I was pleasantly surprised by this film. With a budget topping $200 million, I was quite skeptical about whether throwing all that money toward one of the twentieth century's greatest tragedies would make a film exciting enough to see. How much could you dress up the sets? How many models and computer effects could you use? How much more action could you pack into a ship that sinks? Oh, if I've just given away part of the plot for you, go back to school. After having viewed TITANIC, however, I found it to be a well-paced, well-designed, and overall well-made movie. There have been many films made about the maiden and final voyage of the ocean liner Titanic, but this latest offering from director James Cameron is the best I've seen.
TITANIC tells its story in two time periods. It starts out in the present, when ocean explorer Brock Lovett (Bill Paxton) and his team are exploring the wreckage of the Titanic on the floor of the Atlantic, searching for a priceless diamond necklace which supposedly went down with the ship. What they find instead is a drawing of a woman wearing the necklace, which is broadcast on the news. The woman in the picture recognizes herself and phones Lovett, who has her flown out to his exploration vessel on the high seas. There she tells her story to Lovett and his team.
In 1912, Rose DeWitt Bukater (Kate Winslett), a young lady belonging to society's upper class, boards the Titanic for the ship's first Atlantic crossing, from Southampton, England to New York. She is engaged to Cal Hockley (Billy Zane), an heir to old money, and a snob in every sense of the word. On board, Rose feels the stifling trappings of high-society's expectations, and resolves to escape from it all by throwing herself off the Titanic's stern, but is saved from her self-proclaimed fate by Jack Dawson (Leonardo DiCaprio), a passenger in third-class ("steerage", as it's referred to), who talks her out of jumping. Although for Rose the attraction is not immediate, a love affair soon develops between the two, which endangers Rose's social standing as well as her engagement to the jealous Cal.
The story sounds very simple, and perhaps even unexciting, but through solid performances by the leads and good direction by Cameron, a good movie comes through. DiCaprio is marvelous as the young, but worldly-wise Jack, playing the role with the confidence usually found in older actors. His is a character that is immediately likable, as he knows what he wants out of life and is charmingly able to handle a variety of situations. Girls are going to swoon over him. Winslet also proves herself a good actress, delivering her lines convincingly, and the quality of performances between Winslet and DiCaprio makes the relationship believable. The only problem with Winslet is that she does not carry herself in accordance with her character's upbringing. Simply by judgment of her gait, I was distracted from the fact that she was supposed to be an upper-crust debutante. Rather than demonstrate the poise one would expect her character to possess, she sometimes looks positively clumsy, and it unfortunately detracts from her otherwise great acting.
Billy Zane is cast well as the aristocratic snob Cal, since he has a certain look that immediately makes you want to hate him. His features are such that even when he smiles, there's something mistrustful about him, and when he scowls, he is evil incarnate. He's something like a porcelain version of Peter Gallagher, but a cheaper model. Like DiCaprio and Winslet, Zane slips comfortably into his role and plays it well. Backing up Zane is David Warner as Lovejoy, Cal's personal assistant (or "man" as they said at the turn of the century). No matter who else is in the cast, you can always count on a good performance by Warner, who seems to be made to play the distinguished gentleman with a gaze of steel and will to match. Additionally, there are a number of smaller fictional and non-fictional roles thrown in for color, such as Kathy Bates as "The Unsinkable" Molly Brown, Danny Nucci as Jack's friend Fabrizio De Rossi, Eric Braeden as John Jacob Astor, and even Bernard Fox as Colonel Archibald Gracie. Nice to see Dr. Bombay getting work.
Also scattered about are some of the other steerage passengers who are basically in the movie so you can feel sorry for them when they die. This by itself may have been largely compulsory in a film about the Titanic, but it transcends this status by putting these characters in direct conflict with the ship's crewmembers who strive to maintain order and assure that the first-class passengers are placed aboard the lifeboats before anyone else. In this way, TITANIC possesses a depth not usually found in action pictures. You don't just get a love story with a tragedy as a backdrop, but a very real account of class struggle as well.
As I mentioned before, the budget for this film was tremendous, and it certainly showed in the set dressing and special effects. The interiors of the Titanic are nearly breathtaking with their elaborate trimmings and intricate detail, and one has very little doubt that the layouts are authentic. With regard to the exteriors, I would dare anyone to point out a film in which a vessel has been recreated with such meticulousness or on such a scale. Cameron actually built a scale model of the Titanic in a water tank, but only had room for 90%, and therefore had to computer-generate the remaining 40 feet. Could've fooled me and everyone else in the theater, as the splicing is seamless.
Also of note in this film is the way the audience is presented with the anatomy of the disaster right at the beginning. We are told of where the iceberg struck the ship, how the flooding occurred, the way the ship sank, and why it did so in that manner. These technical details serve as a guide for later on when the action starts happening, and allow us to view the sinking with informed analytic detraction, in addition to the more conventional placement in the midst of mayhem and confusion.
In all, James Cameron's TITANIC is a good blend of love story, history, and action. The fact that the film runs longer than most at about three hours is almost unnoticed as the viewer's attention is held alternately by those three main elements, from the movie's intriguing beginning to it's satisfactory ending. In box office receipts, TITANIC the movie will undoubtedly live up to the unsinkable expectations of Titanic the ship.
By : Brian Takeshita
Source: rec.art.movies.reviews newsgroup
Rating: 5
SYNOPSIS: James Cameron's epic TITANIC is a superb film. The tremendous story is, basically, a third-class boy falls for first-class girl, wrapped around the sinking of the greatest ship of all time. Mr. Cameron's film is aided by top-notch performances from its leads. Leonardo DiCaprio finally sheds his arrogant punk image and performs wonderfully, while Kate Winslet shines brighter than ever, as her character experiences the full range of emotions. The supporting cast is also noteworthy, though nothing overshadows DiCaprio and Winslet. There are some minor weak points, but they do not bring the film down noticeably. Cameron splits the film into two halves, one prior to the iceberg and one afterwards, each an example of superior filmmaking. Together, they comprise a full epic adventure, but more importantly, a magnificent love story, which ends in a climax sure to be embedded in viewers' heads long after leaving the theater. TITANIC is the best film of 1997.
MAIN REVIEW (There will be some spoilers at the very end, but there will be a warning beforehand.):
James Cameron's list of credits towers above most of his peers. Though I have not seen THE SPAWNING, his first film, I have no problem in saying that his filmography is more than just a little impressive. THE TERMINATOR, ALIENS, and THE ABYSS (the director's cut, that is) are all phenomenal. In the 1990's, I believe he took an ever-so-slight dip with T2 and TRUE LIES, both of which lacked the emotional sharpness of his 1980's films, but they are still grand entertainments. With TITANIC, he has his masterpiece. His other films have flirted with greatness, but never achieved the spellbinding feats of TITANIC. Up until now, it was as if Mr. Cameron was more concerned with the machines in his films (and all of his films seem to indicate a great big great-big-machine fetish) than with the people who created them, though he never lost sight of the importance of those people. More than any other action director/writer, Mr. Cameron has maintained strong relationships between his characters. He has become famous for writing strong female parts, though that could be questioned with Jamie Lee Curtis' character in TRUE LIES. Linda Hamilton may as well re-name herself Sarah Connor; Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio's performance (opposite the equally-sharp Ed Harris) in THE ABYSS brims with fiery rage one moment and then tender femininity the next, a rare feat anywhere, much less in an action film; Mr. Cameron's finest female remains Sigourney Weaver's Ellen Ripley. When was the last time a female action lead received an Oscar nomination? I cannot think of one, ever. Ripley dominates ALIENS, even with the army of H.R. Giger-inspired nasties chasing her and her tough space-marine cohorts, wielding heavy artillery and simultaneously rediscovering her maternal instincts with the lost child she takes under her wing. In TITANIC, Kate Winslet's Rose DeWitt-Bukater is no exception. She does not get to handle M-16's or underwater oil rig equipment, but still she proves to be one tough woman. As I said before, Rose runs the emotional gamut in this film, and Winslet handles it beautifully. An Oscar nomination, especially in this year of rare strong female parts, is definite, and deserved. Not for one moment did I not believe what Rose was doing. It would have been easy not to like Rose. Face it, she is a prissy, spoiled, ignorant rich girl. But Winslet makes Rose irresistible. She exceeds her fabulous performance in HEAVENLY CREATURES by being completely vulnerable, yet never out of control. Rose wants to experience things, things which her mother and, more specifically, her class forbid her to experience. Who can blame her for despising the upper class experience? It is depicted as boring, repetetive, and adventure-deprived. She wants to change her life, and finally, finally receives the opportunity, in the form of Jack Dawson (DiCaprio). Jack is a travelling artist who wins his ticket back to America on board Titanic in a poker games, just five minutes before the great ship leaves. I must admit, the thing most preventing me from wanting to see this film beforehand was that I knew Leonardo DiCaprio was the male lead. In all of his prior performances (save MARVIN'S ROOM), he perpetually irritated me with his cockiness and whining. Thankfully, he does not whine or act cocky for one moment during TITANIC. He shows full capability of bringing great force to a "straight" character, as opposed to his previous array of quirky ones. Here, he has no physical or mental handicaps to aid his performance, yet is stronger than ever. DiCaprio sparkles as Jack, fully embodying the carefree, poor, young artist who falls for the first class beauty he spots on a higher deck. This is a magical moment, as Rose comes into his sight, almost glowing with light. Jack is smitten. His friend Fabrizio (Danny Nucci) waves a hand in front of his mesmerized eyes, to no avail. As fate would have it, Jack and Rose do meet later that night, when Jack finds her hanging off of the back of the ship, in a suicide attempt. For the first 100 minutes, Mr. Cameron allows the relationship between Jack and Rose to develop realistically and poignantly. Thank God for this. So many films rely on huge climaxes to titillate audiences. Mr. Cameron realizes that huge climaxes can do more than titillate if the audience is entranced by the characters in that very climax. Feeling titillated wares off; feeling truly moved lingers. A film cannot truly move its viewers without devoting proper time to its characters. The first half of the film relies on more than just a developing romantic drama to drive itself. So many other flavors are at work here. First and foremost, comedy. The spit lying unbeknownst on Jack's chin as he is presented to the first class ladies; Jack's lack of silverware knowledge at the dinner table; Cal's dismissal of Picasso; these moments, among others, comically underscore the development of Jack and Rose's romance. Other factors at work during the first half of the film to keep the entertainment level high: the marvelous cinematography, with sweeping shots of the monumental ship; exquisite period detail in sets, costumes, language and mannerisms; colorful supporting characters, such as Kathy Bates' Molly Brown; and the unforgettable score by James Horner. Every bit of music is impeccably paired with what is onscreen. Its greatest accomplishment is that the music never seems out of place, so rare in film today. It is never obvious, yet omnipresent. This is yet another category for which TITANIC deserves Oscar recognition. The developing romance is filled with so many magical moments, both visual and emotional. The film's finest moment, in my eyes, is the nude drawing scene. For such a seemingly outrageous concept, the scene fits perfectly into the framework of the characters and the film. After Rose has conceded her evident affection of Jack, to Jack, she brings him back to her suite to be drawn like the women she has seen in Jack's other drawings--nude. For the occasion, she wears only the 56-karat Heart of the Ocean diamond necklace her fiance Cal (Zane) had previously given her. It is the only time she wears the jewel. After dropping her robe, a speechless Jack positions her on the couch. During this scene, this behemoth of a film achieves a scarce level of subtle, cinematic poetry. Little dialogue is exchanged, but the scene swelters with eroticism. Seeing Jack's eyes peering over the paper at Rose is to see artistic determination, the search for perfection-- Jack wants to capture Rose's very essence in one drawing. The halfway point of the film is preceded by a physical manifestation of Rose and Jack's growing love for each other. This could be the finest-executed example of a teen love scene since 1989's SAY ANYTHING... The scene exemplifies the youthful exuberance of Jack and Rose, but also the universal and timeless experience of falling in love. The few words that are spoken during this scene are the film's best dialogue. In this scene, Mr. Cameron whittles down the feelings of Rose and Jack into just the minimal number of words, an appropriate and deft maneuver. When the iceberg hits, it really does not seem like something that could sink Titanic. This was, after all, an "unsinkable" ship. The blind arrogance of its creators is humbled by a tiny-in-comparison chunk of frozen water floating in the North Atlantic. The damage is done. The ship will sink, proclaims its builder and staunch admirer, Mr. Andrews (a brilliant Victor Garber). Mr. Cameron hits another high note with the dumbfounded reactions of the various crew members upon finding out that the unsinkable is indeed, sinking. The second half of the film defines the capacity of the cinematic art. Describing the sights Mr. Cameron unleashes is next to impossible. It is here where parts of TITANIC become simply ineffable, where one can truly understand and accept the medium of film as unique from the other arts. There are certain things that only novels can do best, and there are certain things that only poems can do best. No novel or poem could hope to better the second half of TITANIC for what it is. And that is a visual magnum opus. Seeing the great ship fill with water, slowly dip head-first into the water, and finally ending up straight in the air, only to slowly ease into the Atlantic ocean...all of this is an utterly remarkable visual experience. But TITANIC aspires beyond this. The eye candy is only half the story. After spending so much time with Jack and Rose's building romance, the film certainly does not forget them. Because the audience has invested so much into them, their numerous subsequent separations are that much more heart-wrenching. The actual sinking appears to unfold in real time, which is a definite plus. The gradual tension plus the feeling of inevitability allows for moment by moment changes from intensity to pathos. One cannot forget the humbled Mr. Andrews leaning against the dining room mantle, gently fixing the clock as a half- empty brandy glass slides off the mantle. There are so many of these tiny, poignant moments, which hardly ever fall into sentimentality. Mr. Cameron captures so many characters' feelings during this time of desperation. But he never loses focus on Jack and Rose. They are the main story, always. There are, however, minute scratches on this diamond of a film. Some of Cameron's dialogue is mediocre at best. And there are moments when the central romance becomes cheesy. But what needs to be considered here is that Jack and Rose are kids! There is ALWAYS cheesiness in a youthful romance (as well as older romance). That is really the way that kids in love speak to each other. Also, the perhaps-too-sharp contrast between rich and poor often comes out in unnecessarily harsh lines spoken by Rose's mother and, especially, Cal Hockley. Thankfully, though, these weaknesses are easily eclipsed by the prevailing positives evident throughout. Along with DiCaprio and Winslet, so many other actors perform splendidly. Kathy Bates is always delightful as the Unsinkable Molly Brown; Frances Fisher nails her role as the class-aware mother, who is actually given a small dose of humanization (rare for the upper class in this film) when she explains that the family fortune is depleted; Bill Paxton and Gloria Stuart each do very well during the present day bookends, with Stuart especially showing Rose's undying fire. But there are two supporting performances of special note: Victor Garber as the honorable Mr. Andrews, and Billy Zane as the oh-so-evil Cal Hockley. Garber deserves an Oscar nomination for his earnest, intense performance as the ship's main designer. He is, at first, rightfully proud of his ship. But when the iceberg hits, he is the first to accept that "the ship will sink." When he walks up the grand staircase, and Rose inquires about why everyone is being made to wear their life-vests, Garber's eyes (and watch his extraordinarily expressive eyebrows here) burn with guilt, shame, and fear as he explains to Rose of the inevitable. The other performance worth discussing is Billy Zane's portrayal of Cal Hockley. As performed, Hockley is completely unlikable, and unfortunately one-dimensional in that respect. It is difficult to say whether the blame should fall more on Zane or on Mr. Cameron, for writing lines that could not really be taken very far. Surprisingly though, Zane does very well with what the character ends up being. Occasionally, there is even some subtlety gracing his performance (!). It is easy to hate Cal, but impossible to feel anything else, which is a weakness in any character. Beyond characters and performances, the technical achievements of this film are beyond astounding. The visual effects are quite simply the best effects in cinema, not only for their visible attributes, but also for the way they bolster the story, rather than supercede it. Also, the sound is perhaps the clearest and most skillfully utilized I have ever heard. So many tiny conversations, sound effects, and background noises come across so clearly without ever getting in the way. This is the way technical aspects of a film should work. After all is said and done, one question remains: Why is TITANIC such a great film? Yes, the acting, the tragic story, and the technical marvels are all executed wonderfully, but what really pushes TITANIC to the top of the heap? Perhaps it is the film's massive ambition, only equalled by the size of the actual Titanic. The immense ambition plus the near-flawless execution amount to the complete cinematic experience. This, in a nutshell, albeit a rather large and expensive nutshell, is the true power of film.
