Hollywood » Movies » Titanic » Audience Reviews

Titanic (1998)(U/A)

Release date 13 Mar 1998

Audience Reviews

Write your own review & let others know how Good or Bad the movie was.

4000 characters left
  • Story
  • Action
  • Direction
  • Movie rating
Showing 1 to 2 of 2
Ama Rangana Mahagamage 2015-03-12 23:03:34
No movies are really perfect. They always have flaws, and things that just irk me the wrong way. Sometimes a movie can be close to perfect, in my opinion. Titanic is one of the movies that is close to perfect in a technical sense.
One thing that many critics have been raving about is if the $200 million price tag of Titanic can be paid off, or even if the movie was worth that amount of money. In my opinion, this shouldn't be the main issue. The main issue should be whether the movie was simply a good movie or not. But if I am to answer that question of whether it was worth that hefty amount, I'd have to answer with a resounding "YES!"
First let's discuss what kind of movie Titanic is. Titanic is not an action movie. Titanic is a well made love story that has elements of classic Cameron suspense woven into it. After all, when a boat is sinking, everything isn't okay. Things go wrong, and thus you have suspense. But don't look at the movie as if it were a simple action movie, because it's not. It's many things woven into one. A love story, a comedy, and a thriller. One of the strengths of Titanic is how it's many things at once.
Titanic is also three stories at once. The story of Brock Lovett (Bill Paxton) searching for the lost diamond that Rose Bukater (Kate Wins let) wore back in 1912. It's also the story, being told in flashback, regarding two lovers torn because of class distinction and a jealous fiancee who wants nothing but to win. It also chronicles the sinking of the Titanic, which is wonderfully portrayed through amazing special effects.
DiCaprio and Winslet work together seamlessly on the screen, and there couldn't have been a better match-up for this movie. They both performed wonderfully and are definate Oscar contenders.
James Horner does perhaps one of his best scores yet with this movie, incorperating nice vocals to make the mood explode into a colorful experience. Without the music, Titanic would have gotten perhaps only a 6/10 on my rating scale. You don't know how much music adds to a movie until it's taken out.
All in all, this movie is a masterpiece. Although corny at times, it soars with all of the elements that Cameron has masterfully arranged. It really makes you think they went back in time and captured the whole thing happening.
Titanic is one of my favorites, but rates low on the scale of them, simply because it's so highly depressing. But it is a very well made movie. I'd recommend it to anyone.
Mohammed 2010-02-01 21:08:26
It is with some surprise that I come to write this review. For, eight months after it opened, it's a little disorientating to remind myself that I actually did very much enjoy James Cameron's epic "Titanic." That's because, somewhere in that time period, the unrelenting crudfest that has surrounded this film has made me hate the film and everything about it. I hate Leonardo DiCaprio. I hate James Horner. And surely I can't be alone in wishing that Celine Dione's heart would just *stop*?

But I want to be objective. So, having acknowledged my qualms, I'll try to set them aside. And let's get at the question that the hype has all too often obscured: is the film any good? If so, why? And if not, why not?

The key to this question is to situate the film within the correct genre. James Cameron, let's remember, is an action director; he is probably America's most talented (Spielberg at his best is better, but Spielberg's problems of late are a whole different issue). He made "Aliens" (my vote as the best sci-fi actioner of the eighties), both "Terminator" films, "The Abyss," and "True Lies." He is not known as director of romances.

True, one thing that was notable in his best films ("Aliens" and the first "Terminator") was an attention to character. But this was never a feature that could stand on its own, and until "Titanic" I don't think Cameron ever harboured illusions that it could. The beauty of Cameron's work was that he could create serviceable, yet affecting, emotional subplots and integrate them fully into the thrust of an action narrative (think how well Ripley's maternal instincts are played upon in "Aliens").

We must see the plot of Titanic in these terms. Do we really believe that Cameron conceived the love story between these two characters and then decided the perfect backdrop was the sinking of the Titanic? I don't. I'm pretty sure Cameron started with the thought of how exciting the sinking scenes would be and then grafted Jack and Rose into the events afterwards.

The film bears this out. As a good old fashioned disaster movie, "Titanic" is superb. The special effects, while not as flawless as some would have you believe, are extremely impressive. This is even truer when you consider how many involve water effects, which are notoriously difficult: they become expensive when done full scale (think "Waterworld") and tend to look very fake when miniaturised (think of the breaking dam in "Superman").
Showing 1 to 2 of 2
Get Instant News Updates
Notification Settings X
Time Settings
Clear Notification X
Do you want to clear all the notifications from your inbox?
Settings X
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. This includes cookies from third party social media websites and ad networks. Such third party cookies may track your use on Filmibeat sites for better rendering. Our partners use cookies to ensure we show you advertising that is relevant to you. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on Filmibeat website. However, you can change your cookie settings at any time. Learn more