James Camerons 1997 Titanic: Its Overall Effects

[Parks Stephenson]

Steve,

You may have me confused with someone else...I have no problems whatsoever with the casting of the movie. Like everyone else, I thought, and still do think, that Winslet was gorgeous. I'll leave Leo's appearance for the women to evaluate. All I did was point out that the makeup worn by Winslet was a modern interpretation. Bill Sauder once pointed out, and rightfully so, that Kate's makeup was not appropriate for a lady of that period...only women of ill repute would wear such heavy colouring in public. And you will never find me criticising Ms. Winslet's figure. I do, however, wonder if any director would be brave enough to portray, or any audience would accept, any major female character appearing <FONT COLOR="FF0000">exactly as she would have in 1912.

I mentioned Katie Gilnagh because she is the most ready example of 1912-era beauty that I can come up with. Do not use the picture in her biography page on this site as a guide, either. You have to see her smile, which she so amply displays in her April 1912 photo, to really appreciate her allure. Phil, how about updating the site with that picture?

Also, since mine was the only name in your post, I hope you're not saying that I don't attribute a rebirth of interest in Titanic's story to Cameron's movie. Even though interest in Titanic has been a constant since at least 1955 (it's been a constant in my life since the 1960s), there's no question in my mind that Cameron's movie inspired a new generation of Titanic enthusiasts.

Parks

 

[steve b]

parks my apology, i was not in any way disputing anything you said..i guess i should have been more specific. what i was responding to was the general response of people who labeled her (kate winslet) as heavy or the like, and that kind of sickened me. because i don not feel her to be heavy, and i think its all the better that a more realistic person instead of some hollywood model/actress was cast in the role..indeed i happen to agree with you, parks, for i have seen recent pictures, maybe just days after her giving birth to her first child, and noticing the beautiful radiant glow on her..its a beautiful thing to behold. as for the comment about the rebirth of interest, that was to ingrid, who in one of her earlier posts said she didnt think it (the film) spawned a rebirth of interest..my only point was to disagree, for i feel not only gave new life to the story, im starting to think the passion level may be as high now as it has in many mnay years..sorry for the confusion parks and my apology. i respect your opnions highly

 

[Inger Sheil]

Steve - I did say that the movie had lead to an increase in interest in the ship - Like the dinosaurs, however, interest had never really gone away ;-) Although that movie-lead interest has peaked and is now on the wane, it did inspire people to take a look at the subject and a tremendous amount of research was generated on the ship and her people. One downside to this was that the 'circus-like' atmosphere surrounding the Cameron movie hoop-la drove some people further underground - I've known some individuals with a connection to the disaster who refuse to have anything to do with it as a measure of disgust with what they felt was the exploitation of events that were tragic for their families. Others found their lives in turmoil - one individual who had a family member aboard the ship found that he was pursued by the media even at his place of work.

I have no particular objections to the people cast in the lead roles (and I urge Parks to go on and give us his impressions of Leo ;-) ). Kate Winslett is indeed lovely - she looks like a gorgeous pre-Raphaelite beauty (although that make-up will date the film). Like others, I think she played her role well how it was written. However, I stand by my comments that this isn't an either/or thing - I don't have to believe it is either perfect or atrocious. I can enjoy aspects of the film and offer criticisms on other aspects. I can raise objections to Cameron's dialogue, while at the same time noting that I believe he is a superb visual artist and that the finest moments in this film are, IMHO, the ones with little or no dialogue. I can cheerfully (and do!) ignore the Jack 'n' Rose elements of the script.

To each his own

All the best,

Inger

 

[Parks Stephenson]

I urge Parks to go on and give us his impressions of Leo

Ing,

Leonardo DeCaprio is a twerp and it should have been me cast next to the lovely then-Miss Winslet.

There, now you know.

Parks

 

[Allison Lane]

Just to put in my two cents on a few topics--

I like Cameron's Titanic a lot better in most ways than A Night To Remember, and ANTR better in some ways than Cameron's film. Maybe it's because I saw Cameron's first and people tend to like what they see first better, but ANTR to remember struck me as too documentary-ish, plus Kenneth More makes me think of William Shatner. Another quibble of mine was that I never really did (still haven't) figure out exactly who everyone was supposed to be, like those first and third class passengers. Couldn't tell the officers apart either, but not like you saw much of them--except for More--anyway!

I don't care much for Jack and Rose, either. I bawled like a baby over them the first two times I saw the movie (typical teenager-ness, I guess; I was fourteen at the time), but now when I watch it I skip through all their scenes and concentrate on the officers.

Like Inger I anticipated Cameron's movie for a long time, too--it'd been years since I'd first read Ballard's book in elementary school, but I still had interest in the Titanic, and Cameron's movie pretty much served to remind me of it. I distinctly remember walking up to the senior parking lot at school for band practice one misty afternoon in November 1997 and discussing the matter of the huge budget with an older band member, and laughing about it. I saw it right after it came out and I wasn't disappointed at all. Granted I probably don't know as much about the ship as most of the people here, but one thing I always say in defense of Cameron is, he put you ON that ship. What I wouldn't have given to be an extra. Almost like having one of my dreams realized, I guess.

I think Gracie got kinda shafted, too. They made him out to be some kind of clueless guy (am I putting that right?) who only cared about his brandies. I keep thinking of Bernard Fox in The Mummy later every time I see him in Titanic.

I agree with Bill Wormstedt--I go back and see Titanic for the ship and the real historical people. I don't have anything against Leo per se except that Titanic ruined him, turned him into a teen idol, and one facet of my life's work has been to make fun of people like him. Kate Winslet I like very much, and people who make fun of her weight should get a life. Just because she isn't a stick figure doesn't mean she's fat. I think she's just fine the way she is.

Inger--since you specifically mentioned Lightoller once, I wanted to ask you if I was alone in thinking that Jonathan Phillips portrayed him as a little... twitchy? He always looked like he wanted to say something but never quite got it out. Doesn't mean I didn't like him, though--I liked him quite a bit. (A lot better than Kenneth More!)

As far as womens' opinions of Leo go, well, this one's opinion is that Mark Lindsay Chapman (in the guise of Chief Officer Wilde) can manhandle ME into a lifeboat any day.


-Allison L.
(Kinda long-winded there... sorry!)

 

[steve b]

allison, beautiful post, im in agreement with you on most points. i still believe however, that the characters of rose and jack have theyre place in the movie, and not just for the love angle. they also try and give us a look at some of the people on board, and kind of guide us through the ship. i just think critisism of cameron for trying to weave a love story into this is kinda harsh..he was simply looking to add another appealing element to the story, all the while telling in breathtaking fashion titanics story..believe me, compare to most of the garbage that was thrown out and called movies in 1997, and you'll understand why i feel the way i do

 

[Inger Sheil]

Hallo there, Allison —

I agree that both ANTR and Cameron’s flick had their strengths and weaknesses — ANTR got away with things that Cameron would have been hung out to dry over (the christening sequence, for example), but then he did set a higher bar for himself with proclamations of its accuracy. ANTR did score points for actually having a second class, however — unlike Cameron

I agree with you on some of the officers in ANTR — the generally vague depiction of Lowe, for example, who only comes into his own for that moment in the boats (‘Rubbish! You’ve room for about twenty more! Now hold your tongue and do as you’re told’). However, the Moody of ANTR was infinitely superior to the Moody of Cameron’s flick (one of the people closest on earth to James Moody was deeply affected by Michael Bryant’s portrayal). Jack and Rose just don’t wear well at all — okay once or twice, subsequent viewings just earn a skip through on the remote.

Inger--since you specifically mentioned Lightoller once, I wanted to ask you if I was alone in thinking that Jonathan Phillips portrayed him as a little... twitchy? He always looked like he wanted to say something but never quite got it out. Doesn't mean I didn't like him, though--I liked him quite a bit. (A lot better than Kenneth More!)

I agree about the twitch — the man looked like he was border-line even before the collision. ‘A nazi officer’ suggested one viewer, ‘constipated’ said another. The tension in him was there even before the collision. I’ve noted the Shatner thing with Moore, too (must be that turtleneck), but feel that the real Lightoller came somewhere between the two — physically closer to Moore. certainly. Moore’s assured confidence, solidity and general warmth accord more with the sources I’ve seen then Phillips’ ascetic, high-strung English officer stereotype. I suspect Cameron was very much influenced by Wade’s book about the disaster (particularly in the depictions of Lightoller and Lowe), and the result was a man who little resembled the Titanic’s officer I’ve seen spoken of so warmly in correspondence even before the disaster. The real Lightoller lies somewhere between Moore’s ‘hero that binds the plot together’ and Cameron’s ‘strutting martinet’.

I’ve been fortunate in that I work very closely with a German scholar who is doing some astonishing work on Lightoller — taking nothing at face value, she has gone back to the very basic elements of the story and is critically assessing every fact, anecdote, and assessment published, and then going from there. The assumption is that, as both an autobiography and biography have been published, there is little more to learn about Lightoller. She is proving this wrong, and it is a wonder to behold

Working from a huge range of sources, and traveling as far field as his birthplace in Chorley, this woman has — beginning with his childhood — rewritten what we ‘know’ of this remarkable man. What scanty details we know of his early years — from ‘The Odyssey’ and ‘Titanic and Other Ships’ — have proven to be completely off base (even down to basic things like the names of family members).

Research has that certain intoxicating effect (much like completing a cross country course or sniffing glue might prove for others ;-) ), and one does get a certain ‘high’ from a puzzle put together and a mystery unraveled, I enjoy doing it in my own work, but I also thoroughly enjoy following the research of others. Although I have not spent that much time working on Lightoller, mainly concerning myself with him when he comes into my own spheres of specific interest, there is so much overlap in this field of investigation that a certain overlap has occurred and I’ve found some splendid new sources on him quite inadvertently. It helps me to appreciate the work that is being done on him, which does dovetail neatly with my own. We’ve sat together in reading rooms and pushed crew agreements, registers, logs and court marshal testimony at each other, muttering ‘look at this!’ or ‘what have you found there??’, shared personal correspodence we’ve come across, visited sites that had meaning in
his life, and it has been quite a privilege to see how she works. She is blessedly free of the ‘hero/villain’ polarity that characterizes so much popular history, and is able to blend compassion with criticism to a brilliant degree — partly through her training, partly through sheer natural ability. The former has equipped her with a very thorough grasp of sources and archives, the latter has given her the instincts to transcend the mere accumulation of facts. Her work, with its judicious blend of criticism and appreciation of the forces of society, professional tradition, character and human nature has given her an insight into Charles Lightoller second to none.

Sorry if I seem carried away with raptures tonight — there are few things I like better than seeing good quality research. That, plus I’m on a bit of a high — finally escaped from being housebound after four days, and was able to meet a friend and colleague who is doing some phenomenal work herself on the Titanic. We were able to go into one of my favourite topics, photo identification of WSL officers with a new photo she had, over lunch in Chinatown. Came home to find one of those magic emails — this one indicating a find had been made in that old standby for treasure troves — an attic that someone had cleaned out!

All the best,

Inger

 

[George Behe]

Inger wrote:

> (one of the people closest on earth to
>James Moody was deeply affected by Michael >Bryant’s portrayal).

Hi, Inger!

Just out of curiosity, how old is this person and what was his/her relationship to Moody?

All my best,

George

 

[Inger Sheil]

Hallo, George -

They're no longer alive - and that's as much as I'll specify

All the best,

Inger

 

[George Behe]

Hi, Inger!

So now you're talking to dead people, eh? ;-)

All my best,

George

 

[Inger Sheil]

George, are you seriously doubting my mediumistic talents, eh? Just for that, I'm not going to share my definitive interview with Captain Smith

You trying to draw me out on this, George? ;-)

Why should I have to speak to the dead to have a first hand account as to what this person's emotional response was? Their reaction could have been electronically recorded, related by them in an interview (via tape or video), written down by them, witnessed by someone they knew, etc.

I suppose the dead do talk to us, in their own way. This person's voice came strongly out of the past, that's for certain - the power of their grief resonated still so strongly, all those decades later.

Warmest wishes,

Inger

 

[George Behe]

Inger wrote:

>You trying to draw me out on this, George? ;-)

Hi, Inger!

Since I received a ten line response to an eight word message, I'd say I succeeded admirably.

All my best,

George

 

[Allison Lane]

Steve--
I'm not bashing Jack and Rose. I do think that they serve admirably as tools for guiding us through ship life (albeit mostly first-class life); it's just that I like the officers more. Thank you for your compliment on my 'beautiful' post, though--I just thought I was aimlessly rambling!

Inger--
Speaking of that christening sequence, I'm still wondering why Walter Lord let them get away with that, but oh well. Also the presence of woodwinds in the ship's orchestra grates at me (and I play a woodwind!), but those are just minor quibbles. So ANTR had a second class? Where were they? I told you I had trouble telling everyone apart!

Your comment about ANTR's Moody has me intrigued, because I don't know which one he is, either. Somehow--to me at least--all the officers seem to look alike. *shrug* I'm also curious as to who the now-dead person is, but I'll just settle for wishing I knew. *g* I also agree with your comment on the real Lightoller being somewhere between More and Phillips. I got pretty insulted when Cal called Lightoller a 'strutting martinet' in Cameron's movie. Lightoller is a person I wish I could have known, because he seemed awfully devilish, though I still can't quite picture that voice coming from that face, doesn't match up, at least in my opinion.

And gosh, your whole ramble on research has me infinitely jealous! In the past year I've started to attempt some serious research on the officers, notably Boxhall, Bride, and Phillips (although I'm always interested in the rest of them), but I seem to be in a hard spot because my resources are so limited. What I wouldn't give to be able to get over to the Public Records Office in Kew! This is another one of those times where I absolutely abhor being young and lacking in funds and/or means of transportation. (I'm seventeen.) I also have a weird kind of inferiority complex where I'm afraid adults won't take me seriously, but I really do want to research these people since I so dearly wish I could have known them.

I love photos of just about everything--I collect photos related to the Titanic officers, and after amassing a collection of over 2000 production photos from The Phantom of the Opera (now there's a useless pastime for you!) I've gotten very good at identifying faces. In the photo realm related to Titanic (and I think I said this before in another thread), one of the things I would give a lot to see is a picture of Harold Bride *smiling*.

And on that note I'm going to procrastinate on studying for my precalculus exam and work on my Titanic story.


-Allison L.

 

[Inger Sheil]

Hallo there, Allison

Keep an eye out for ANTR's Moody supporting Lightoller - he serves as a useful foil, which is probably why a fairly extensive use was made of the character. In addition to a few scenes before the collision (Lightoller tells him to warn the lookouts there might be ice ahead, for example) and during the collision, he also goes down to summon Andrews. He's then told to assist Lightoller at the boats. He's the officer who has to face up to a passenger refusing to get into a boat because she might catch her death of cold and loading and lowering D, to recall a couple of instances off the top of my head. After telling Lightoller that there are only two collapsibles left, he joins Lightoller in attempting to launch them.

There's no reason why you shouldn't be taken seriously in your research - you might meet some age-based discrimination, but most people care about results rather than factors like age I appreciate the difficulties that go with lack of resources at the age of 17, but there are other ways to go about it, and at least lay the prepatory groundwork for later work. The internet is a useful tool for contacts, and letter writing still yields some of the most important results.

George:

Since I received a ten line response to an eight word message, I'd say I succeeded admirably.

Oooooo...I guess you got me! All my secrets are out now (note to self: tailor all future messages to exclude general musing and light-hearted asides) ;-)

Best wishes,

Inger

 

[John M. Feeney]

George wrote:
So now you're talking to dead people, eh? ;-)

Inger wrote:
George, are you seriously doubting my mediumistic talents, eh?

John writes:
Inger, if it's possible, could you contact Mr. Lightoller during the next seance, and ask him who the officer was who committed suicide? (As I recall, Walter Lord reported that Lightoller affirmed that tale to him but would not divulge the identity of the individual.) ;-)

Thanks very kindly!
JMF