"Inspired" by historical events but not constrained

Rating: 9/10 (30 June 2001)

This blockbuster is a milestone in film making and a career peak for Director/Producer James Cameron. When this film bowled over the competition (except in acting and writing categories) at the Academy Awards, it could be the occasion of a gleeful self-coronation (Mr. Cameron as "King of the World"). It had set box office records and was probably also record-breaking for multiple ticket purchases by teen fans of such a long epic. Like its "older sister" GONE WITH THE WIND, this Best Picture Oscar-winner exists in a self-enclosed quasi-historical environment where the beautiful survive and thrive despite morally despicable transgressions. It claims to be "inspired" by actual events around the sinking and recent re-discovery at ocean's bottom. Those who love TITANIC feel that the mismatched couple outdo "Romeo & Juliet" as a most appealing "eternal" couple. Teen fans of Leonardo DiCaprio would gladly throw caution to the wind as did the lead actress who poses nude quite immodestly. As an unimpressed but still positive-minded fan of this movie overall, however, I have loads of questions to ask those who defend this as "one of the all-time best movies" (A.F.I. put it in the category of MOST THRILLING in its 2001 list recently). For example, shouldn't a more specific disclaimer be attached to the closing credit acknowledgments about the ship's crew and captain who are "transformed" unnecessarily and untruthfully into brutish villains? Since real names of actual dead are attached to some "inspired" crew and passengers, attentive audience members assume that those historical people who deserve blame (like Bruce Ismay) are those who did kill and threaten others and otherwise act like the most wicked people ever. Too many names can be exonerated and should be since this script took liberties with depicting the desperate, final actions of the crew. As a second example, why doesn't Molly Brown get her lifeboat over to help those floating in life-jackets (in regular history, this IS (!) part of her claim to fame)? Furthermore, what happened to Fabrizio in the film's middle? How is it that the 100+ year-old is unsupervised at film's end? Does the special effects wizardry paper over and rationalize the simplistic "chase" elements of the film's quite long middle? I felt a bit confused whether the drowned victims were mostly "caged in" by the class-bigots among the fictional crew "stewards" or if they were just too slow in figuring out a strategy like the romantic couple had as the Titanic goes down for the third time. Any help on these issues, Mr. Cameron and defenders of his script? I didn't expect to know if time "stood still" when the ship takes on water but the film takes the "worst spin" on how the lifeboats get loaded and away in time to save only 1/3 of those aboard. Were these numbers strictly correct? The facts could have been a little better adhered to, in my opinion. Again, this is an amazing entertainment product and a Hollywood legend's masterpiece.