Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 7:47 pm




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

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:17 am
Posts: 36
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
I wish I could keep track of how much flack I've taken for being an open fan of this movie. I was bowled over when I saw it in the theater and have owned several versions on DVD (soon to be Blu-Ray). I agree with many of the criticisms: the wooden dialog, the sketchy acting, the modern anachronisms that occasionally show up, etc... In addition, many of the nightime sky composites look pretty bad in this day and some of the CGI is damn ugly. But the live action visuals are still very impressive, and even in the era of "Transformers" the sound mix is still exceptional. I can't help it, I really like most of this movie aside from the modern day segments. Maybe it's the hopeless romantic in me.........

Anyways. Cameron is getting dangerously close to becoming another casualty of the "technology over any other concern" list. 3D is not the greatest thing in movie history (in fact, I'm officially sick of it), and shoehorning a movie like Titanic into it was a mistake, in my opinion. I could see him making the argument for converting Aliens (I think that actually might be worth seeing), but that's pretty much it.

Next thing you know Ridley Scott will convert Blade Runner.........

_________________
--If I have to hear "Ya Mo B There" one more time, I'm going to ya mo burn this place to the ground.--


Tue Apr 17, 2012 12:50 am
Profile
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 796
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Titanic 3d Opened big in China ($58M last weekend) setting records all time: http://www.china.org.cn/arts/2012-04/16/content_25157172.htm

despise some Chinese viewers complaining that they could not see Naked Kate in 3D Hilarious! One particularly fan was quoted:

Quote:
“I waited 15 years to see 3-D boobs, not 3-D iceberg.”
HaHa

from http://popwatch.ew.com/2012/04/12/titanic-3d-china-censors-nude-scenes/

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


Tue Apr 17, 2012 1:15 am
Profile WWW
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 796
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
MinnJD wrote:
Next thing you know Ridley Scott will convert Blade Runner.........

Blade Runner is my top sci fi film of all time. I even own the blu ray with the director's cut, I think that the FX visuals still stand tall nowadays but I do not know if Ridley would make a good 3d conversion as it is not clear to me if he even know how to shoot a film in 3d or how much he likes this technology. At this point I 'd only trust Cameron or Scorsese for a good 3D conversion

Quote:
"2D to 3D conversion isn’t a technical process, it’s a creative process that uses technology" - Jon Landau

from:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/titanic-3d-nab-producer-jon-landau-james-cameron-312631

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


Tue Apr 17, 2012 1:21 am
Profile WWW
Gaffer

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:17 am
Posts: 36
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Prometheus is being released in 3D and supposedly Ridley likes it quite a bit.

Being that the movie is likely to be very dark it remains to be seen if it makes any difference.

_________________
--If I have to hear "Ya Mo B There" one more time, I'm going to ya mo burn this place to the ground.--


Tue Apr 17, 2012 7:07 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1494
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
For Titanic buffs - James' review of 'A Night to Remember' is available on the old site.


Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:24 pm
Profile
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 796
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
MinnJD wrote:
Prometheus is being released in 3D and supposedly Ridley likes it quite a bit.

Being that the movie is likely to be very dark it remains to be seen if it makes any difference.


Thanks for bringing this up, I Googled up and Ridley shot it in RED 3d but as you pointed out the quality remains to be seen. I will definitely watch this movie when it comes out. Others in 3d that I am interested to see this year is the reboot of Spiderman. Unfortunately, Avengers is post - converted to 3D and SkyFall which originally 3D was mentioned , I just Googled up and turned out to be shot old fashion and in post-conversion to iMax. I will still see The Avengers and SkyFall (not decided yet if in 3D and/or iMax)

Post - conversion of new movies normally sucks like John Carter and at best are ordinary like Thor, Captain America. The reason is the Movie director did not like to shoot it in 3D (because either does not know or just do not like the technology) but the studios push it to get the sub charge lol. Post - conversion to 3D should be left only for old movies that fit certain criteria of suitability and the original director is available and knowledgeable in 3D to supervise the conversion
Cheers

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


Last edited by unwindfilms on Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Tue Apr 17, 2012 8:25 pm
Profile WWW
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Quote:
The experience of watching the movie in an unbroken stretch (no pauses for bathroom or snack breaks) on a big screen is completely different than seeing it at home, no matter how good your home theater may be. Titanic is a grand soap opera. Reducing it to TV size, even big TV size, siphons off some of the grandeur but leaves the suds.


Indeed, the experience of watching “grand soap opera” for over three hours without opportunity for refreshments or bathroom breaks seems daunting to me.

Quote:
(Titanic was the first movie to tap both the previously-known teen boy revenue stream and the previously-unrecognized teen girl equivalent.)


I concede that I my opinion is based on anecdotal evidence alone, but I was in my mid-twenties in 1997 and didn't know a single male of my agegroup or younger who had any interest in 'Titanic'. Those who had seen it were usually dragged in by their girlfriends and were not impressed. They did like the special effects though. I believe 'Titanic's success is based on multiple viewings by girls or women of any age rather than teen boys.

Quote:
Titanic remains a great accomplishment and a wonderful entertainment. Not for a moment have I regretted or re-considered my original four-star rating. Yes, the story is old-fashioned and at times cheesy. The romance is overblown, the villains are played too broadly, and some of the dialogue is laughable. But it's much in keeping with the great melodramas of Hollywood's Golden Age.


‘Titanic’ is also much in keeping with 1970ies Irwin Allen disaster movies. They weren’t any good. Neither were most melodramas of Hollywood’s Golden Age, particularly the cheesy ones with overblown romances, broadly played villains and laughable dialogue. At least those didn’t last for three hours and didn’t feature Celine Dion ululating us into a tinnitus. They usually had better acting, too, although they were probably as factually inaccurate as ‘Titanic’. (I believe that you die from hypothermia after 5 to 10 minutes in water with a temperature of around 0° C and, consequently, do not have enough time to fetch an axe to free your handcuffed beau. I'm surprised that didn't bother James Berardinelli, who has issues with the physical impossibility of metaphorical planets in "Melancholia".)

Of course, I do not begrudge anybody liking ‘Titanic’ or even considering it a great film. It is a notable movie in film history because of its success alone. That being said, it doesn’t mean that I have to like it or that my dislike of ‘Titanic’ is a fashionable counter reaction to its success. Actually, with a view to all the obvious flaws of the movie, which James Berardinelli has mentioned as well, I think that you need to really, really like the type of movie, which used to be referred to as ‘women’s pictures’ or ‘weepies’, in order to find ‘Titanic’ any good.


Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:48 am
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:55 pm
Posts: 3172
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ, USA
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Unke wrote:
Quote:
(Titanic was the first movie to tap both the previously-known teen boy revenue stream and the previously-unrecognized teen girl equivalent.)


I concede that I my opinion is based on anecdotal evidence alone, but I was in my mid-twenties in 1997 and didn't know a single male of my agegroup or younger who had any interest in 'Titanic'. Those who had seen it were usually dragged in by their girlfriends and were not impressed. They did like the special effects though. I believe 'Titanic's success is based on multiple viewings by girls or women of any age rather than teen boys.


I knew a fair number of single guys who attended TITANIC alone and enjoyed the experience.

It's fairly well understood that the average teen-boy or teen-girl oriented movie taps out domestically around $300M to $400M. Anything topping that has broken beyond the genre. For something to reach $600M, it really has to have knocked down walls. TITANIC strongly attracted both teenage girls and boys and, as a bonus, drew in a sizeable adult crowd.


Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:49 am
Profile WWW
Director

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1494
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Quote:
I concede that I my opinion is based on anecdotal evidence alone, but I was in my mid-twenties in 1997 and didn't know a single male of my agegroup or younger who had any interest in 'Titanic'


no offense, but were you or any of your friends particularly into film in '97? I was in film school in '97 & EVERYONE in my program(professors too) had a strong interest in seeing Titanic, many months before its release, regardless of gender. The name 'James Cameron' sort of made it a must see among film fans(at least in my world) circa 1997 along with anything by Spielberg, Scorsese, Tarantino(the day Jackie Brown opened was like xmas to me...ditto Titanic. And Casino. etc.)

also, I assume you were of age to recall the tremendous worldwide media attention when the wreckage was discovered in '85? It was certainly an event that captured my interest as a child. A big budget movie about it (not counting 'Raise the Titanic' haha) was a no brainer. BTW, did you ever see the German propaganda 'Titanic?'

And I know many, many of the older crowd(people who go to the movies like once a decade - like some of my relatives) who went to see Titanic, whether you think its crap or not, I think it tapped into a hell of a lot more than the teen girl crowd(I assume GWTW had a lot of dudes in the audience in '39 as well), it was the biggest all ages phenomenon since ET(another movie that had/has a big backlash among the internet crowd) And the same thing happened with Avatar, Cameron is clearly onto something, I can't believe there are some posters here who think he's just a hack or that lump Titanic with Pearl Harbor or something. There are box office hits(of which there are many every year) & then there are phenomenons(and we're talking worldwide ones, not just the US, like say Dark Knight) Whether you like his movies or not(& let's not forget that Titanic & Avatar got mostly raves from critics, he's hardly Michael Bay like) I don't see how anyone with an interest in film cannot recognize the 'gift' he apparently has for knowing what people want.

One other thing that Titanic showed was just how much BO potential the Xmas season had. Part of the reason Titanic & Avatar had such good 'legs' was because Jan/Feb generally have such lackluster releases. Cameron missing his July '97 release date was a blessing in disguise imo.


Wed Apr 18, 2012 2:08 pm
Profile
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Cameron did once make good movies, but 'Titanic' and 'Avatar' were not given the chance to work on their own merits (maybe 'Titanic' did so more than 'Avatar'). Viewed out of context, 'Titanic' is just an average love story that takes a long time to go anywhere. The appeal of the movie is that it's set against such a huge historical event, which was obviously used as the main selling point. With 'Avatar', all he had to do was engineer the rumour about 3D and let the media do the rest.

Considering he's obviously passionate about social injustice (see 'Avatar'), Cameron seemed to forget or just plain ignored the untapped potential 'Titanic' had to explore this theme further. This leads me to believe that what he did with 'Avatar' was exploitation at it's worst. Combine this with his self congratulatory tactics regarding 3D and yes, you're entirely right; Cameron knows what people want... and what they will part with money for.


Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:28 pm
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 796
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Dragonbeard wrote:
Cameron did once make good movies, but 'Titanic' and 'Avatar' were not given the chance to work on their own merits (maybe 'Titanic' did so more than 'Avatar'). Viewed out of context, 'Titanic' is just an average love story that takes a long time to go anywhere. The appeal of the movie is that it's set against such a huge historical event, which was obviously used as the main selling point. With 'Avatar', all he had to do was engineer the rumour about 3D and let the media do the rest.

Considering he's obviously passionate about social injustice (see 'Avatar'), Cameron seemed to forget or just plain ignored the untapped potential 'Titanic' had to explore this theme further. This leads me to believe that what he did with 'Avatar' was exploitation at it's worst. Combine this with his self congratulatory tactics regarding 3D and yes, you're entirely right; Cameron knows what people want... and what they will part with money for.


Cameron still makes good movies in most people opinion (including critics) :

Titanic
IMDB : 7.5/10 (363263 votes)
Rotten Tomatoes : 87 % (158 reviews)
Box Office : Over $2B

Avatar
IMDB: 8.0/10 (432487 votes)
Rotten Tomatoes : 83 % (283 reviews)
Box Office: $2.8B

IMHO, I found these two movies not only very entertaining but also with high quality film making techniques. I have a profound respect for Cameron as a Director who likes to try new things and get the results that he is aiming for , no matter how long it takes , without being manipulated by the studios because the studios just respect him.

Finally, if you want to make a movie with the main or only porpoise of pushing a political agenda, then better make a documentary so when people goes to see then they will get highly analytical about that particular topic. I personally go to the movies mainly to be entertained not lectured and If I get curious by a particular topic that I see in a movie then I research it in a serious ways by using more reliable sources

Cheers

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


Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:22 pm
Profile WWW
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
I don’t think you need to remind people that Avatar and Titanic are incredibly profitable and critically acclaimed. I mean, I guess it’s nice that a lot of people enjoy those movies, but that doesn’t really change the way I feel about them.


Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:48 pm
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
There are some great movies whose primary purpose is political/social. I don't see why fiction--often our lens for looking at our own problems--shouldn't be used for exploring that territory. It just requires honesty and a willingness to explore material into possibly uncomfortable directions, which is probably why it's not too common.


Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:02 am
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Unke wrote:
‘Titanic’ is also much in keeping with 1970ies Irwin Allen disaster movies. They weren’t any good. Neither were most melodramas of Hollywood’s Golden Age, particularly the cheesy ones with overblown romances, broadly played villains and laughable dialogue. At least those didn’t last for three hours and didn’t feature Celine Dion ululating us into a tinnitus. They usually had better acting, too, although they were probably as factually inaccurate as ‘Titanic’. (I believe that you die from hypothermia after 5 to 10 minutes in water with a temperature of around 0° C and, consequently, do not have enough time to fetch an axe to free your handcuffed beau. I'm surprised that didn't bother James Berardinelli, who has issues with the physical impossibility of metaphorical planets in "Melancholia".)

Of course, I do not begrudge anybody liking ‘Titanic’ or even considering it a great film. It is a notable movie in film history because of its success alone. That being said, it doesn’t mean that I have to like it or that my dislike of ‘Titanic’ is a fashionable counter reaction to its success. Actually, with a view to all the obvious flaws of the movie, which James Berardinelli has mentioned as well, I think that you need to really, really like the type of movie, which used to be referred to as ‘women’s pictures’ or ‘weepies’, in order to find ‘Titanic’ any good.


Pardon my French but this is bullshit. Comparing Titanic to an Irwin Allen movie makes as much sense as comparing Lord of the Rings to the Beastmaster and Willow.

And Celine Dion doesn't open her mouth till the end credits, so saying that her singing diminished your experience of the movie is at least disingenuous.


Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:24 am
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
James Berardinelli wrote:
It's fairly well understood that the average teen-boy or teen-girl oriented movie taps out domestically around $300M to $400M. Anything topping that has broken beyond the genre. For something to reach $600M, it really has to have knocked down walls. TITANIC strongly attracted both teenage girls and boys and, as a bonus, drew in a sizeable adult crowd.


I’m still not convinced that ‘Titanic’ is a teen-boy oriented movie. Actually, I don’t think that it is a teen-oriented movie at all. Of course, Leonardo DiCaprio was a teen heartthrob, but that would only affect its marketability towards teenage girls and, to a lesser extent, adult women. I doubt that Kate Winslet had a similar appeal to teenage boys.

I think you hit the nail on the head when you refer to the sizeable adult audience for ‘Titanic’. I believe that ‘Titanic’ was able to attract a lot of people who would normally not go to the cinema not least because of its classical, old-fashioned style and certainly because of its topic, which was prominent in the media in the mid 90ies due to the Titanic exhibition.

I maintain that multiple viewings, presumably by girls and women, were the main reason for ‘Titanic’s phenomenal success. This is anecdotal again, but I have met a number of girls who have seen the movie between five and twelve times in the cinema. I’ve not met any male person, who did so. Also, other movies, which are targeted primarily at women, were stupendously successful as well, such as Love Story, Dirty Dancing, Pretty Woman or Mamma Mia!. I doubt that these movies significantly crossed over into other demographics.

Of course, that doesn’t mean that no teenage boy or adult man went to see ‘Titanic’. Titanic made for a perfect date movie and will have drawn in a sizeable crowd of teenage (and other) males because of that alone. And it was the must-see event movie of the year as well.


Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:59 am
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
calvero wrote:
Quote:
I concede that I my opinion is based on anecdotal evidence alone, but I was in my mid-twenties in 1997 and didn't know a single male of my agegroup or younger who had any interest in 'Titanic'


no offense, but were you or any of your friends particularly into film in '97? I was in film school in '97 & EVERYONE in my program(professors too) had a strong interest in seeing Titanic, many months before its release, regardless of gender. The name 'James Cameron' sort of made it a must see among film fans(at least in my world) circa 1997 along with anything by Spielberg, Scorsese, Tarantino(the day Jackie Brown opened was like xmas to me...ditto Titanic. And Casino. etc.)


As stated my impression is based on purely anecdotal evidence - just as yours, if I may say so. Also, I am not convinced that students and professors of film schools constitute a representative sample of the population, particularly when it comes to interest in specific films. I would fully expect someone with an enhanced interest in movies - such as a student of film - to get excited about the new Lars von Trier or Michael Haneke movie, but I doubt that these names alone will attract big crowds of “regular” cinemagoers.

calvero wrote:
also, I assume you were of age to recall the tremendous worldwide media attention when the wreckage was discovered in '85? It was certainly an event that captured my interest as a child. A big budget movie about it (not counting 'Raise the Titanic' haha) was a no brainer. BTW, did you ever see the German propaganda 'Titanic?'

And I know many, many of the older crowd(people who go to the movies like once a decade - like some of my relatives) who went to see Titanic, whether you think its crap or not, I think it tapped into a hell of a lot more than the teen girl crowd(I assume GWTW had a lot of dudes in the audience in '39 as well), it was the biggest all ages phenomenon since ET(another movie that had/has a big backlash among the internet crowd) And the same thing happened with Avatar, Cameron is clearly onto something, I can't believe there are some posters here who think he's just a hack or that lump Titanic with Pearl Harbor or something. There are box office hits(of which there are many every year) & then there are phenomenons(and we're talking worldwide ones, not just the US, like say Dark Knight) Whether you like his movies or not(& let's not forget that Titanic & Avatar got mostly raves from critics, he's hardly Michael Bay like) I don't see how anyone with an interest in film cannot recognize the 'gift' he apparently has for knowing what people want.


I didn’t write that Titanic only tapped into the teen girl crowd, but that I believe that its success is primarily the result of multiple viewings by “girls and women of any age”.

I also didn’t suggest that James Cameron was a bad filmmaker and I recognise his talent for making commercially (and to some extent critically) highly successful movies. That still doesn’t mean that ‘Titanic’ is a good movie, it just means that it is a popular one, and it certainly doesn’t mean that I have to like it. Otherwise, you are in the argumentative territory of Elvis Presley’s album title “50,000,000 Elvis fans can’t be wrong”.

Oh, and I haven’t seen the German 1943 movie ‘Titanic’, but I have recently watched a documentary on Titanic-related movies, according to which the famous 1950ies Titanic movie ‘A Night to Remember’ used a number of scenes from ‘Titanic’ (1943). There are some other interesting aspects to this movie, too: It was never released cinematically in Germany (or withdrawn from circulation shortly after its release), because the story of a sinking ship was considered to be detrimental to public morale, when many German cities were bombed. After the war, it was banned because of its blatant anti-British content. Ironically, some scenes were shot on the cruise ship Cap Arcona, which would be tragically sunk in 1945 with a death toll of an estimated 6,400 - four times the number of people who died as a result of the sinking of the Titanic.


Thu Apr 19, 2012 10:23 am
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
panos75 wrote:
Unke wrote:
‘Titanic’ is also much in keeping with 1970ies Irwin Allen disaster movies. They weren’t any good. Neither were most melodramas of Hollywood’s Golden Age, particularly the cheesy ones with overblown romances, broadly played villains and laughable dialogue. At least those didn’t last for three hours and didn’t feature Celine Dion ululating us into a tinnitus. They usually had better acting, too, although they were probably as factually inaccurate as ‘Titanic’.


Pardon my French but this is bullshit. Comparing Titanic to an Irwin Allen movie makes as much sense as comparing Lord of the Rings to the Beastmaster and Willow.

And Celine Dion doesn't open her mouth till the end credits, so saying that her singing diminished your experience of the movie is at least disingenuous.


Regarding Celine Dion: Point taken. I have confused my dislike of this terrible song (omnipresent at the time) with my dislike of the movie.

Why would it be bullshit to compare 'Titanic' to a 70ies disaster movie? Titanic is effectively half romance/ half disaster movie. I haven’t seen 'Willow' or 'Beastmaster', but if they fit into the high fantasy genre, a comparison with Lord of the Rings is sound.


Thu Apr 19, 2012 10:26 am
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 796
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
Unke wrote:

I also didn’t suggest that James Cameron was a bad filmmaker and I recognise his talent for making commercially (and to some extent critically) highly successful movies. That still doesn’t mean that ‘Titanic’ is a good movie, it just means that it is a popular one, and it certainly doesn’t mean that I have to like it. Otherwise, you are in the argumentative territory of Elvis Presley’s album title “50,000,000 Elvis fans can’t be wrong”.



You don't like Elvis too? What's wrong with you Man? HaHa

As far as I am concerned I do not care (not mention to be offended) that you do not find "Titanic" a good movie and glad to see you at least given a point ;-)

My father used to say I wish I was a golden coin so everybody would like me :D

Yeah Titanic makes a good date movie and I thank Cameron for that, now the reason in my view is a bit different than yours (the case of being dragged by your girlfriend) . Titanic makes a good movie to take your date because your lady will like it and so do you at least in most cases (I know not you in particular HaHa).

When I was married , I remember going with my wife often to the Cinema Friday night after a good working day (both were working) and sometimes she used to pick the movie (some times I used to fall sleep half way through) and other times I used to pick the movie (now, she some times used to fall sleep half way through HaHa) but when we went to see Titanic, man , we both enjoyed it and no one felt sleep even it was a 3 plus hours one :D


Cheers

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


Last edited by unwindfilms on Fri Apr 20, 2012 3:37 am, edited 1 time in total.



Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:18 pm
Profile WWW
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 796
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
unwindfilms wrote:
Unke wrote:

I also didn’t suggest that James Cameron was a bad filmmaker and I recognise his talent for making commercially (and to some extent critically) highly successful movies. That still doesn’t mean that ‘Titanic’ is a good movie, it just means that it is a popular one, and it certainly doesn’t mean that I have to like it. Otherwise, you are in the argumentative territory of Elvis Presley’s album title “50,000,000 Elvis fans can’t be wrong”.



You don't like Elvis too? What's wrong with you Man? HaHa

As far as I am concerned I do not care (not mention to be offended) that you do not find "Titanic" a good movie and glad to see you at least given a point ;-)

My father used to say I wish I was a golden coin so everybody would like me :D

Yeah Titanic makes a good date movie and I thank Cameron for that, now the reason in my view is a bit different than yours (the case of being dragged by your girlfriend) . Titanic makes a good movie to take your date because your lady will like it and so do you at least in most cases (I know not you in particular HaHa).

When I was married , I remember going with my wife often to the Cinema Friday night after a good work day (both were working) and sometimes she used to pick the movie (some times I used to fall sleep half way through) and other times I used to pick the movie (now, she some times used to fall sleep half way through HaHa) but when we went to see Titanic, man , we both enjoyed it and no one felt sleep even it was a 3 plus hours one :D


Cheers


Oops! again I pressed quote instead of edit which was my intention and another post got triggered. No intention of spamming just posting at 6:30 am after just waking up lol

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


Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:19 pm
Profile WWW
Post Re: April 15, 2012: "Refurbishing TITANIC"
unwindfilms wrote:
Unke wrote:
I also didn’t suggest that James Cameron was a bad filmmaker and I recognise his talent for making commercially (and to some extent critically) highly successful movies. That still doesn’t mean that ‘Titanic’ is a good movie, it just means that it is a popular one, and it certainly doesn’t mean that I have to like it. Otherwise, you are in the argumentative territory of Elvis Presley’s album title “50,000,000 Elvis fans can’t be wrong”.


You don't like Elvis too? What's wrong with you Man? HaHa


I actually do like Elvis (the music, not the movies), but the argument stipulated by the famous album title doesn't hold much water.


Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:47 am
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 70 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


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