Titanic (1953)

[Eric Paddon]

Gave this a view last night. The strong acting and script is what overcomes any quibbles one could have with the fictionalization and inaccuracies, plus one must remember it was made prior to ANTR, which meant they didn't have the resources at their disposal that later productions would have. According to the commentary track, Fox didn't even have access to photos of the Olympic, let alone Titanic, to help them more accurately recreate the Titanic's interiors.

Interestingly, two additional movies were made by Fox at the time of Titanic utilizing the same sets. "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes" (where one can see the sets in color) and the film noir thriller "Dangerous Crossing". The latter co-stars Michael Rennie as the ship's doctor, and it was Rennie who does the final tag narration of "Titanic", revealing in the end a little more insight to a busy studio at work in this era!

 

[RileyGardner17]

These are very interesting facts, I had no idea. I wonder if even if they had the resources if they'd have gone in the proper direction. The boat deck set (or singular set they used) is decently accurate. Nothing about the ship's interiors is even remarkably close, and some of the choices in the screenplay are rather strange. And if they planned to end it with all the passengers dying while peacefully singing Nearer my God to Thee, I don't know how accurate they would have been otherwise. I suppose it helps to give them the benefit of the doubt, however.

The costumes as well are very obviously a mixture of 1910's and 1950's - it's oddly modern for the era. There was evidently no real effort in that department.

This all being said, I still think the sets are beautiful, the acting is powerful, the script is solid and perhaps the best aspect of it, and it is a beautifully shot film. Honestly, despite the inaccuracies that plague it, it's still so marvelous and well done. I think it ought to get more recognition in the Titanic community for being just that.

 

[Kathy S]

This all being said, I still think the sets are beautiful, the acting is powerful, the script is solid and perhaps the best aspect of it, and it is a beautifully shot film. Honestly, despite the inaccuracies that plague it, it's still so marvelous and well done. I think it ought to get more recognition in the Titanic community for being just that.

I agree completely. This is one of my favorite Titanic movies.

 

[robert warren]

Of course we all have to remember that back in 1953 there wasn't much to go on.Just the reports from the inquiries.old newspaper clippings,and those 1912 dollar books which were loaded with errors.There was no where near the plethora of material that we have today.Of course this film is unique in the fact that it opened the door to modern Titanic scholarship.It also ignited the flame in the late Ed Kamuda of which we now have The Titanic Historical Society, and the wonderful museum of pre discovery artifacts in Indian Orchard MA.My only complaints with the film are the super ornate dining room which could have belonged in a Vanderbilt mansion, and that BEASTLY alarm whooping all through the sinking! Also if you listen carefully to the background, everytime you hear people talking, a womans voice saying something like "this now!" or whatever is heard all through the film.

 

[Robert T. Paige]

I have a DVD of "Titanic Disaster In The Atlantic" (1929) which also includes a re-enactment of parts of the U.S. Senate Inqiry.

 

[Robert T. Paige]

I didn't know exactly where to put this, but since it has to do with the 1953 "Titanic" movie, I will insert it here.

In one of the opening scenes there is an episode of " The old flag which was flown on Captain Smith's first ship "The Old Star of Madagascar"". Was there any significance in this as far as any truth historically or was this just an invention of a screen writer for dramatic purposes ?

 

[Robert T. Paige]

I agree completely. This is one of my favorite Titanic movies.

As I have frequently said this is but one of my favorite Titanic movies.
But mainly because it was the first one I had seen.....way back on the big screen in 1953, no less.

If I had to rate these three movies I would rate them for the good parts to overcome the bad.:
1953- The acting , especially Webb and Stanwyck. And the Gifford-Annette is better than the Jack-Rose connection.
1958 - The overall historic accuracy.
1997 - It's in color and the overall showing of the ship itself.

 

[Robert T. Paige]

I have a DVD of "Titanic Disaster In The Atlantic" (1929) which also includes a re-enactment of parts of the U.S. Senate Inqiry.

The re-enactment is audio only - no video.
The "voice" of Captain Stanley Lord is portrayed by Bernard Hill, who portrayed Captain E.J. Smith in the 1997 "Titanic".

 

[Robert T. Paige]

I didn't know exactly where to put this, but since it has to do with the 1953 "Titanic" movie, I will insert it here.

In one of the opening scenes there is an episode of " The old flag which was flown on Captain Smith's first ship "The Old Star of Madagascar"". Was there any significance in this as far as any truth historically or was this just an invention of a screen writer for dramatic purposes ?

I checked a little on this. It's pure fiction. One more "blooper". :-(

 

[Robert T. Paige]

One more comment.
"A Night To Remember" has been given cause for criticism for starting out with the scene showing the launching ceremony complete with the christening with the bottle of champagne .
But....."Titanic" (1953).starts out with a foggy day at Cherbourg.