Cameron's Titanic Vs Pearl Harbor

E

Eric Paddon

Member
I do not believe I am the only person in this forum who has expressed his or her view about a particular Titanic related topic more than once. That happens to go with the territory of a discussion and a back and forth, and I don't think *anyone* should feel compelled to post no more than once on something regardless of his feelings on that subject (be it Cameron or Californian).

Furthermore, I have *not* posted on this subject every day, I merely chose to put in my two cents on a particular thread that compares two different movies.

You would do your side a lot better if you chose to have a dialogue on the matter rather than complain about the number of times I post on a subject. By using the term "us" you assume a very arrogant posture of yourself speaking for every other member of this forum, when in fact you are only speaking for yourself and you are certainly not speaking as the moderator of this message board imposing restrictions on what can and cannot be discussed.
 
A

Adam McGuirk

Member
Ok, I will put my two cents in. I thought Camerons Titanic was great. If you don't like you don't have to see it. when you say Jack and Rose were unlikeable I say I don't think James Cameron really wanted them to be "likeable". All the movie is is combining fact with fiction which he did a good job of when he was having his fictional characters interact with real ones. if he didn't have the lovestory then it wouldn't have been the enourmous box office it that it was. Cameron movie bad or good brought in a whole new generation of Titanic fans that wouldn't care about Titanic if it weren't for the movie. No ones ever gonna come up with a love story that everyone all ways likes. Theres allways gonna be someone that dislikes it lije you do.
 
E

Eric Paddon

Member
"If you don't like you don't have to see it."

If I hadn't "seen it" then I would not be able to voice my own opinions of it. See it I did, and then after five years I decided to see if maybe there were some things I had not been fair about, and hence the reasons for posting my current impressions when there are threads that invite comment on it.

But just for the record, the subject of this thread is comparing "Titanic" with "Pearl Harbor" and I'm a bit amused that you don't choose to deal with the reason why the thread began but instead merely want to offer just a knee-jerk defense of Cameron's work.
 
J

John Meeks

Guest
Martin....

Sorry - been 'tied up' for a coupla days.

Re. the 'Kate pilot' - yes, I'm still checking the identity of the guy, but at least one Japanese survivor claimed that he couldn't resist waving as depicted in the film! So - it probably did happen - I don't see why not. I have several Japanese friends - not one of them has two heads or fangs!

If you want an idea of what Japanese military life was like at the time, there are one or two good books out there - probably the best being that of Saburo Sakai, the Japanese Navy 'ace' of WWII. He comes over as being quite a 'laid back' guy!

I accepted the scene as it was, with no reservations - but with, perhaps, a sad smile.

Eric, I agree absolutely with your comments on Jack, Rose, The Coral Sea and most certainly Midway!

I don't wish to detract from Jimmy Doolittle at all - but I don't think the Japanese were that affected by his raid - any more than he did!

It's true value, in my opinion, lay in its effect on American morale. In that respect, it was priceless, and set the whole tone of the following three years.

Regards,

John M
 
E

Eric Paddon

Member
Quite true John that the Doolittle Raid was done more for American morale in the end, and it was desperately needed in the wake of one setback after another in the Pacific (which the film does not do a good job of communicating).

There was one effect the raid did have on Japanese thinking, and that was that the raid was what tilted Japanese strategists into going along with Yammamoto's proposal for a Midway strike. The raid did spook many Japanese about the threat to the Emperor's safety and gave them a reminder of what they had failed to do at Pearl, which was knock out the carriers. Thus, instead of focusing on a strategic plan that might have won them the war, such as sweeping towards India and the Middle East for possible linkage with German forces, they turned their attention to Midway which ultimately became the true turning point of the war.
 
J

John Meeks

Guest
Eric...

Absolutely so!

Ever wondered what it might have been likeif they had been in a position to link up with German forces, in, say, Afghanistan?

Regards,

John M
 
A

Adam McGuirk

Member
when i said if you don't like it you don't have to see it i ment since you've seen it once and didn't like it you didn't have to see it again.
 
Mary Hamric

Mary Hamric

Member
Well, I loved Cameron's Titanic and I am not ashamed to say it. It may not be hip to like it in rivet-counter circles, but I am too old to care what everyone else thinks. I respect people who don't like it...fine with me.

I was much more interested in the ship than in the love story, that was for sure. I didn't even cry when Jack died. Not one tear, but I did sob when people where clamoring for a knife to cut the falls and seeing the 1500 people in the water after the ship sank.

So, for me, Cameron got the real point of the story across to me: the 1500. And that makes for a successful Titanic movie. I wouldn't be here or interested in Titanic if it weren't for the film.

My two (or three) cents.
Happy
 
M

Mark Taylor

Member
For those who want to read the details of what happened at Pearl Harbor, I heartily recommend Walter Lord's Day of Infamy. Like his book on Titanic, it is well written and gripping in detail.
 
S

Sahand Miraminy

Member
Hey all,
Im not sure if this was said up there but......In Pearl Harbor its a girl between two guys, as in Titanic. One guy takes her flying and has a little fun with her after, as in Titanic. The other One survives. Theres all these sinking ships and stuff. Also at the end shes like Blah Blah people dies on the U.S.S Arizona like old rose says 1500 ppl died on the Titanic. I like Pearl Harbor and all but its such a copy!

Sahand
 
A

Alex McLean

Guest
Just a reply to some questions. The Japanese gunner in the zero yelling to the kids playing baseball is indeed true. Also on a similar note, a survivor on Ford Island remembered a pilot of a Japanese plane (most likely a Zero) smiled and waved to him
 
A

Anita Casey-Reed

Guest
Like many people have commented already, I wasn't exactly thrilled with the love stories pasted over the historical event, and Ben Afflack annoys me to such a degree that it's very hard to look at his films in a non-biased way, so I'll only make this point: At least Titanic stuck with the tragedy of the event, while Pearl Harbor had to tack on the Doolittle raid, much to the detriment of the piece as a whole.
That said, I'd also like to recommend Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo to anyone wanting to see a better flick about the Doolittle raid. My husband thought there was too much mushy stuff with Van Johnson and his girl before getting to the actual raid, but I didn't mind it. Also, Spencer Tracy rocks in just about every movie he is in, and his role as Jimmy Doolittle is no exception.
 
M

Maria Fernandez

Member
these films were slightly simmilar. But i think titanic wins hands down. number one, it was original lol ! But i think Pearl harbour went on a bit longer than titanic, and got slightly boring at parts, where as with titanic i was hooked right the way through.
I think Titanic was a special film, and cannot be beaten.
 
M

Maria Fernandez

Member
seriously?! - wow - shows the difference i think - i didnt notice the time during titanic but i thought pearl harbour was longer....
 
Top