Wretched "love" story inflicts 300 foot gash

Rating: 5/10 (19 March 2004)

I really did not want to see another version of the "Titanic" story on film, because there already were two superb versions, both made in the fifties. I went anyway, as this one was hard to avoid, you might say. I found the story on the ship quite annoying, tailored with shallowness, and aimed smack-dab at the Blockbuster potential: Teenagers.
I was disappointed by the depiction of a "romance" that would have NEVER happened in 1912. A young woman masquerading as a socialite? Becoming interested in (and getting naked for) a steerage passenger? Sleeping with him on the ship? Flipping the bird and spitting? Really? in 1912 ??? Wow, James, you have quite an imagination.
Technically, the film is hard to fault, but it just seems to lack in suspense. There are some fake looking computer generated moments. The most serious flaw - how anyone could spend 3 minutes (never mind 30 minutes in the film) - in freezing seawater in the bowels of the ship, and somehow make it all the way to the stern to jump off? COME ON!
I would encourage those who share my views to check out these two classics instead:
A Night to Remember (1958) A definitive British minute-by-minute docudrama that has rightly stood the test of time.
Titanic (1953) A great Hollywood version (the OLD Hollywood) which I could not even find a mention in these reviews. It did a superb job of depicting a troubled and ultimately doomed romance on the great ship. I can actually say this version "puts you on the ship" more than the 1997 version. It featured a great story, believable characters (unlike this version) played to perfection by some of Hollywood's best. Not to mention an unforgettably sad Father-Son moment at the end.
It featured special effects way ahead of their time, which still look pretty impressive today. But it is literally forgotten, save for a 'Studio Classics' DVD release.
It certainly makes me wonder why Cameron needed to spend a gazillion dollars on SFX, put in such a LAME unbelievable story, and get more awards than the 1953 version. Those who get anal about some of the technical details on the earlier films (such as for instance the ship not breaking in half) seem to miss the point. This Titanic must have caught the Academy sleeping.