something becomes really popular there is always a portion of the populace who will hate it for no other reason than it being popular.


It's the inevitable "Hype Backlash"...

Samantha's_Song
07-02-2009, 12:05 AM
Which he 'borrowed' from The holy blood and the holy grail, written some twenty years before his predictable twaddle. I do like the film though, but only because it has my Jean Reno in it. :D


I too am no fan of gross historical inaccuracies, particularly when given the Dan Brown "No, this is all fact and we're educating the ignorant masses" treatment.

BenPanced
07-02-2009, 12:12 AM
I was the one who kept yelling at the screen SINK, ALREADY! Best way to describe it for me is it used 10 words when 3 would have sufficed.

ETA: Here's Blondie performing My Heart Will Go On during their Parallel Lines 30th Anniversary Tour last year. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kr16srlCwkA)

Millicent M'Lady
07-02-2009, 12:24 AM
I was the one who kept yelling at the screen SINK, ALREADY! Best way to describe it for me is it used 10 words when 3 would have sufficed.

ETA: Here's Blondie performing My Heart Will Go On during their Parallel Lines 30th Anniversary Tour last year. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kr16srlCwkA)

Bahahaha! Me too! My friend (who very stalkerly) went to see the film 12 times in a three week period nearly had a conniption, I tells you.

I didn't care though. My bum was sore and my brain was angry!

maestrowork
07-02-2009, 12:28 AM
I have to admit, I've watched it a few times on TV, etc. just to watch the ship sink. It is quite spectacular.

katiemac
07-02-2009, 12:33 AM
It makes a heck of a drinking game, anyway. Personally I like to count how many times they say each other's names.

"Hurry, Jack! Let's go, Jack! Jack, the ship is sinking, Jack!"

Vincent
07-02-2009, 12:45 AM
And if you are going to use a real life backdrop, get your facts straight. For instance, Lake Wissota is a manmade lake in Wisconsin that didn't exist yet.
That's really stretching it, mate. A minor historical anachronism that had nothing to do with the Titanic, didn't invalidate the Titanic mythos, and didn't impact on Cameron's depiction of the Titanic tragedy.

Jcomp
07-02-2009, 12:47 AM
Incidentally, what the hell ever happened to Billy Zane? I remember at the time thinking this would catapult him to greater things. Next thing you know he's starring in the absolute lousiest martial-arts TV movie I have ever seen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNm6hwxztDE)...

Celia Cyanide
07-02-2009, 12:49 AM
I was twenty-one when the film first came out and I'd have done di Caprio then and I'd do him now. I am neither a mother type or a teenager.

Um, yeah. Regardless of whether or not someone might "see diCaprio as man enough to interest a real woman," he is. That's just a fact.


Clive Owen, incidentally? I could force myself but meh.

He's not bad. But the thing is...Clive Owen looks much older than Kate Winslet did in that movie. Which is fine, but how many more damn love stories do we have to see where the woman looks more youthful than the man? Why is it believable one way and not the other?

BenPanced
07-02-2009, 12:51 AM
It makes a heck of a drinking game, anyway. Personally I like to count how many times they say each other's names.

"Hurry, Jack! Let's go, Jack! Jack, the ship is sinking, Jack!"
"I'm flying, Jack! I'm flying!"

...two hours later...

"I'm swimming, Jack! I'm swimming!"

Toothpaste
07-02-2009, 12:59 AM
Sigh, so we aren't allowed to take issue with terrible dialogue, cliched characters, poorly handled exposition, and ridiculous melodrama? Instead those of us who don't like this movie are just overreacting, or doing some backlash thing to the hype.

I didn't like it when it came out (aside from the ship sinking bit, the special effects at the time rocked), and I still don't like it. It has nothing to do with historical fiction, the actors cast, or even Celine Dion. In my mind it has everything to do with the writing which, at least in my opinion, is downright awful.

(someone already mentioned it, but who on earth writes the line "I'll never let go" and then physically lets go of a person?? It's just one of the strangest moments on film. Why couldn't she have just said, "Thank you Jack" or "I love you Jack"? Epitomizes the bizarre writing throughout this movie.)

scarletpeaches
07-02-2009, 01:04 AM
(someone already mentioned it, but who on earth writes the line "I'll never let go" and then physically lets go of a person?? It's just one of the strangest moments on film. Why couldn't she have just said, "Thank you Jack" or "I love you Jack"? Epitomizes the bizarre writing throughout this movie.)

I've never understood why people don't get this line. She wasn't talking about never letting go physically. I would have thought the true meaning of this line was obvious?

Samantha's_Song
07-02-2009, 01:12 AM
Yep. I suppose deeper meanings don't always sink in. Excuse the pun, seeing as we're talking Titanic. :D


I've never understood why people don't get this line. She wasn't talking about never letting go physically. I would have thought the true meaning of this line was obvious?

Jcomp
07-02-2009, 01:28 AM
I always thought it was interesting that she let go anyway, extra meaning aside. It sort of seemed to fit the general situation. I'm sure there were lots of people on the Titanic, as in other disasters, making promises to loved ones they can't keep. The situation is beyond your control no matter how badly you wish to handle it.

Toothpaste
07-02-2009, 01:34 AM
I've never understood why people don't get this line. She wasn't talking about never letting go physically. I would have thought the true meaning of this line was obvious?

Hon, I got the true meaning of the line, trust me. But personally I found it an absurd moment in which to to say it, even though she meant it figuratively, to then do the opposite literally is a laugh out loud moment. "I'll never let go, and now let me pry your fingers off this craft . . .". She could have said it when she got onto the rescue ship. She could have said it AFTER prying him off, watching him sink into the murky depths. The timing of the line is just atrocious and, in my opinion, unintentionally hilarious.

Saint Fool
07-02-2009, 01:41 AM
I didn't hate the movie, but as a Titanic buff myself, I wish they had focused on the real stories instead of the fictional romance (especially with some of the character actors they had.)

That said, I doubt that Cameron could have sold the studio on making the picture if there had not been a love story with pretty people.

Kurtz
07-02-2009, 01:50 AM
Because it's not the Futurama episode.

Jersey Chick
07-02-2009, 03:11 AM
Most idiotic line of the movie:

The ship is sinking, (it might even be totally ass end up by now) and Rose and Jack are at the stern and Rose says (in all her brilliance)

"Jack! This is where we first met!"

WTF?

Yes, because that is what I'd be thinking as I'm minutes away from freezing my Main Line ass off...

But I still love the movie. I just grit my teeth at that particular moment.

katiemac
07-02-2009, 08:38 AM
Most idiotic line of the movie:

The ship is sinking, (it might even be totally ass end up by now) and Rose and Jack are at the stern and Rose says (in all her brilliance)

"Jack! This is where we first met!"

WTF?

Yes, because that is what I'd be thinking as I'm minutes away from freezing my Main Line ass off...

But I still love the movie. I just grit my teeth at that particular moment.

Kate Winslet ad-libbed that. Or at least requested the line, something -- it wasn't in the original script.

Actually I think it's kind of fitting, considering the "never let go" motif is from that original scene as well. But the actual phrasing is a bit awkward.

Chasing the Horizon
07-02-2009, 08:49 AM
Well, I saw Titanic once ten years ago and I think I slept through part of it, so let me think a minute, lol.

As I recall, nothing happened. And nothing happened. And nothing happened. The ship FINALLY sank (I cheered a little). My moronic friends at the time cried (I gagged a little). I went home and watched Starship Troopers to clear the melodramatic sap out of my head.

I distinctly remember fervently hoping the whiny rich-bitch female lead would die (I was quite disappointed) and laughing out loud at some of the more ridiculous dialogue. I was very underwhelmed by special effects--everyone had gone on and on about them and I remember thinking they weren't as good as the SE in Twister. I don't remember finding any scene particularly sexy, so that must not have been all that good either (or maybe I slept through that part).

For the record, I have no problem admitting I like popular movies. I'm a seriously hardcore Pirates of the Caribbean fan. But I'm also not about to say that a piece of poorly-written poorly-acted crap like Titanic has any merit just because a lot of other people like it. I will admit that, were it not so ridiculously popular, chances are I would've forgotten all about it by now.

dgiharris
07-02-2009, 11:23 AM
In terms of the Titanic being true or fictional.

I've always felt that historical 'treatments' such as the movie Titanic are o.k. as long as they are "Emotionally True".

Given the 1000+ passengers of all ages and various cultures, I felt that it was 'true enough' and thought that the love story and live life to the fullest motiff were very fitting.

In terms of women not liking or thinking DiCaprio is man enough. Women, like men, have various tastes.

There are some women that swoon for the fabio types, others that love effeminate types, some that love the baby face, some that love the WWE beefcakes, etc. etc. To each their own. Given that women are the reason why Titanic set those records, its safe to say that enough women found DiCaprio attractive.

In terms of people's reactions as depicted in the movie while the boat was sinking. You'd be surprised what people will say and do during high stress life-threatening situations.

Mel...

willietheshakes
07-02-2009, 11:52 AM
I wish to come out as someone who cries like a bitch every. Damn. Time she watches this fillum.

There. I said it.

(nods)

Me too.

Samantha's_Song
07-02-2009, 12:22 PM
Not only that, back in those days, girls of Rose's position wouldn't have come across very many men/boys, especially someone from a lower class and from a different culture. She would have lead a very sheltered life, not like the girls of any class now, so of course he would seem great to her, because he was different.


In terms of women not liking or thinking DiCaprio is man enough. Women, like men, have various tastes.


Mel...

maestrowork
07-02-2009, 02:46 PM
I went home and watched Starship Troopers to clear the melodramatic sap out of my head.
<snip>
For the record, I have no problem admitting I like popular movies. I'm a seriously hardcore Pirates of the Caribbean fan..

Sounds like it's just a matter of taste and you probably don't like love stories/historical -- at least if it's at the core of the story -- but scifi/fantasy. Or maybe I'm wrong, but all the counter examples you've given (Twister, Starship Trooper, etc.) are sci-fi action non-love stories. ;)

To me, the love story angle in Titanic is not the real problem by itself. After all, I've enjoyed love stories/historical (Atonement, Shakespeare in Love, The English Patient, Doctor Zhivago, etc. etc.) but I think it drags on for way too long -- it's over an hour and a half of that before the ship hit the iceberg. Plus the writing, especially the dialogue, is heavy-handed, trite and contrived. Not to mention melodramatic. That's the challenge with love stories -- how can you do it without sounding sappy and trite? There's just so many way to say, "I love you."

I mean, they could have focused on the sinking of the ship in the second half but no, they kept bringing up the melodrama. Does Billy Zane really have to shoot them right in the middle of ship sinking? Do they really have to run around the ship that much? Etc. I understand Cameron needed some drama, but by George, the ship is sinking! That's drama right there.

To me, the love story and the melodrama surrounding it are the least interesting aspect of the film, and that's its problem. When Cameron focused on the ship, the passengers, the mayhem, etc. that is when the story soared.

As a writer of love stories, I think the best way is to make the love story secondary and refrain from stating the obvious. :) In Atonement, for example, the love story is secondary, even though extremely important to give it an emotional core and final punches. Same with all the other ones I mentioned, which I enjoyed.

Of course, that is just my own taste and opinion. Obviously there are plenty of people who like their love stories front and center, filled with "Jack, Jack, I love you, I'll never let go, Jack" stuff. To each his or her own.

Polenth
07-02-2009, 04:40 PM
I saw bits of it. Nothing inspired me to see the whole thing. I couldn't sit in the room while someone else watched it. I'm just not into love stories much, unless there's some other element there... and I just wasn't seeing one from the bits I saw.

I wouldn't say I hate it though. I'm indifferent.

CaroGirl
07-02-2009, 04:41 PM
Titanic is too long, poorly written, melodramatic and Leo's portrayal is one-dimensional. However, the visuals are stunning, especially when the ship's sinking, Kate Winslett's performance is quite lovely (despite the messy dialogue), and, frankly, this story is about people who actually lived this disaster. Whenever I watch the end bit, with the people in the water freezing to death, the young women and babies, the shouts that fade to silence, I'm moved to tears simply in memory of those who lived and died in that water.

Overall, I like Titanic.

willietheshakes
07-02-2009, 04:43 PM
And what difference does it make that she got naked? I do it in movies all the time.

Links, plz.

You know, so I can give proper credit where credit is due.

Celia Cyanide
07-02-2009, 05:52 PM
Links, plz.

You know, so I can give proper credit where credit is due.

It's on my IMDB page!

Jersey Chick
07-02-2009, 07:04 PM
Well, all I know is that if I'm at the stern of a ship that's ass-end up and thinking I'm going to die, I hope my last words are something more along the lines of "Holy Crap!" than "This is where we met (insert inaudible squee here)!"

Like I said, I like the movie, that doesn't mean I can't think some of the lines, whether scripted or not, are completely asinine. :D

maestrowork
07-02-2009, 07:50 PM
Well, all I know is that if I'm at the stern of a ship that's ass-end up and thinking I'm going to die...

But that's the thing, they got to the stern because it was the safest place and there was a chance they could survive the nose dive (and they did). Jack told her to hold on, blah blah. So she had trust in him, and she knew she could count on him. That's why that line, cheesy as it may be, is logical for that moment.

Jersey Chick
07-02-2009, 08:03 PM
Not to me it isn't. It's silly.

But that's me.

jodiodi
07-02-2009, 08:31 PM
Like a lot of posters' have said previously, there are many things to like and dislike and I can't go into them all.

Just a few of my personal likes/dislikes about it:

Hated the first part up until the iceberg hit. I mean, it was beautifully filmed, beautiful sets, beautiful costumes, ... DULL, BORING STORY.

Once the ship hit the iceberg, I got interested. Still didn't care about Jack and Rose.

I actually hoped the old lady was Rose's maid or something. I wanted Rose to die.

That damned song is so annoying, especially when performed by that drama queen.

The mother and her kids, the old couple--they were the most touching parts and the only times I teared up.

Billy Zane was wasted on a pointless character.

All of these observations are, of course, IMHO. YMMV.

CaroGirl
07-02-2009, 08:38 PM
Confession: Billy Zane has scared the bejeezus out of me since Dead Calm.

maestrowork
07-02-2009, 08:45 PM
He was not half bad in The Phantom. Of course, I was watching Catherine Zeta-Jones most of the time.

Shadow_Ferret
07-02-2009, 10:55 PM
That's really stretching it, mate. A minor historical anachronism that had nothing to do with the Titanic, didn't invalidate the Titanic mythos, and didn't impact on Cameron's depiction of the Titanic tragedy.

I had to look up anachronism before I could respond. To you it's stretching it and minor. To me it's a writer not doing his research and shows sloppiness.

But I never said that was my sole reason for not liking it, it was merely another symptom of a larger problem I had with it.