Le Titanic

It isn't great, but I was impressed by the overall project. It is overlong, with a somewhat corny script and some of the actors don't convince. The rape scene halfway through was very brutal, and perhaps inappropriate. Some people say this is historically inaccurate, but I need to check my history. The performances are good generally with some exceptions (Catherine Zeta Jones is lovely here), the costumes are nice and the special effects for a TV mini series were close to superb. George C.Scott is a brilliant actor, and he was quite good here. Tim Curry, as a villain likewise. Though both men have been better. I wasn't entirely convinced by Ase and Jamie's romance, as it was basically a retread of the James Cameron blockbuster, which also suffers from its length. The music is also good( my music teacher hates the 1997 film's music) and this is the first adaptation when the ship breaks into two, which was nicely done. Not a bad attempt! 7/10 Bethany Cox

I have seen just about all off the Titanic movies there are. This definately isn't the best but it is worth seeing. Most Titanic movies portray the Astor's, the Straus's, Molly Brown, the wireless operators, and the captain. But this film also shows the story of the Allison's which is never told and they portrayed the story remarkably well. It also showed the third class story as well and did a good job with that one as well. It is a good movie to watch even though it is slow at times.

My Score 7.1/10

A lot of other comments stated that the acting was great, especially George C. Scott. Sorry, but that's just not so. His lines are delivered dripping with melodrama, so much so that I thought I was watching an amature production. His explanation of the ship and what would happen as soon as he stepped in the wheelhouse (after the collision) was laughable. How he knew the ship was doomed before anyone sounded the hull was amazing. Further technical gaffs was the sound of creaking wood and running water, even in the first class section, within minutes of the collision. The rape scene was apparently some scriptwriter's idea of connecting with contemporary stories, but it was ugly and just not true. In fact, this film is filled with more false info than any other (except the film by the same name with Clifton Webb and Barbara Stanwyk (sp?)). If you want to see the most accurate tale of what occurred during that April night, see the superb "A Night to Remember". I rate this one star out of 10.

I had very mixed feelings about this movie. Although there were quite a few flaws, it was certainly not without its charm. The first thing that must be taken into consideration when commenting on this movie is that it was a low-budget, made-for-tv movie, so the effects and other technical aspects were less than spectacular. However, to me the story is what makes a movie good or bad. Since there were a few stories sprinkled throughout the film, it was at times good, but usually not so good. First the bad things. I think the worst thing about this movie is that there was alot of pointless and boring filler that made the movie seem to drag on, especially around the time of the sinking. The second time I watched the movie, I noticed that I fast fowarded through almost half of it. I also did not care much for the story of the Allison family and their paranoid nanny. I found their part when the ship is sailing extremely tedious and boring and the part when they're searching for their baby too obnoxious to be sad. I also almost couldn't bear the performance of the actress portraying Mrs. Allison. And the whole part about the nanny just became annoying. The Allison family actually existed, and the young Allison girl was the only first-class child to die on the Titanic. This could have been a very sad and touching part, but I just saw it as a complete flop.

Now for the ok things. I really loved Catherine Zeta-Jones and Peter Gallagher in this. Although the love affair between the two was just a little more than okay, they threw in great performances and I found their characters interesting. I enjoyed much of the happenings in first class and especially found the old superficial socialite (that woman with the dog, her name slips my mind as of now) very entertaining and humorous. As for those down in steerage, I found Jamie and Olsa to be quite charming characters and took interest in their affairs. However, my favorite part of the movie was most likely Tim Cury. If there is one thing I love in a film it is a good villian, and he is definately one. His performance was, in my opinion, the best part of the movie. Overall, I'd say that it was not great, but there were some factors that saved it and actually made it an enjoyable made-for-tv movie(how often can you say that?)

This made-for-TV version of the famous disaster actually stands up fairly well against its $200 million James Cameron counterpart. The effects are good - and in a few cases even on par with Cameron's version. Indeed, watching the two films back to back, you might be surprised at the similarities between the two versions, at least during some key moments. Both have steerage party scenes, for instance. The cast is generally strong too, particularly Catherine Zeta Jones in one of her first lead performances, and George C. Scott as Capt. Smith. But where Titanic (1996) hits all the wrong notes is in a poorly conceived subplot involving a crooked crewmember (Tim Curry). His character doesn't really belong here, and his villainous actions get to be quite shocking near the end ... it takes away from the human drama of the doomed people on the ship and actually comes close to ruining the movie (though no fault of actor Tim Curry, who turns in a great performance). If you only have time to see one super-long movie based on the disaster, see the Cameron film - if you've got time to see two, this one is worth the rental.