Archive through October 28 2001

Not open for further replies.
Aug 29, 2000
Yep! It WAS Ken's- ! Wish one could get a print of it. I always imagined his paintings (all I have seen are actually done in acrylics) were huge canvases-but was surprised to see many of the works are relatively small- He had an exhibit at a gallery in Southport, CT of his paintings for Ballard's first book. Most were in the 24"x20" range. The detail and brush strokes are masterful- he must paint some of it with one hair in the brush! Acrylics dry fast-so I am doubly impressed. The clarity and color is remarkable-the running rust looks more realistic than the REAL thing. Add to all of this the complexity of underwater shading and it is enough to send me back to painting (badly) bowls of fruit!

Inger Sheil

Feb 9, 1999
It would make a wonderful print - I imagine there would be a very ready market for it! I'm surprised that his canvases aren't huge - given the photographic detail in book reprints, I had imagined them as vast canvases reduced in size, producing that effect in books. I'm all the more impressed if he was working on a smaller scale.

I know the intimidatory effect! My brother has a degree in geomatic engineering, and has always been rather critical of my own works - he's told me often enough that I can't do 'inorganic' shapes (i.e. ships) - according to him, everything I do looks like it was grown! This works to a degree with the softened lines of submerged shapes, but for the clean, pristine lines of a new ship at sea it is rather less effective (although Ilya, even with his engineering background, is much kinder about my Titanic works). If it has to be inorganic, I'm much happier with rough-hewn stone...!
May 8, 2001
Today I watched this movie for the hundredth time, but for the first time, I actually realized the Titanic was slowly and hauntingly towed past the World Trade Center. Seeing the two together was moving beyond words. Colleen

Joshua Gulch

Mar 31, 2001
Just wondering here...
If someone decided to remake "Raise the Titanic" based much more closely to the book, with murder mysteries, sneakier Russians, and a nuttier Gene, how many of you would object?
Even though it couldn't possibly be accurate, who'd have a problem with it?
I loved the book and was a little dismayed with how far the movie strayed. I did enjoy the movie quite a bit though, and favor it even over Cameron's. But that's just my opinion. I'm partial to it.


Dave Hudson

Apr 25, 2001
I wouldn't object one bit. It's always been kind of a fantsy of mine to remake that film. As long as the sets were accurate, I would have no problem at all. IMO, I think that's it's the dream of every Titanic fan to see the ship intact with little or no deterioration. Who wouldn't want to see the great liner enter New York at last? Raise the Titanic competes with ANTR as my favorite movie, not because of the plot, but because of that GREAT scene when she actually arrives in New York. Also, the music kicks all other films' a**! I would love to see it remade. Although, they would have to use an oversized model again for effects. Computer effects are too risky, they never look entirly realistic (Cameron's was great, but a lot of scenes were kinda obvious).

May 8, 2001
Joshua. My husband and I had this discussion yesterday after watching the movie. He said that the book was SO much more informative, and throughout the movie, he sat and explained what they were doing, and why.
I guess the remake would depend on how it is changed. I have seen 100 remakes, and they try to make them politically correct which ruins the whole movie. I see areas of improvement, and if they would remake it, I would only give my opinion after seeing it, but I don't know of one remake so far that I like better than the original.
Jul 9, 2000
Easley South Carolina
If the remake was done true to the book, I wouldn't have a problem with it in the least. While the premise is badly dated in light of recent discoveries, I like good entertainment as much as anyone else.

Like Colleen, I find "political correctness" not only offensive and irritating, but anachronistic as well. All the more so when somebody tries to use a movie to send a "message."

Michael H. Standart
Apr 18, 2001
If a remake was made, it could open up a whole new premise to the actual raising part as now we know what it looks like and have a very good idea of its condition, it would certainly make for intesting ideas as to to bring up the front half of a badly corroded and impact damaged vessel at a depth of two and a half miles,
on to another subject, now we know (and i didn't until ten minutes ago) that the larger scale model is in Malta, can any one shed any light on the model used in the flotation tank sequences? taking into account a comparison between the divers and the model, I would hazard a guess at about six to seven feet long which would put it into about 1/187 scale. Was it a one off for the film or a comercially available model because the only one i've heard of in this scale is Robert Hahns and that certainly wasn't available back in 1980! any one any ideas?



Kyrila Scully

Apr 15, 2001
South Florida
Unfortunately, Hollywood has never been a stickler for historical accuracy, not even in documentaries. Sending a "message" is what got them in hot water during the infamous McCarthy era, spurring Senator Joe to conduct his witch hunt for "Commies" in the film industry. The film industry has ever since gone overboard to champion "Cause de celebre" and attempt to turn the tide of public opinion on highly controversial issues. Subconsciously, this may be one of the reasons I stopped acting and turned to writing where I have control of the story and how it is presented.

All the best,

Adam Leet

May 18, 2001
I'm not sure if the technology used in the movie would be of any use in real life, Richard. The wreck in the film was supposed to be in fairly good shape; the bow section today is a rusty shell, basically. Think of it as a fragile eggshell. For Raise the Titanic, they started by filling the ship with a buoyant foam. If they attempted this with the real wreck, it could likely damage its integrity further. Using hydrazine tanks would make matters worse, as the bilge sections of the ship are not necessarily load-bearing structures. Likely, using that method will destroy, if not significantly damage the hulk. And that's not going into how much of the bow is buried in mud.

Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Similar threads