Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Mon Jul 28, 2014 7:42 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 70 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC" 
Author Message
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:55 pm
Posts: 3118
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ, USA
Post April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Click here to read topic.


Sun Apr 15, 2012 9:27 am
Profile WWW
Gaffer

Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 5:11 pm
Posts: 33
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
I have to disagree with you on the 3D conversion of Titanic. It's probably the best 3D converted film I've seen, and I think it actually makes parts of the film (namely the last hour and a half) more immersive. And I did not see this movie in theaters during its long 1997/1998 run, so seeing it on the big screen was amazing in itself.

And this re-release will hang on for the next two weeks... I think it's going to cruise past $60M to $70M before it relinquishes its 3D screens to Disney's The Avengers.


Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:27 pm
Profile
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
I'm very happy to see James that you didn't try to diminish "Titanic"'s cinematic worth as many of your colleagues have done in order to become "cool" and "hip". I agree with you that the movie has its flaws, but the experience I lived 14 years ago in a dark theater was something magnificent and unique. This was no doubt our generation's "Gone With the Wind".


Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:33 pm
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
I guess my question is answered on whether or not James was going to review "Titanic" in 3D.

Anyway, as for the film itself, I still think it's a very good motion picture. For me, it's not Cameron's finest film, but I'd put it in a Top 5 list for Cameron's best films. I never saw it in theaters, but I did catch it when it first came to video. Is it flawed? Sure. I'm a little more forgiving of some flaws since it's a period piece. I mean to me some historical films have an old-fashioned way with romance, dialogue, acting, etc that can be off-putting to modern audiences. However, in the end I think it still works very well. It's still an excellent technical achievement and a real testament to Cameron's passion as a director.

I think we're all aware of it being trendy to retrospectively hate this film over the years which I think is undeserved. I mean even though it's not a perfect film, I don't think it deserves all the hatred a lot of people are giving it in retrospect. A movie that was once the highest-grossing film of all-time really can't be that bad. But I guess such large, overblown, retrospective hatred is a byproduct for having the film be one of the highest-grossing films ever with multiple Oscars.

Like I said before, despite imperfections I still think it's a very good movie and has held up pretty well since 1997.


Sun Apr 15, 2012 3:47 pm
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
I will repeat myself from the other thread.

Quote:
It's always irritating to have one's legitimate grievances marginalized as not liking something because it's cool to hate stuff. It seems especially common with Titanic, though. Why is it so hard to believe that some people just don't like this movie very much?


Quote:
a forum is a place of conversation. The only thing that poisoning the well accomplishes (e.g. with statements along the lines of "people who profess to dislike this thing are just going with the crowd") is to stifle the conversation, rather than engage it.


Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:09 pm
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
I don't care if it's a period piece or not, at the very least I should care about the central characters, but I didn't find the romance to be the least bit interesting or compelling, and I couldn't have cared less about the outcome. I don't hate it because it's the "trendy" thing to do, I hate it because it's extremely boring, uninvolving and WAAAYYYYYY TOO long for it's own good, i'd seriously consider sitting through any of the Twilight films before going anywhere near Titanic again, at least they don't drag on for three hours.


Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:38 pm
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Yeah, personally I wouldn't have given the Best Picture Oscar to this film (hands down, my choice would have been L.A. Confidential or, failing that, The Sweet Hereafter) but I agree that it's still an excellent piece of cinema. It's well-acted, well-directed and as with all of Cameron's films, it's full of first-rate visual and special effects that serve to enhance, rather than overtake, the story and the characters in it. For me, Titanic's Achilles Heel has always been its screenplay - it's not horrible but rather unremarkable. It does the job of getting us to like the characters and root for them, but it doesn't exactly have the most memorable dialogue and the proceedings are a little overblown, which is par for the course with this sort of film as James pointed out in his blog. Personally, I could never, in good conscience, justify a **** rating for this film but a very strong ***1/2 isn't out of the question (and after sitting through the debacle that was Pearl Harbor, a very laughable and transparent attempt to capitalize on the success of Titanic, where the dialogue was even more insipid, I am inclined to look more favorable on the 1997 film). I dunno if I'm gonna be seeing this in 3D but I will agree that even though I don't consider this to be the very best of its 1997 siblings, it's still a grandiose, epic melodrama, the likes of which only Hollywood could do. I will say this though, I have always hated, and will continue to hate, that wretched Celine Dion song, but I have never liked Celine Dion so there you go.


Last edited by oafolay on Mon Apr 16, 2012 1:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.



Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:52 pm
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
You mean the same way it's cool to hate Lucas? ;)

I did notice that despite JB claiming that he'd not change his 4 star review, his remarks that followed certainly didn't sound like he held it as much more than a 3 at best...

Cameron is to 3D what Spielberg was to Blu Ray. However whereas one was simply a format that enabled people to view a High Def movie, the other is a glorified lens flare filter effect. Obviously Cameron has seen that people don't give a shit about 3D but maybe he feels his reputation would be hurt to admit he made a mistake. I hope the dead horse he continues to flog will be enough to feed his ego once 3D takes it's bow and leaves.


Sun Apr 15, 2012 7:56 pm
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
I saw this on opening day. Seems like a long time ago now. Cinema was maybe 25% full, seriously. Funny to think the same cinema would be packed day in day out just a few days later. Anyway, I honestly don't get the fascination and box office appeal of Titanic. It's actually a pretty bad film (the dialogue especially is atrocious imo and the acting often hammy), and of course far too long. Very much spectacle over substance, and even the spectacle wasn't that great. And finally, you knew with certainty how it was going to end, i.e. the whole movie is really about how two people you don't really care about in a shipwreck you know is going to happen. This was a 2.5 or at best 3 star movie for me, and one of the 10% of James' reviews I just can't agree with.


Sun Apr 15, 2012 9:51 pm
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 736
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Let me start that I agree with JB's opinion in most parts, except in the bit where he argues that it is not worthy to see it again in 3D. I did not find the 3D conversion gimmicky at all .In the sinking , the 3D enhanced the visual experience with the depth dimension, in the romance bit at least this conversion did not dim the colour. I did not notice the awkward scenes due the conversion as mentioned by James (Maybe I need to watch it again with high attention to this detail) . Now, for people who like to watch 3D films then I highly recommend it but do not expect to be blown away as in Avatar (Particularly when you saw it the first time)

As of point of information, only in USA, Titanic 3d has made $44.4M (it cost $18M to convert) so far
http://www.imdb.com/chart/

Here in Hobart is playing only in 3d in one cinema with one session (8:30pm) a day for a normal room and two sessions a day for the Gold Class and all have been full every time that I have checked on the net (Some of the Gold Class sessions booked with days in advance) since last week. The Gold Class session cost $40 a ticket . So I would expect a high taking internationally for this film too. In brief, the film will make money, this time around too. Would it pass the $2B worldwide if you add the 1.8B already taken in 1997? well that remains to be seen? and that's the target that Cameron is aiming for, to have the only two films in the $2B club: "Mine and mine" according his own words HaHa
Cheers

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)


Sun Apr 15, 2012 11:00 pm
Profile WWW
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 736
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
unwindfilms wrote:
Let me start that I agree with JB's opinion in most parts, except in the bit where he argues that it is not worthy to see it again in 3D. I did not find the 3D conversion gimmicky at all .In the sinking , the 3D enhanced the visual experience with the depth dimension, in the romance bit at least this conversion did not dim the colour. I did not notice the awkward scenes due the conversion as mentioned by James (Maybe I need to watch it again with high attention to this detail) . Now, for people who like to watch 3D films then I highly recommend it but do not expect to be blown away as in Avatar (Particularly when you saw it the first time)

As of point of information, only in USA, Titanic 3d has made $44.4M (it cost $18M to convert) so far, according:
http://www.imdb.com/chart/

Here in Hobart is playing only in 3d in one cinema with one session (8:30pm) a day for a normal room and two sessions a day for the Gold Class and all have been full every time that I have checked on the net (Some of the Gold Class sessions booked with days in advance) since last week. The Gold Class session cost $40 a ticket . So I would expect a high taking internationally for this film too. In brief, the film will make money, this time around too. Would it pass the $2B worldwide if you add the 1.8B already taken in 1997? well that remains to be seen? and that's the target that Cameron is aiming for, to have the only two films in the $2B club: "Mine and mine" according his own words HaHa
Cheers


Actually just passed the $2b with $88.2M collected internationally (outside the US)
http://www.digitalspy.com.au/movies/news/a376572/titanic-3d-breaks-box-office-records.html
So Cameron has the only two movies in the 2B club : "Mine and Mine" lol (Mission Accomplished ;))

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)


Last edited by unwindfilms on Mon Apr 16, 2012 4:51 am, edited 1 time in total.



Mon Apr 16, 2012 2:05 am
Profile WWW
Producer

Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:04 am
Posts: 2108
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
I actually remember finding it hard for my family to watch Titanic because it almost always sold out. For days at a time even. It took us a few days till we were finally able to see it!

I love Titanic but it's actually only #4 or 5 on my top 10 list of 1997. And Aliens and Terminator 2 will forever be my favorite James Cameron flicks.

And for those who think this movie's script isn't good, it's a masterpiece compared to not only Pearl Harbor (which somebody already mentioned) but also Avatar as well. The characters in Titanic are much better and more compelling in Titanic as well. The central romance is WAAAAAAAAAAAY better in Titanic than in Avatar.

Looking forward to seeing Titanic on the big screen again. Cautiously optomistic about the 3D as well since James Cameron is, you know, the king of the world when it comes to 3D! :D


Mon Apr 16, 2012 3:55 am
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 736
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
ilovemovies wrote:

Looking forward to seeing Titanic on the big screen again. Cautiously optomistic about the 3D as well since James Cameron is, you know, the king of the world when it comes to 3D! :D


I will buy the 3d Blu ray when it comes out ;-)

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)


Mon Apr 16, 2012 4:50 am
Profile WWW
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Ken wrote:
I will repeat myself from the other thread.

Quote:
It's always irritating to have one's legitimate grievances marginalized as not liking something because it's cool to hate stuff. It seems especially common with Titanic, though. Why is it so hard to believe that some people just don't like this movie very much?


Quote:
a forum is a place of conversation. The only thing that poisoning the well accomplishes (e.g. with statements along the lines of "people who profess to dislike this thing are just going with the crowd") is to stifle the conversation, rather than engage it.


I'm quoting Ken because I can't think of a way to say it any better :)


Mon Apr 16, 2012 6:53 am
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 736
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
unwindfilms wrote:
unwindfilms wrote:
Let me start that I agree with JB's opinion in most parts, except in the bit where he argues that it is not worthy to see it again in 3D. I did not find the 3D conversion gimmicky at all .In the sinking , the 3D enhanced the visual experience with the depth dimension, in the romance bit at least this conversion did not dim the colour. I did not notice the awkward scenes due the conversion as mentioned by James (Maybe I need to watch it again with high attention to this detail) . Now, for people who like to watch 3D films then I highly recommend it but do not expect to be blown away as in Avatar (Particularly when you saw it the first time)

As of point of information, only in USA, Titanic 3d has made $44.4M (it cost $18M to convert) so far, according:
http://www.imdb.com/chart/

Here in Hobart is playing only in 3d in one cinema with one session (8:30pm) a day for a normal room and two sessions a day for the Gold Class and all have been full every time that I have checked on the net (Some of the Gold Class sessions booked with days in advance) since last week. The Gold Class session cost $40 a ticket . So I would expect a high taking internationally for this film too. In brief, the film will make money, this time around too. Would it pass the $2B worldwide if you add the 1.8B already taken in 1997? well that remains to be seen? and that's the target that Cameron is aiming for, to have the only two films in the $2B club: "Mine and mine" according his own words HaHa
Cheers


Actually just passed the $2b with $88.2M collected internationally (Just this weekend outside the US)
http://www.digitalspy.com.au/movies/news/a376572/titanic-3d-breaks-box-office-records.html
So Cameron has the only two movies in the 2B club : "Mine and Mine" lol (Mission Accomplished ;))


Oops! I was trying to edit the previous post (adding the text just this weekend and a new one got created unintentionally. I had to leave it as I do not how to delete it unfortunately. No intention of spamming. Feel free to either indicate me how to delete this or a forum admin actually do it

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)


Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:59 am
Profile WWW
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Film critic James Kendrick recently released his review of "Titanic" 3D. He praises the film still after all these years and made some interesting analysis on the Cal Hockley character, the romance and social class conflict, purity and romanticism, etc.

http://www.qnetwork.com/index.php?page=review&id=2752


Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:51 pm
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
The main problem I have with this movie is that people always make excuses for it.

I'm not ripping into James or anyone here specifically, because I love older movies that have a whole different style of acting to them. This movie just has wooden characters and some of the worst dialogue ever.

Yes the ship looks great, and the costumes work well, and it's directed/shot very well. But if the acting is terrible and I can't stop knowing i'm watching a movie with acting that to me is sub-par...then the movie fails. I've seen plenty of movies with worse directing and worse sets but with stellar writing/acting that I can dive right into and submerge myself, but when almost half the lines delivered jar me back into realizing i'm watching a movie, that to me completely ruins the experience.

So yes, I don't like Titanic, and I choose not to like it because to me as a whole package it doesn't succeed. Not because other people don't like it. Or because it's trendy to not like it...and converting it to 3D to show again to me is just a money grab.


Mon Apr 16, 2012 1:44 pm
Second Unit Director

Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 4:52 pm
Posts: 271
Location: North Carolina
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Count me among those who enjoyed the original a lot. I won't argue with those of you who have problems with it, but for me, the whole package just simply worked. For every scenery-chewing scene with Snidely Whiplash -- er, I mean, Billy Zane -- we see some great scenes with Gloria Stuart, whose character and casting were inspired.

However, I don't remember a single movie that suffered as badly as Titanic when it moved from the big screen to TV. I could not believe how much worse it was when I first saw it on TV. And the special effects aged badly: CG effects that were state-of-the-art in 1996 seemed fake only a few years later.

I wouldn't mind seeing it on the big screen again, but I won't watch it in 3D.


Mon Apr 16, 2012 2:56 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 736
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
G'Day,

I like Titanic not because the majority of people worldwide ($2B plus in the box office, refer to my previous posts here) or the majority of known film critics liked it (136 out of a total of 156: 87 % in Rotten Tomatoes )

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/titanic/ or because won 11 Oscars (still record)

or even because the owner of this forum liked very much (4 stars) too and I won't repeat most of James's arguments which I agree totally about why he liked that much but summarise that I found it epic ( 3 hours plus of sheer entertainment)

I have not watched it as many times as some other did thou. I watched it once in 1997 in the cinema and wanted to watch it again but the long queues put me off lol. I bought the dvd and watched it on a relatively small TV (on today's standards) and the experience was not the same. I watched again in the big screen in 3D and made me want to watch again lol but here the Cinema have been full at least when I have checked. Now I have a big 3D plasma TV and a decent sound entertaining unit at home, so I can hardly wait to get the 3d blu ray to enjoy it at home with family and/or friends again HaHa

From down under
Carlos

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)


Last edited by unwindfilms on Tue Apr 17, 2012 3:27 am, edited 1 time in total.



Mon Apr 16, 2012 5:38 pm
Profile WWW
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
I still can't watch a bunch of people running around in 30 degree water for 2 hours. It's not suspension of disbelief. Its utter nonsense. Cameron is so worried about the angle of the constellation in the sky when someone looks over their shoulder, but mucking about in colder than freezing water for ages is acceptable?

The acting is so mostly atrocious. Billy Zane should be ashamed. I adore Kathy Bates and its difficult to watch her in this mess. Leo is still the annoying teen idol at this point. He had yet to become the excellent actor he is now. Winslet? Whatever... she's always runs hot or cold.

Sorry, I don't get it and I don't want to anymore. Old Hollywood is Auntie Mame to me, not Gone with the Wind, another god-awful POS.


Mon Apr 16, 2012 10:44 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 70 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr