how to make Titanic perfect

Rating: Null/10 (27 November 1998)

This is the second time I am writing about this movie, so obviously I liked it very much, despite its many flaws. Why else would I waste my time writing about it? My earlier entry pointed out what I thought was great about Titanic, as well as what was wrong with it. I have given it more thought, and will now suggest ways I believe it could have been the perfect movie, instead of just a very good one. 1. Keep the love triangle in, but reduce the three leads' screen time (they were not *that* interesting). Instead, develop some of the other characters, especially Molly Brown (Kathy Bates), Thomas Andrews (Victor Garber) and perhaps Bruce Ismay and Tommy Ryan (Jack's Irish friend who gets shot) as well. Movie would wind up with several interesting intertwined stories (including a couple of historic ones) and more on those characters who really *were* interesting. 2. The subplot involving the diamond was silly and unecessary--you could get the old Rose in without that unbelievable and contrived situation. She could just be there because she's the oldest surviving passenger, for instance. It would still work. The movie would even work without the "bookends" at all, and be a lot shorter, although I understand it's a convenient way to get the footage of the real wreck in the movie, which is extremely interesting and well done. 3. The Jack and Rose characters should be played by different actors. Winslet, though a good actress, is just a little unrefined and unbelievable as a first-class passenger. Claire Danes or Gwyneth Paltrow would have been better (though I understand Danes was actually considered but declined the role). Dicaprio is too young and frail looking. Since the role is not a difficult one, *any* decent actor could have played Jack. But he should at least have a little meat on his bones! 4. Make the Jack character a bit more interesting a/o complicated. He was too "perfect" and therefore not very compelling. Give him a fault or two. Rose had plenty to spare! 5. Put some of the important events leading to the sinking back into the script, i.e., the Californian ignoring pleas for help, the wireless operator's role in the tragedy. Even if the movie were a *little* longer it would have made a big difference without being *too* long. (I understand that the latter was actually included in the original script but was left on the cutting room floor...why?) 6. Give the wonderful Victor Garber (Thomas Andrews) a LOT more to do. He was by far the most interesting character in the movie, seemed very deep and complex, and left me begging for more. Of all the actors, I think he was the best in the movie. 7. Don't portray *all* the first-class passengers as third-class people. This is just not the way it really happened. First of all, on the real ship, the third-class passengers were *not* locked behind--it simply took them longer to get to where the life-boats were. Also, many first-class passengers performed heroic deeds, i.e., Isador Straus and his wife (seen briefly during the band sequence as they lay on their first-class bed waiting to drown) refused to be saved, giving up their lifejackets and insisting on drowning together... People are people, and in such a tragic situation, you would see the entire range of heroism vs. cowardice in *all* the passengers, whether first, second, or third class. 8. On James Cameron's Titanic, the second class has mysteriously disappeared. Where were they? What were *their* circumstances like? (I presume they would be the middle class, as most of *us* are!) All in all, a very good movie, and perhaps I am nitpicking. But I liked it so much and have seen it so many times, I just cannot resist putting in my 2 cents.