Rating: 
Summary: A movie for movie lovers. Not for beer guzzling action buffs
Review: As movies go, this one is well structured. The characters are well developed, the plot points are very straightforward, the story is well written, and the actors did a good job of expressing the material to the screen.This is not a movie for people who have a lack of intelligence, lack passion, and have no artistic vision. Such individuals should probably purchase a copy of Terminator 2, or similar movie with lots of explosions and pointless chase scenes.
Rating: 
Summary: lame
Review: This movie is vastly overrated. The script is terrible, most of the acting is terrible, and some of the special effects look like a dark room with a candle in it. I can't imagine what they look like on the small screen. If you want to buy Titanic, I encourage you to reconsider. If you feel compelled to buy Titanic, you need to seek professional help.
Rating:
Summary: Better than my existential friends said...but, eck!
Review: It was void of any real meaning. The plot seemed tacked on and the movie made money because of the star power of dicaprio. Who is less than brilliant, by the way. But, the effects were nice. And kath bates was humorous.
Rating:
Summary: Great entertainment with a touch of tragic history.
Review: Watch this movie for fun. We all know about the fate of Titanic. It's amazing that Cameron can make a whole movie based on the sinking of a ship and especially when everyone knows that it's going to sink. Don't try to find a political or social message in watching this film though the separation of the social classes play a role in who survives. Just enjoy the amazing special effects and the very healthy Kate Winslet. You will feel a sense of loss if you remember throughout the movie that so many people died terrifying deaths on that fateful day.
Rating:
Summary: A grand, spectacular romantic epic
Review: I will admit right from the start that Titanic is not an entirely perfect film; the dialogue, particularly in the first half, is rather crude and the modern day sequences seemingly lack energy (but perhaps for a reason--see below). All reservations are thrown to the wind, however, when the viewer gets wrapped up in the romance of Jack (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Rose (Kate Winslet) and the majesty and grandeur of the most famous ship in history. It is a historical epic in the tradition of Gone With the Wind and Doctor Zhivago (both of which feature similar flaws as well). Nevertheless, the film that seems to have been most influential to director James Cameron in the making of Titanic is The Wizard of Oz: just as Dorothy is transported from her humdrum existance to the colorful land of Oz, so is the viewer in Titanic taken from the bleak, monochromatic modern world back to the vibrant Technicolor of April 1912. Possibly the finest aspect of Titanic is the performance of Kate Winslet. The film is basically about her transformation from depressed teenager to brave womanhood, and Winslet emodies the role with beauty and panache. She runs the gamut, literally and physically, in Titanic, and emerges with a radiance I've not seen since Julia Roberts charmed audiences in Pretty Woman. Winslet should've won the Oscar, but that's a whole other column.
Rating:
Summary: YUCK!!! AND DOUBLE YUCK!! NOT WORTH THE MONEY!
Review: This was the worst movie of the year! After hearing many rave reviews on the movie I decided to catch it. A waste of four dollars if you ask me. All I got from that three hour period was a sore back and a flat behind. There was no chemistry at all between the two performers. The soundtrack was horrible!! Celion Dion (I think that's her name) spoiled the whole movie with that terrible song!! (I really want rank a ZERO for this movie but one star seems to be lowest rating there is). The original Titanic movie was much better. The special effects is childs play in this movie, LOOKS FAKE!! 'While You Were Sleeping' and 'Sleepless In Seattle' will still be my favourite date movie, thank you very much.
Rating: 
Summary: Okay, a little over-rated though.
Review: Titanic is often considered as either extremely bad or extremely good by most viewers, I beg to differ. This film did lack a proper build-up of emotion, and brake-out of the emotional masks worn by people on a daily basis (which may be demonstrated in "Good Will Hunting") that was required for a true 'tear jerker.' The film did, however, have high quality special effects, as well as excellent acting on Winslet, DiCaprio, and even Billy Zane's parts. Zane, however, got the but end of the deal, by only doing one good thing that attempted to balance his arrogant character. The only person who fell short on this film, was really the writer. The writer didn't fall so short that the film was a total flop, but just enough to leave this film lacking. An example of the unexcusable triteness of the script was DiCaprio's ever-constent invulnerable, seen-it-all attitude, that makes a possibly likeable guy into a boring stereotype. The editor was even worse by leaving the film so incredibly long. To conclude on why it had such brilliant expectations was that most of the film's publicity was caused by DiCaprio's millions of young teenage girl fans, who worship him idolistically, otherwise, it would be one more no award, box office film that's memory would be lost along with the likes of "Henry V" (all due respect to Henry V, that was brilliance), and "The Goodfellas."
Rating:
Summary: it was a romantic movie full of wonderful special effects
Review: I have watched this movie several times and have found I fall in love with this movie all over again. It is a beautifully directed movie with many glamorous scenes and great special effects. Though the romance of Jack and Rose is not a very realistic one, it was what gave the movie the warmth that it needed. I did not go to see this movie for reality, but to escape to a once forgotten time where love prevails no matter what happens. If your looking for reality get a documentry.
Rating:
Summary: One of the Finest movies Ever to hit the silver screen
Review: As millions of people are really quite taken by this exquisite peice of work that James Cameron wrote, alot of peole tend to forget the real sadness behind the story. Nobody could be better at that than James Cameron. The band playing until the final minutes before thew sinking, Thomas Andrews staniding in the smoking room. Evrything was so impressive. If anyone has bad things to say about this movie that is fine. But if you are a lover of history, and fine details of a story, this is a must see.
Rating: 
Summary: Better to have seen it in the cinema
Review: There's certainly been a lot of hype and a lot of backlash when it comes to this latest rendition of the famous disaster. As you'll see in other reviews, most either loved it or hated it, but felt strongly about it either way. My feelings are, rather, on the moderate. First, let me say that I saw this film three times in the cinema, and would have no problem seeing it there again. This is because the visuals are absolutely extrordinary. The scope and glory of the cinematography, combined with Cameron's impeccable sense of visual "moments", make this film a sheer delight for the eyes. In fact, the best moments are just visual: the transitions from present to past and back, Rose and Jack kissing on the bow at sunset, Jack drawing Rose (a nude scene overwhelmingly aesthetic, rather than sexual), harrowing bits in the sinking sequence, dead Jack slowly descending into the dark of the ocean. In the cinema, though not on video, this is enough to carry "Titanic" over its deficiencies. The same is not true on video, however. On video, you have either the choice of "standard" format - in which you a good third of the picture - or "widescreen", which gives you the whole movie, only smaller. While the latter is certainly the way to go, the diminishment of the visual element brings to focus the drawback of the movie. First, the screenplay itself is one of Cameron's weakest. It is cliched, melodramatic, and overreaching, not to say anachronistic (more on that anon). Second, Leonardo DiCaprio is a terrible actor. Not even talents like Kate Winslet and Kathy Bates can get him to work with them. He has no concept of ensemble acting. The excellent supporting cast, in particular Gloria Stuart and Victor Garber, just don't have enough to do to make up for him. Third, in trying to make Rose a girl for the ninties, Cameron makes her unbelievable for her day. She would not have smoked at the table, she would not have punched strangers, and she certainly would not have had sex with Jack. (Their relationship would have been better if that scene had been omitted anyway.) As far as the "finger" dispute goes, she should have used the English equivalent (like our "V for Victory" gesture, only with the back of the hand facing the recipient.) In conclusion, if you haven't seen this in the cinema, rent the widescreen edition to get the feel. If you have seen it in the cinema, best to be content with that.
|
