Sexyloutak
Absolutely the worst movie.
AutCuddly
Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,
Nicole
I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.
Susan David Warr
This was a great mini series and we both found this version of the Titanic story much better than Cameron's movie. We didn't understand why the movie got all the hype. The TV series had better character development. The actors were better in the TV series as well. The TV series seemed to have more time to develop more story lines as well as just having a love story. I thought that Decaprio was particularly weak. His dialog was poor. Perhaps that was the poor script perhaps. But why did he have to repeat the name "Rose" so often. As for the visuals the TV series was just as good. The only thing that Cameron had really that was better than the TV show was the theme song. Why the public swallowed Cameron's movie so much over the TV series I cannot explain. But then I do not understand the rating that some movies get. Some great movies seem to get no respect and others get high reviews.
ptb-8
Hilarious TV miniseries that perhaps uses borrowed sets from the UK 1979 version ... maybe reused in the Meaning Of Life 'Titanic sequence" .....(SOS TITANIC of 1979 starred with Jerry Hauser and Cloris Leachman.... yes....) and adds glamourpuss Catherine Zeta Jones and George C Scott with what is clearly Tim Currie's most berserk characterization of any rocky horror he has ever played....in fact he plays it for laughs... and at such a 'Snidley Whiplash' level that must have just collapsed with laughter after ever 'take' . Wait till you see him 'disguise himself as a woman... even though he has a mustache and beard....!) Handsome JOHN DOYLE... (who...?) in a Jimmy Cagney role and various other TV and faded movie stalwarts add feathers and good haircuts to the luster of the doomed liner... but really this is no more than cheap tabloid TV 'clarrssy' movie watching for uneducated farm workers... in fact I do not believe it was made for anyone whose first language was English... even though it is in English. Capish? Bleached back projection, rabble hordes, religious fanatics, flimsy locked gates and bewildered potato head farmers and wives round out a really low budget 'oooh waaah' level of production. The best bit? The fantastic Gothic ceiling of the dining room. This is a version of TITANIC that actually dares to skimp on the actual sinking of the ship... that happens during a montage...!!!!! yep, during a montage......... urgggghh. a montage... huh??? the whole thing runs 170 minutes and the ship sinks in a montage..!!!!!!
grabitrun_11
Who the hell decided that this was a good idea? The very fact that TV producers have to invent bogus love stories to make the greatest and most famous maritime disaster in history more interesting is insulting - to introduce a fictional rape is positively impertinent.Had anyone involved in this crap ever heard of the Titanic before? It didn't seem like it, as others have noted before me the inaccuracies in construction of the ship itself along with the events portrayed is simply laughable.As for the performances, George C. Scott - one of my all time favourite actors - must have been really hard up to stoop to this clunking mess, and Catherine Zeta Jones, well...the Oscars really don't mean anything if talentless pouting hacks like this wooden woman can win one, or perhaps her husband helped buy her it, and as mentioned Marilu Henner gave possibly the least-like Margaret Brown performance ever.Add to this mix of wooden performances, some hammy ones too - most notably Tim Curry, who was hamming it up something rotten - if only he had twiddly bits on his moustache and said "curses!" every 5 minutes, he would be ideal for the local am-dram group's pantomime villain this year.With all the wood and ham on display, everyone could have been saved from this Titanic disaster, sailing on a sea of wooden performances and eating ham sandwich soliloquies till they reached New York.Avoid this rubbish at all costs!
prunesarequeen
So i saw this 2 part movie on channel 5 (UK) many many years back and I thought it was really good. But then i learnt more and more about the Titanic and slowly realised that this movie wasn't as good as i thought. The CG ship looks good but the sets are badly recreated. They have a locked gate at the end of the A Deck promenade which leads to the 3rd class section on C Deck. This was NOT there on the actual ship and there was no access to 3rd class from that section. They also show the Dining Room to be at the foot of the stairs on A Deck, the dining room was on D Deck and at one part of the movie, the dining room is seen to be on the boat deck.The film covers 3 stories. One of Jamie Perse who stole a ticket to get onto Titanic, he meets a girl and a family she is with and they fall in love. Jamie is also involved with a crew member who assists in trying to steal the 1st class Jewelary. The 2nd story is of the Allison family who have hired a Nanny who is apparently a murderer and the 3rd story follows Izabella Paradine, a woman returning home from her mothers funeral. She bumps into an ex lover, Wynn Park, and she has an affair with him while her husband and daughter are waiting for her in America. They have removed one Key character from this film....Thomas Andrews, no idea why but they have merged his role with Ismay and Captain Smith. A very bad move as this is historically inaccurate, as is much of the film.The historical accuracies aside, the 3 stories are quite well written, shouldn't really be set on the Titanic, the thief one at least, but it does make a few good hours of entertainment
