The greatest film ever? I doubt that.

Rating: Null/10 (5 September 1999)

"Titanic" has made a lot of friends since it first appeared in theaters, and I can't say that it doesn't deserve them. Certainly, parts of the film are superb, moving, and really unparalleled among other films. Then, there are those other parts that aren't. What really bothers me about "Titanic" is that the weakest elements of the film seem to be those that have garnered the most praise among fans. Allow me to elaborate.
For instance, there are the main characters, provided by Leonardo di Caprio and Kate Winslet. Besides setting off considerable sparks and possessing a great amount of natural chemistry, they accomplish very little. Actually, that's not completely true for Winslet, who may very well set the record for showing the most cleavage ever in a PG-13 film. But as far as characters, they are cardboard cut-outs who, while they look very good on screen, are doing little more than taking up space.
Of course, this isn't completely their fault. Both of these young actors can indeed act, believe me, I've witnessed it for both of them. The fact is, they didn't have much to work with, and here I am, of course, referring to James Cameron's script. Now, just to set the record straight, Cameron is a very talented fellow. He knows how to make a completely convincing fake ship sink, how to stage action scenes, and how to tell a story. Quite simply, he's a good director. No, no, he's a great director. But he's a horrible writer. His dialogue positively reeks of clichés and vainly-attempted humor. And, perhaps that explains why James Horner's fantastic score has so much of the limelight. Perhaps Cameron realized that his pathetic script wasn't enough to build drama and suspense, so he relied on the music to do that.
Now, on another level, the film is a technical masterpiece. The special effects, cinematography, editing, production design, and all of the other "back-stage" elements are simply superb. While "Titanic" unarguably cost an enormous amount of money, it's easy to see why. The money is right up on the screen, in all its glory, for all to see. Yet, is it fair to say that a film is great when only half of it truly is? I don't think so. On that note, I base my overall rating, knowing that it would have been far better if only Cameron swallowed his pride, put his ego on the shelf for a moment, and hired someone else to write the screenplay. Unfortunately, he didn't, so we have to suffer for it.
*** out of ****.