| Author |
Message |
    
Erin Fallon O'Brien-Ryan
| | Posted on Sunday, December 2, 2001 - 7:59 pm: | 
|
Although I was extremely angry at the time, I now thank my father for taping over SOS Titanic with Alien. That movie is total garbage, but then again so is that mini-series. Cameron's film was the most tolerable of the films made after ANTR. I have to say though that I love Raise the Titanic. It appeals to the idealist in all Titanic buffs. It would have been fabulous if Titanic were in one piece and well preserved. Sure the movie was totally unrealistic, but you have to admit it was pretty damned cool. |
Charmaine Sia
| | Posted on Monday, December 3, 2001 - 5:39 am: |
|
1) The 1996 CBS mini-series.
I don't know why I'm saying that it was the worse - to tell you the truth that was where my interest in Titanic actually started! - but it's probably because of the way Murdoch was portrayed. I simply could not believe that any officer would have acted in that manner and thus went to search for information off the internet on Murdoch. He's been my favourite officer since then... 
Sad that Murdoch was also portrayed as a coward in Cameron's Titanic - while the set, costumes etc. were good, certainly not the way they remember a brave officer  |
Kate Bortner
| | Posted on Thursday, December 6, 2001 - 6:10 pm: |
|
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this one before, but my vote for the worst Titanic movie ever made is Greatest Love of All. While technically only sorta about the ship it is a central part of the story development.
The set was horribly inaccurate. (David Hudson, you would have screamed out loud!!!) They added decks and stair cases where they didn't exist and wouldn't have been anywhere near what they were suggesting they were. The "ballroom/diningroom" didn't even make an attempt to look like anything on board. The cabins looked like a Holiday Inn. Eeeeek! Did the reseachers not even look at the wealth of information and pictures of that era or that ship!!!???!?!!!
The costumes (usually something I can grab on to to enjoy even if the set and/or story is icky)were totally from the wrong period. They looked in some places like the Edwardian revival of the 1970's and that was when they were at their best!!! The hats were from the 20's in the Titanic scenes and from the early 1910's during the 1920's scenes. Was there a snaffu in the wardrobe shop?
And the characters were so thinly drawn it was laughable. I won't even get into the fact that they weren't even close to the characters from the novel, because often times that doesn't matter, but gee if you're gonna change the characters from the book at least make them interesting!
There was an obvious absence of "real" characters in this film (always my favorite part of any Titanic film) No Molly Brown, no JJ or Madeline, no Lady Duff Gordon, no Ismay, no even Capt. Smith. Hello??? What ship were they on??? And the life preservers had SS Titanic printed on them. Wrong wrong wrong. Ug!
But the worst part of this film had to be the sinking. It went down in less than what appeared to be 15 minutes (real time) Rip, Tilt, Sink. All in one piece with funnels in tact. It was like a video game. Oh and then there was the suction. Ship went under and our lead character's boyfriend was sucked out of her grasp into the deep. Again, hello???? Did they not read up on this event?!
And don't even get me started on the inacuracies of the Carpathia!!!
Yes, I know it was a tv movie and all that that implies, but it was extremely disappointing to view. If you like Titanic fiction, read the book. While it is dangerously close to a Harliquine Romance, it at least trys to take an historical look at the tragedy.
Okay, there's my 2 cents for what it's worth. Any one else see this flick? Kyrila?
-kate. |
Kyrila Scully
| | Posted on Thursday, December 6, 2001 - 6:17 pm: |
|
Kate, are you referring to "No Greater Love", based on the Danielle Steele novel? (Now that WAS a Harlequin Romance!) The story of the poor rich girl who loses her parents and her fiance on Titanic and is forced to raise her younger siblings and take over her father's newspaper in San Francisco? Titanic was only in what? The first five minutes of the movie? I think it was made for the low-budget Lifetime Channel.
Kyrila |
Michael H. Standart
| | Posted on Thursday, December 6, 2001 - 9:51 pm: |
|
>>I think it was made for the low-budget Lifetime Channel. <<
It was.
Looks like it was done on the Queen Mary too, as was the part about Kelly Rutherford's character crossing over to England to chase her errant sister down.
I got a chuckle over the whisle being blown all the time as...I suppose...some sort of alarm.
As melodrama went, it was pretty cheesy. As history went, it...well never mind. The filter won't let me use the appropriate word.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart |
Kate Bortner
| | Posted on Thursday, December 6, 2001 - 11:07 pm: |
|
Yup that was it. No greater love. But in the movie the family lived in Boston instead of San Fran. and there were only 4 children instead of 6 and the oldest son went into the theatre instead of the 2nd son going into the movie business. . . It is reeeeeaaaaalllly bad. But I disagree that the ship being only in the beginning part keeps it from being a T film. The T event is what shaped their lives and the film, though be it capsulated, does show the sinking before and after. And the Titanic is ALL they can talk about thru out the entire film.
In any case that's why I mention it here.
-kate. |
Michael H. Standart
| | Posted on Friday, December 7, 2001 - 12:19 am: |
|
Ooops...misunderstanding alert! I didn't say it was not a Titanic film. What I said was that it was done on the Queen Mary...as in filmed on board. That ship seems a popular spot for the Hollywood types to do their filming.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart |
Adam Leet
| | Posted on Friday, December 7, 2001 - 1:58 am: |
|
Hmm, looks like they had filmed SOS Titanic on the QM as well, judging from a few key shots. The only thing that wasn't was during the sinking sequence, when they shifted to a set to make at least an attempt at a decent Titanic boat deck.
As for Raise the Titanic being appealing to all Titanic buffs, it was good, but as far as raising the ship, I would've been opposed to it. Of course, that's just me.
-Adam |
Stacie Crowther
| | Posted on Sunday, December 9, 2001 - 3:42 pm: |
|
There was a Titanic film done in 1929 which is rough on the eyes and one doen in 1996 with Katherine Zeta-Jones. The disgusting rape scene in the Zeta-Jones starring a crooked crewman, whose sole purpose aboard the ship was to loot, was really bad. Captain Smith was a loud boysterous swine. Everything was completely wrong and obviously reaearch was not done on the characters prior. |
Kyrila Scully
| | Posted on Monday, December 10, 2001 - 1:13 pm: |
|
And yet, Marilu Henner (who gets my vote for "Worst Portrayal of 'Molly' Brown") had the audacity to boast to reporters that "their" Titanic movie was wonderful and didn't cost the millions of dollars for special effects that Cameron's film was still spending (at the time of the interview, held months before the release of Cameron's Titanic).
I never did hear her say what she thought of Cameron's movie after it was released, but then I didn't see Franklin Mint doing a doll or costumes based on Catherine Zeta-Jones' character, either.
Sometimes money talks, sometimes it shuts people up.
All the best,
Kyrila |
Elaine R Barnes
| | Posted on Friday, December 28, 2001 - 6:48 pm: |
|
Marilu Henner as Molly Brown?!!!!!!! Ack!I'm glad I never watched that film! |
Patricia Bowman Rogers Winship
| | Posted on Saturday, December 29, 2001 - 6:09 pm: |
|
I have heard about a German language made-for-TV film that aired on the continent sometime this past year. Inger told me about it, because someone sent Monika a tape of it. It has to do with the American Inquiry, and at least sounds like it has possibilities as a serious contender in this category. Ing, help me a bit here, because you've seen it-- with simultaneous translation, yet-- and I haven't! :-)
Pat W |
Inger Sheil
| | Posted on Sunday, December 30, 2001 - 1:30 am: |
|
G'day Pat -
It's a contender, I'd say. Based on a souped up Wade, it featured a vicious characterisation of Ismay and Lightoller. Can even the most enthusiastic of their detractors seriously imagine these two quaffing champagne together on the eve of their departure from America, gloating over the fact that Smith can't stop them?
~ Ing |
Mysti Sands
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2002 - 7:15 am: |
|
Honestly? I have to admit, I thought the 1996 mini-series was far better than James Cameron's version. (Oh and I'm new here, btw .) I thought while the movie was terribly miscast in some places, the overall concept was a more interesting one. I kind of liked the idea of how different little dramas were all taking place at the same time in the mini-series: the blossoming romance between the guy and the girl, the Allison family and their nanny, the man and the woman having a forbidden love affair, etc. Because there were so many different personalities on that boat. So many different journeys all taking place at the same time. Everyone was traveling on the same boat to different places... both geologically AND in their personal lives. So the multiple drama thing sort of fits for me. The only bad thing about the mini-series, was that it was poorly done. The script wasn't that great. Had it been worked on a little more, it could've made for a great movie.
Call me crazy, but while I DID enjoy James Cameron's version, I've always thought that the whole scenerio of the "lower-class guy meets upper-class girl and falls in love" thing was a little cliche. All through the movie, I couldn't help but feel as if the filmmakers were trying their best to milk our emotions with stock Hollywood tactics and shock value... dynamic special effects, dead mothers and babies in the water (complete with an awesome make-up job)... and all to make up for a lackluster script. Without the sinking scene, the rest of the story would've hardly been worth sitting through. And plus, from the very first time I saw James Cameron's "Titanic," I could never seem to get into the "love affair" between Jack and Rose. I didn't feel a lot of chemistry, sorry. Good professional acting, at best. (I felt it more from Winslet, but not so much from DiCaprio.)
And at least the mini-series script had some promise. The only thing I truly hate about the mini-series is how they drug the Allison nanny's name through the mud by mistaking her for a child killer, like many people did in real life. Bad move. And not a very classy one, either. Fictional characters are one thing, but you just don't fudge on the facts when you're dealing with real people -- period. And of course, James Cameron made the same mistake with Murdoch. Not nice at all .
But anyway, ANOTHER valid reason to prefer the 1996 mini-series over Cameron's film... two words: TIM CURRY! An extremely versatile, dynamic, and underrated actor if there ever was one. He's my favorite actor of all time. There's a part of me that wishes he would've been cast in the Cameron film, because not only could he have made it even MORE worth the price of a ticket, another wonderful Curry performance would've been seen by a lot more people the world over than the mini-series. |
Adam Leet
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2002 - 2:17 pm: |
|
Welcome to the forums!...
...and please excuse me while I disagree on that one. God I could not believe how horrid the '96 miniseries was. The fictional elements were ridiculously unnecessary and in some cases inappropriate, the factual elements were handled poorly, the sets were a terrible attempt to recreate Titanic. Basically, I saw the big stars in that cast as seeking another buck, which is the case for a lot of bad films.
<<I couldn't help but feel as if the filmmakers were trying their best to milk our emotions with stock Hollywood tactics and shock value... dynamic special effects, dead mothers and babies in the water (complete with an awesome make-up job)... and all to make up for a lackluster script.
That's true, and is true for every film. That's a Hollywood thing. But I must point out that the dead mother and child in the water was an actual event, and I would assume Cameron latched on to that as another emotional element to the death sequence. As for the script, again, I think it's gold compared to the '96 film's.
In the end, the producers of the 1996 Titanic film seemed to care only about capitalizing on an anticipated rise in popularity in the disaster. While Cameron may have done so as well, he also shows a genuine concern and respect for the ship, as has already been stated in a thread on the discovery/salvage forum.
The 1996 miniseries was better than Cameron's Titanic? That's a joke, right?
Adam |
Michael H. Standart
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2002 - 5:09 pm: |
|
Mysti said; "Call me crazy, but while I DID enjoy James Cameron's version, I've always thought that the whole scenerio of the "lower-class guy meets upper-class girl and falls in love" thing was a little cliche."
Hi Mysti, and welcome to ET. I can sum up the above in two words; Dramatic licence. Hollywood and film makers the world over do it all the time. I have a lot of reasons for preferring Cameron's version to the 1996 miniseries, not the least of which was Cameron's incredible attention to detail. Yes, it has mistakes, but the wonder of it was that there weren't more in a flick as long and done on as large a scale as this one. It's Cameron's tendency towards being a perfectionist that ensured that.
I agree that Tim Curry is quite a formidable character actor, but in my opinion, even his talants don't save Titanic 1996.
Cordially,
Michael H. Standart |
Nathan Good
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2002 - 8:55 pm: |
|
SOS Titanic is by far the worst film regarding the Titanic that I have seen. I enjoyed James Cameron's Titanic's attention to detail and authenticity but not much else. The film would have just as effective if it focused on the factual stories around real people. But then people say that there would have been chances for it to end up like the miniseries which botched the whole think. That miniseries was more effective as a look into the workings of a transatlantic liner in the early 20th century than about the Titanic specifically.
N Good |
Nathan Good
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2002 - 10:02 pm: |
|
I should add that the Cameron film was a great picture and that the sets were incredible, but what I really was dissapointed with was the story. Like I said above, it would have been more or just as effective had they used true stories much like 'A Night to Remember'. I did enjoy the film, story problems aside. It was moving and a good tribute to the Titanic.
I wonder if they really referred to the Titanic as just 'Titanic' as in the movie. When they board the ship at Southampton the man who greets them says "welcome to Titanic" rather that "welcome to the Titanic". The same can be said for the old woman.
(message above) *think = thing
thanks
N Good |
Jason Marcotte
| | Posted on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 12:24 am: |
|
Just reading this post made me chuckle in a few places.
To begin, I must go with the consensus here and vote the 1996 Titanic CBS mini-series as the all time WORST Titanic movie. Its not often that I get mad when I watch a Titanic film, but this one just made me shout out at the TV in anger.
First off, Marilu Henner as Molly Brown was AWFUL!! I mean could she say any more 1 liner quips. I wanted to deck her with a soup tureen after the first 5 minutes. All of the characters in the movie were cardboard, transparent and depthless. The Allison subplot was probably the only bearable one out of the entire menagerie. The Wynn Park/Mrs.Paladine fiasco was annoying more than it was outright horrible. I just thought it awfully convenient that Mrs.Paladine got over her feelings for her "beau" after the Titainic went down and he died. It would have been more interesting for her "divorce" telegram to go though and have her husband and daughter NOT show up on Ellis Island (again, where did these writers pull Ellis Island from). But I guess that would have contradicted the happy ending schmaltz that laces every TV movie these days. Bruce Ismay, Captain Smith and Madeleine Astor were are miscast. I should stop -- I don't think I can find anything nice to say about this tripe.
I also want to take this time to defend "SOS Titanic". I may be a little bias because this film was one of the initial catalysts that launched my interest in the Titanic (the other being "A Night To Remember"), but overall I think this is a well done film. I enjoyed how a story line was followed through in every class (and even the crew). I mean 2nd class passengers almost always get overlooked in other Titanic films -- did anyone even know there was a 2nd class on Cameron's Titanic? Granted, the sets for SOS Titanic could use a little work and I was never once convinced that for the large scale shots I wasn't looking at the Queen Mary, but overall I thought it a standup piece of work.
Ian Holm was terrific as Ismay and I thoroughly enjoyed Cloris Leachman as Molly (don't call me 'Maggie') brown. I guess I enjoyed the whole cast of characters. The costumes I thought were spot on and a legitimate progression of the story was never compromised for the sake of schmaltz (i.e. no rape scences).
The SOS Titanic movie I've seen was apparently the longer version. I've seen the shortened one and found it not to be as enjoyable. The little nuances found in the former make the movie for me.
Anyway I had to voice my opinion on this topic. I could go on and on about how much I LOATHE the CBS Titanic but my fingers are sore. That movie has already brought me enough pain and I cannot justify it letting me feel anymore.
Jason. |
sharon rutman
Member
Username: sharonrutman
Post Number: 17
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, June 29, 2002 - 4:38 pm: |
|
It's a dead heat for the worst Titanic movie between Raise the Titanic and SOS Titanic. who can forget that memorable scene with clueless no-talent Ann Archer warbling "I can't put the wormy on the hooky?" YUK!!! And who can forget Madeline Astor, who looked all of 12 years old in SOS Titanic constantly boring us to tears with constant references to her pregnancy? Get real -- a woman in l9l2 never ever said the "P" word. Go back to A Night to Remember for a moment--Astor informed Lightoller that his wife was "in delicate condition." A pregnant woman was "in the family way" or was "expecting a bundle of joy from heaven." The supposed romance between Beasley and the other lady teacher was sappy and stupid. Also I found it ironic that David Warner who was gentle Lawrence Beasley in SOS Titanic played the sinister, menacing Spicer Lovejoy in Cameron's Titanic.
|
Eric Paddon
Member
Username: eric_paddon
Post Number: 90
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, June 29, 2002 - 8:06 pm: |
|
SOS Titanic is a solid #2 (behind ANTR) for the best Titanic movie IMO. The depiction of Beesley worked well because it enabled him to express all the observations he made in his book. Ian Holm also gives the best performance of Ismay in any Titanic drama.
The worst Titanic movie, sorry to say for those who feel otherwise, is Cameron's by a mile with me. No amount of accurate sets and impressive SFX can ever compensate for the worst written script ever, not to mention insufferably annoying characters and performances from all the leads. I despise everything about Jack-Rose and Cameron's jettisoning of so much real history in favor of his anacrhonistic 1990s romance of horny tennage lust is another major strike against it. |
Adam Leet
Member
Username: leet
Post Number: 218
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 29, 2002 - 11:49 pm: |
|
Yeah, I disagree with that. Cameron's Titanic, for me, is a close second to ANtR, though SOS Titanic is pretty far back. In my opinion, the honors for worst films go to Titanic (1996) and Britannic, as an honorable mention. Maybe I'll remove them from my collection, even...
Adam |
Shelley Dziedzic
Moderator
Username: shelley
Post Number: 789
Registered: 4-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, June 30, 2002 - 5:40 am: |
|
There are no bad Titanic movies in my eyes- only some better than others. Every representation filmed offers some positive interpretations or new twists I hadn't thought of before. SOS -the THREE hour version was novel in that it was in color- there was some GREAT matte shot work, it gave a touching view of steerage for the first time, explored the relationship of that steerage couple Martin and the glorious lady he sees at the dance, presents lifelike vignettes such as the Countess of Rothes in the Turkish bath being admired through the steamy window,Mrs. Harris and her sprained ankle- and I enjoyed the Queenstown deck scene with the Irish merchants and the lace bedjacket episode with the Astors. Yes, the casting of the Astors was off- and NOBODY has yet to accurately portray Mrs. Brown. I also thought the portrayal of Ismay was especially good- at the end he did look utterly befuddled and in shock-"All that beauty...just a few chairs." as he looked overboard at the floating debris. Raise the Titanic boasts a fabulous soundtrack, great visuals of the ship rising out of the deep which STILL take my breath away and an interesting plan for raising the hull which back then was pretty clever. I never quite think of it as a real Titanic film- more of a Cussler blockbuster book transfered to the screen which just happened to include the ship as part of the adventures of the real focus-Dirk Pitt-superman of action and mystery! Never met a funnel flick I didn't like! |
Tarn Stephanos
Member
Username: titanictarn
Post Number: 414
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, June 30, 2002 - 8:20 pm: |
|
Worst Titanic movie?
No contest-
"Raise the Titanic"
Stunning special effects, amazing model- but the emabarassingly bad acting,the stale air or boredom, and butchering done on the original Cussler story was h-o-r-r-i-b-l-e.
Is a sad thing, as Raise The Titanic was by far Cussler's best book. The film adaptation was so bad, it was nothing short of blasphemy!.
regards
Tarn Stephanos |
Nathan Good
Member
Username: goodnathan
Post Number: 46
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, June 30, 2002 - 8:28 pm: |
|
Hi folks,
I second Tarn's sentiment about 'Raise the Titanic'. I am a huge fan of Clive Cussler but happened to see the movie before i read the book and I couldn't believe how much they left out. I'd imagine it would be hard for any filmaker to capture all the effects of a Cussler book, but I like Tarn's choice of words when he referred to it as butchering. However much I would like to see a good film made about a Cussler novel, sometimes I think they are too complex to fit into one motion picture. Maybe a mini-series?
All the best,
Nathan Good |
Tracy Smith
Member
Username: tracy
Post Number: 958
Registered: 12-2000
| | Posted on Sunday, June 30, 2002 - 8:30 pm: |
|
I agree with Shelley about Titanic movies. |
Eric Paddon
Member
Username: eric_paddon
Post Number: 91
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, June 30, 2002 - 9:34 pm: |
|
Generally I don't count "Raise The Titanic" because I rank starting with movies that take place aboard the ship during the sinking. But as a fan of Cussler's novels who was introduced to them by RTT, it is unquestionably disgraceful adaptation, redeemed only by the effects work, the best score John Barry ever wrote for a non-James Bond movie, and Alec Guinness's cameo as Bigalow, the surviving crewman.
But the negatives? God, miscasting all around. Richard Jordan was a terrific character actor (especially as the wily national security advisor in "Hunt For Red October") but he is all wrong for Dirk Pitt. Likewise Jason Robards as Admiral Sandecker, and not too good turns from Anne Archer and David Selby either. The script is terrible too, with the heart of the action removed and the moral equivalence ending that isn't in the book is another disgrace.
The only thing I can say in the movie's defense on these points is that apparently more than 40 minutes of footage was excised after a preview screening that better explained some of the plot. Among the items jettisoned was a 1912 prologue that depicted the sinking and showed Brewster locking himself in the vault. The special effects footage of the sinking can be seen in the Titanic episode of the 1982 TV series "Voyagers" that has aired on Sci-Fi Channel in the past and it shows the second funnel breaking off but not the first (which is how the model in RTT was done). I suspect that there were also more scenes of Anne Archer left on the cutting room floor too.
Couple of points about the sloppy research the filmmakers did which shows they knew absolutely nothing about the real Titanic. In addition to having the wrong funnel missing for an intact Titanic, their montage of photos at the beginning of the real Titanic and life aboard shows a photo of an orchestra with brass instruments. That photo is from 1918 of the first Dixieland Jazz Band. |
Adam McGuirk
Member
Username: adam20
Post Number: 197
Registered: 5-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, June 30, 2002 - 11:29 pm: |
|
Eric if you say Camerons is the worst you've ever seen then how do you put the 96 miniseries over that? You say you hate the Cameron love story well I thought 96's was horrible. Atleast Cameron didn't have people getting raped by the steward from hell. And Camerons had the sets and the effects to make up for the love story if you didn't like it.
Adam |
Eric Paddon
Member
Username: eric_paddon
Post Number: 92
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, July 1, 2002 - 2:20 am: |
|
They come out a wash in the bad fictional story department with the steward from Hell being the one thing worse than Cameron. But the 96 has a better score and mentions more real events overall. Plus, the 96 has the virtue of being a project that was intended to tell more real history but got sabotaged by the network execs. That was never the case with Cameron which was driven by the bad story. With me, it's not a case of not merely not liking the love story, the operative word in my case is I hate it, and despise everything about it and its characters.
The sets and effects do not compensate for the story in either production though, with me. I would prefer inaccurate sets and a more accurate and better written script than vice versa any day of the week which is why ANTR and SOS Titanic run away with #1-2 honors for films, and the TV version of ANTR also enters that upper echelon.
|
Adam McGuirk
Member
Username: adam20
Post Number: 199
Registered: 5-2002
| | Posted on Monday, July 1, 2002 - 2:44 am: |
|
ok I see your point now..See I like the way Camerons ship looked so real but you have to admit the way the sinking looked was phenominal.
You may hate everything else Cameron did with that movie and Eric I know you do but he did give us a since to what it really looked like and that ship was just phenomanal. That is something Camerons movie did give us.
Adam |
Don Tweed
Member
Username: smokestack
Post Number: 149
Registered: 5-2002
| | Posted on Monday, July 1, 2002 - 3:19 am: |
|
Worst? I don't know!
If it has something to do with Titanic, i'll watch!!!
The 96 series was a real stinker!
But as for best affects for the ship?
Camerons, hands down!
I agree with Adam that the sinking sequence and total look of the ship was superb!
To hell with the love story.. I went to see the ship!!!
All the Best, Don |
sharon rutman
Member
Username: sharonrutman
Post Number: 27
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 3, 2002 - 11:43 pm: |
|
I still think Raise the Titanic (both book and film) are both the pits!!! Clive Cussler is a sexist jerk. |
Dave Moran
Member
Username: gatchaman
Post Number: 14
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, July 4, 2002 - 10:13 am: |
|
I seem to remember the book had an incredible amount of sex, in one case in one of the bedrooms on the Titanic itself ?
One presumes they removed the rotting bedclothes, rotten woodwork and any skeletons that may have been lying about beforehand...
Otherwise, it might ruin the overall ambience.
Dirk Pitt always struck me as an incredibly tedious fellow, probably very dull to talk to at parties...
' Yeah, after I raised the Titanic, stopped the Whitehouse from being shelled by a reconditioned WW2 battleship armed with nuclear shells, united Canada and the USA in one big nation and discovered what really happened to Abraham Lincoln, I took a coupla weeks holiday.."
" Really ? Well, if you'll excuse me, I must go and talk to someone else. You just stand there and flex your ego..." |
Pat Cook
Member
Username: cook
Post Number: 524
Registered: 4-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 4, 2002 - 10:58 am: |
|
One thing about all the above mentioned movies which is quite good. This is just my opinion but I've always enjoyed the music scores in all of the Titanic movies - even the dreadful 96 Scott version. I wish somebody would put together a CD with all these - Titanic Themes.
JMHO here.
Best regards,
Cook |
Eric Paddon
Member
Username: eric_paddon
Post Number: 93
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, July 4, 2002 - 5:13 pm: |
|
There is such a CD actually, albeit done by a slightly less than full orchestra. It's called "Titanic: The Ultimate Collection" and in addition to featuring themes from the usual sources (Cameron) is also the only CD that features any recording of the fanfare from the 1953 Fox movie "Titanic" (which is just about the only music heard in the film), and also Lennie Niehaus's lovely Main Title for the 1996 miniseries.
Be sure to also get Silva Screen's wonderful rerecording of the complete score to "Raise The Titanic" as well, along with the Broadway musical CD (the superior Titanic production of 1997) to complete your Titanic music collection.
And Clive Cussler's early novels are still a good read. |
William Ajello
Member
Username: unsinkable
Post Number: 367
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 4, 2002 - 6:56 pm: |
|
Pat,
The original version of "Raise The Titanic" (music by John Barry) is available on CD, it's a terrific soundtrack....I own it, I should know as well as the soundtrack to The discovery channel's documentary "TITANIC: Anatomy of a disaster".
Eric is correct about "TITANIC: The Ultimate Collection" (have this one also), it does contain the themes to mostly all of The TITANIC films, however, they are not from the original composer who actually scored it but it's the next best thing.
Eric,
You are way too hard on "Raise The Titanic", I agree it wasn't a cinematic masterpiece but if the filmmakers really wanted to make this a great flick, they would've stuck to the book religiously....they skimped on the Russian conflict, imagine the cinematic extravaganza of a fully laden USA/Russian conflict over the Titanic?
Maybe someday, they will remake it correctly.
Regards,
Bill
|
Shelley Dziedzic
Moderator
Username: shelley
Post Number: 816
Registered: 4-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 4, 2002 - 8:04 pm: |
|
Bill- I must agree- Vixen 03 was really good-and that was before anybody was thinking about the Empress of Ireland. I will always have a soft spot for Raise the Titanic- not only because of the wonderful Barry soundtrack, and heart-stopping scenes when she comes to the surface-but also that very nostalgic and sentimental interlude when Pitt is first aboard and is walking alone through the dining room-the music is positively haunting. It is how I would want to view the wreck if it were possible. In fact- when the first artifact exhibit opened at Greenwich, I was able to walk through the darkened spaces alone and the effect of seeing Titanic in that manner for the first time is well... full of wonder. Once I was giving a little presentation at the local library and noticed a boy about 16 in the back of the room listening intently. On a VCR I showed the part of Raise the Titanic where the ship is breaking the surface-with the screeching metal and cascading water. Afterward the boy came forward with his father and told me he had not realized the size of the ship. Then he asked if he could look at my Entex model I had placed on the podium while I was talking to the group. He lightly ran his fingers all over it- I was afraid something would break- he touched the propellers and funnels-and after a while stood back and said-"So that's what an ocean liner looks like." Suddenly I realized with a shock that the boy was blind since birth and had no notion what a liner was or the mammoth size-he had heard the bulk of the ship on the film. So one never knows how something may touch someone's life. |
Eric Paddon
Member
Username: eric_paddon
Post Number: 94
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, July 4, 2002 - 8:06 pm: |
|
Just to clarify one thing Bill, the "Raise The Titanic" CD is a rerecording done by the Prague Philharmonic according to Barry's original orchestrations. The tracks recorded for the film itself alas, are lost, despite the efforts of soundtrack buffs to track them down.
Remaking "Raise The Titanic" is alas, something that's never apt to happen since real history overtook Cussler's imagination and gave us a Titanic wreck not like the one in the book. It would have to be reinvented as a salvage expedition rather than a raising. |
William Ajello
Member
Username: unsinkable
Post Number: 369
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, July 6, 2002 - 4:51 am: |
|
Shelly,
The story with that kid is thought provoking no doubt about it..thanks for sharing it.
Eric,
I didn't know that, sounds damn well like the original soundtracks in the movie, you could've fooled me and you did!
I hate when he does that!
Well damn, it's still the soundtrack from the movie no matter what.....sounds damn good too.
Shell is right "Memories of Titanic" is a wonderfully haunting piece of music, have added it to my compilation tapes a dozen times.....
Shell, if you get a hold of the "Anatomy of a disaster" soundtrack, on track two or three I believe, there is a 3-parter, the middle one is called "History" another haunting piece....it's about 1:45 seconds long but does the job well.
I'll send you another real haunter off topic in mail, this one choked me up when I heard it.
Regards,
Bill
|
sharon rutman
Member
Username: sharonrutman
Post Number: 31
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, July 6, 2002 - 4:09 pm: |
|
Three words describe Clive Cussler--oink! oink! oink! |
Eric Paddon
Member
Username: eric_paddon
Post Number: 96
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, July 6, 2002 - 6:15 pm: |
|
Then how come Loren Smith keeps holding her own everytime she appears?
Cussler's early novels, from "Mediterranean Caper" through "Cyclops" were wonderful stories set within a largely consistent universe. "Treasure" and "Dragon" were when he started to run out of steam and the problem is that he no longer writes with any consistency or any regard for what happened in previous novels. (It's especially annoying that he ignored the ramifications of the endings of his past novels, which I shouldn't mention because that would give away the endings of some of his better ones). That being said, he's one of the few novelists I still buy whenever one of his books come out. |
sharon rutman
Member
Username: sharonrutman
Post Number: 32
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, July 6, 2002 - 9:04 pm: |
|
Well, Cussler does need to add some female love interest to Dirk Pitt or the books would be even more boring. Besides Loren Smith doesn't show up in Raise the Titanic; this bimbo shows up in later books |
Paul Rogers
Member
Username: progers
Post Number: 205
Registered: 11-2000
| | Posted on Saturday, July 6, 2002 - 10:15 pm: |
|
I'm with Eric on this one. I thought that Raise the Titanic was extemely well written. An amazing number of plotlines, all climaxing in the Dining Room of the raised ship - brilliant! And this was all written well before the Titanic became popular again with a wider audience.
Shame the film was pants...
My favourite Cussler novel is Night Probe - if only because of the cameo appearance of James Bond!
And I'm not too sure I'd call Loren Smith a bimbo! As Eric says, she certainly holds her own every time she makes an appearance in any of the novels. If I remember correctly, Dirk Pitt had two other major "love interests" within the series: Summer Moran and Maeve Fletcher (I think?).
Regards,
Paul. |
Eric Paddon
Member
Username: eric_paddon
Post Number: 97
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, July 6, 2002 - 10:19 pm: |
|
No, she's not in RTT, but she's hardly been a helpless bimbo. And say what you want about Cussler, one thing his books aren't is boring. "Mediterranean Caper", "Iceberg", "Raise The Titanic", "Vixen 03", "Night Probe", "Deep Six" and "Cyclops" are all magnificent and the rest are good in concept but suffer from a problem of recycling familiar ideas.
|
sharon rutman
Member
Username: sharonrutman
Post Number: 36
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, July 8, 2002 - 11:50 pm: |
|
I think my problem is that Cussler's books are really a guy thing. For years the Titanic was considered so Macho that it was hard for women to break in. |
Stefan diklich
Member
Username: stefan
Post Number: 36
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 10, 2003 - 12:33 am: |
|
SOS Titanic |
Jake Angus
Member
Username: qramgy
Post Number: 53
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 10, 2003 - 2:47 am: |
|
Yeah, remember Susan St. James and that guy on the night of the sinking, after dinner? Susan's leaning on the rail in the flimsiest of frocks, and her male companion ain't doin' much better. With the temp. at freezing + the windchill..... oh, yeah!!!!!!!! Bring it on!
 |
John Clifford
Member
Username: hjca
Post Number: 214
Registered: 11-2000
| | Posted on Friday, October 10, 2003 - 5:09 am: |
|
How about the 1996 CBS Mini-Series.
George C. Scott was NO!!!! Captain Smith (you can't put George S. Patton in every character you portray).
Catherine Zeta Jones has since proved she can do much better.
The rest of the characters: forgettable.
Actually the cast of that mini-series typified a parody once put forward by Cassandra Anderson, known to many, in the 70s and 80s, as "ELVIRA: Mistress of the Dark": she took a line from a Vincent Price film, where his character is reciting an incantation, in an unknown language.
At the commercial break, "ELVIRA" shows us "the subtitle translation":
"I know it's a TURKEY, but it's paying the Rent".
 
John Clifford
|
Pat Cook
Member
Username: cook
Post Number: 789
Registered: 4-2001
| | Posted on Friday, October 10, 2003 - 6:55 pm: |
|
Hey John!
Please, sir, I must correct you. Being an avid Elvira watcher, her real name is Cassandra Peterson. However, under either name I'll toast her ANYtime!
Also, one thing you CAN say about "S O S Titanic" that I can't say for any other Titanic film (well, that I've ever seen, anyway) - at least, it DOES show all three classes. Invariably, the usual film shows First and Third class passengers. This one, via Lawrence Beesley (also the only time he has been portrayed), gives us a glimpse of Second Class.
Best regards, all around,
Cook |
John Clifford
Member
Username: hjca
Post Number: 215
Registered: 11-2000
| | Posted on Saturday, October 11, 2003 - 3:10 am: |
|
Sorry about the names, Pat. Seems I'm starting to develop "Senior moments".  
I do agree: "A toast to Elvira"; no comment about what I'll offer the CBS Mini-Series. 
John Clifford
|
