Do you think the novel "Raise the Titanic!" was far better than the movie?

I do. The Titanic looked more realistic funnel-less and the book contained more plot twists and excitement that I don't think could ever be copied on film.

I don't think they should have even made the movie, it's completely different than the book. It's not like A Night To Remember, which is very much well-adapted, almost word for word.

 

A preferred the novel to the movie because at the very least, some of the ideas for raising the ship....had the hull been intact and in a reasonably good state of preservation.....were at least theoretically plausible.

The movie was horrible but the musical score at least was great.

 

The novel was better.

 

The Novel was better, the pictures were better. But I still liked the movie. It was entertaining. Very few movies are better than the novels. A few exceptions for me were Gone with the Wind, The Godfather, and Logan's Run. I liked those movies better than the books.

 

The rousing musical score really did a lot to keep the film from being a total stinker.

Parts of the film are actually done quite well but it oddly deviates from some key elements of the novel. For example, Captain Prevlov is a far more prominent character in the book He's a young, ambitious Soviet intelligence officer who leads a boarding party to take over the Titanic. But in the film he's barely more than a minor character and is played a short, balding middle age actor. In the film there's no boarding party, no big showdown between Dirk Pitt and Prevlov.

 

Yeah, and he's scared away by American jets and an American submarine!

 

I've seen a lot movies over the years and one thing I could always tell almost from the first note was "oh, John Barry is doing the music. He always has good scores for the films he does.