Lots of Hype but little substance

Rating: 4/10 (14 August 2003)

In general I am not keen on large budget spectacular productions such as "Titanic". Whilst the large budget goes in creating expensive but not always useful (and even sometimes counterproductive) special effects, it also creates a situation where enormous public interest becomes necessary if the investors are to recover their money; so that the film concerned has to be continually promoted with a great deal of hype. Seldom does the excessive expenditure lead to a better script, better acting, better direction or better photography, and these are what govern the quality of the final product. Titanic won an incredible number of Oscars, which are supposed to be completely independent awards (11 in all I believe). At the time I cynically took the view that the need for these Oscars as a bait for attracting large audiences had led to extensive funding of media promotions designed to ensure that this particular film was in the mind of all the judges when the selections were actually being made. I also remember feeling very upset that several superb performances in lesser low budget films made during the same year appeared to be being squeezed out by all this hoop-la. Nevertheless once all these awards had been made, I had sufficient faith in the Academy Award system to assume that there must indeed be something totally exceptional about this movie, and I made a mental note that I should see it at some future time.
It was a long time after this, when I did so, and found to my amazement the film was only a somewhat indifferent fictional drama in the tearjerker category, with its appeal stiffened by some very spectacular special effects. It was also far far too lengthy to sustain the viewer's interest in its rather simple dramatic story. My faith in the Academy Award system was bruised but not totally broken as I told myself that I must be missing something if I could not fully endorse the apparent judgement of the vast mass of the public and almost all the critics. This feeling continued until only a few days ago when I chanced to browse through the user comments on this film in your data base and at last realized that my views were quite widely supported and I need not be ashamed of them. (The fact that I initially felt ashamed of my rather critical views is probably a good indication of the degree of hype which developed around this film.)

I am not attempting to deny that Titanic is certainly a better than average film and I do not want my comments to appear totally destructive. The recreation of the ship, and of its death throes, is superbly done but if one is viewing the most expensive movie ever filmed one is entitled to expect very dramatic special effects - the real question is what do they really contribute to the story, and in this case the answer is very little. Overall, the film is extremely well made, but its script is very poor, the characterisation is stereotyped and much of the acting is no more than acceptable, I can see nothing other than some effective but unimportant special effects to justify the status it has been accorded. It fails right from the start as it does not appear to know whether it is intended as a documentary record of a dreadful tragedy or a bittersweet but highly improbable romance. The disparate pull of these two themes continues throughout the film, but ultimately leaves the documentary recreation of the liner and its one tragic voyage as certainly its best feature.
Why did the scriptwriter and director (James Cameron) feel that it was necessary to incorporate a fictional romance into this film? Over fifteen hundred real people actually died, wives and children were torn from fathers they hardly knew. There was real drama in why the Carpathia did not steam to the rescue of the survivors more promptly and this has remained of ongoing interest ever since. The design of the ship, the materials used in its construction, the route followed by the voyage, and the part played by the so-called blue riband for the fastest Atlantic crossing have all been featured in dramas relating to this voyage and some of them were also mentioned in passing in this film. Surely there was enough dramatic interest in the actual story to avoid any need for the fictional additions. In practice this decision has detracted so much from the tale which was crying out to be told that for me at least the film was spoiled.
The rating you give it will depend primarily upon whether you regard the fictional romance or the factual documentary of the Titanic's only voyage as of greater importance. My rating for the romance between Rose and Jack would be no higher than 3/10 because most of the characters concerned are no more than caricatures. The documentary leaves out so much that a similar rating could seem quite generous, but the special effects recreation of the actual sinking makes me feel that a rating of 5/10 would actually be reasonable. Averaging these, and ignoring the problems associated with not knowing whether the film is a romance or a documentary, yields a final rating for the film as released of 4/10, which is probably reasonable.