# Titanic (1997)

### reviewed by
Chris Chaberski

TITANIC, a review by Christopher Chaberski

Director: James Cameron Writer: James Cameron Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet, Billy Zane, Bill Paxton, Gloria Stuart, Kathy Bates, Suzy Amis, Bernard Hill, Francis Fisher, and Victor Garber Cinematographer: Russell Carpenter Composer: James Horner

SYNOPSIS: James Cameron's epic TITANIC is a superb film. The tremendous story is, basically, a third-class boy falls for first-class girl, wrapped around the sinking of the greatest ship of all time. Mr. Cameron's film is aided by top-notch performances from its leads. Leonardo DiCaprio finally sheds his arrogant punk image and performs wonderfully, while Kate Winslet shines brighter than ever, as her character experiences the full range of emotions. The supporting cast is also noteworthy, though nothing overshadows DiCaprio and Winslet. There are some minor weak points, but they do not bring the film down noticeably. Cameron splits the film into two halves, one prior to the iceberg and one afterwards, each an example of superior filmmaking. Together, they comprise a full epic adventure, but more importantly, a magnificent love story, which ends in a climax sure to be embedded in viewers' heads long after leaving the theater. TITANIC is the best film of 1997.

MAIN REVIEW (There will be some spoilers at the very end, but there will be a warning beforehand.):

James Cameron's list of credits towers above most of his peers. Though I have not seen THE SPAWNING, his first film, I have no problem in saying that his filmography is more than just a little impressive. THE TERMINATOR, ALIENS, and THE ABYSS (the director's cut, that is) are all phenomenal. In the 1990's, I believe he took an ever-so-slight dip with T2 and TRUE LIES, both of which lacked the emotional sharpness of his 1980's films, but they are still grand entertainments. With TITANIC, he has his masterpiece. His other films have flirted with greatness, but never achieved the spellbinding feats of TITANIC. Up until now, it was as if Mr. Cameron was more concerned with the machines in his films (and all of his films seem to indicate a great big great-big-machine fetish) than with the people who created them, though he never lost sight of the importance of those people. More than any other action director/writer, Mr. Cameron has maintained strong relationships between his characters. He has become famous for writing strong female parts, though that could be questioned with Jamie Lee Curtis' character in TRUE LIES. Linda Hamilton may as well re-name herself Sarah Connor; Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio's performance (opposite the equally-sharp Ed Harris) in THE ABYSS brims with fiery rage one moment and then tender femininity the next, a rare feat anywhere, much less in an action film; Mr. Cameron's finest female remains Sigourney Weaver's Ellen Ripley. When was the last time a female action lead received an Oscar nomination? I cannot think of one, ever. Ripley dominates ALIENS, even with the army of H.R. Giger-inspired nasties chasing her and her tough space-marine cohorts, wielding heavy artillery and simultaneously rediscovering her maternal instincts with the lost child she takes under her wing. In TITANIC, Kate Winslet's Rose DeWitt-Bukater is no exception. She does not get to handle M-16's or underwater oil rig equipment, but still she proves to be one tough woman. As I said before, Rose runs the emotional gamut in this film, and Winslet handles it beautifully. An Oscar nomination, especially in this year of rare strong female parts, is definite, and deserved. Not for one moment did I not believe what Rose was doing. It would have been easy not to like Rose. Face it, she is a prissy, spoiled, ignorant rich girl. But Winslet makes Rose irresistible. She exceeds her fabulous performance in HEAVENLY CREATURES by being completely vulnerable, yet never out of control. Rose wants to experience things, things which her mother and, more specifically, her class forbid her to experience. Who can blame her for despising the upper class experience? It is depicted as boring, repetetive, and adventure-deprived. She wants to change her life, and finally, finally receives the opportunity, in the form of Jack Dawson (DiCaprio). Jack is a travelling artist who wins his ticket back to America on board Titanic in a poker games, just five minutes before the great ship leaves. I must admit, the thing most preventing me from wanting to see this film beforehand was that I knew Leonardo DiCaprio was the male lead. In all of his prior performances (save MARVIN'S ROOM), he perpetually irritated me with his cockiness and whining. Thankfully, he does not whine or act cocky for one moment during TITANIC. He shows full capability of bringing great force to a "straight" character, as opposed to his previous array of quirky ones. Here, he has no physical or mental handicaps to aid his performance, yet is stronger than ever. DiCaprio sparkles as Jack, fully embodying the carefree, poor, young artist who falls for the first class beauty he spots on a higher deck. This is a magical moment, as Rose comes into his sight, almost glowing with light. Jack is smitten. His friend Fabrizio (Danny Nucci) waves a hand in front of his mesmerized eyes, to no avail. As fate would have it, Jack and Rose do meet later that night, when Jack finds her hanging off of the back of the ship, in a suicide attempt. For the first 100 minutes, Mr. Cameron allows the relationship between Jack and Rose to develop realistically and poignantly. Thank God for this. So many films rely on huge climaxes to titillate audiences. Mr. Cameron realizes that huge climaxes can do more than titillate if the audience is entranced by the characters in that very climax. Feeling titillated wares off; feeling truly moved lingers. A film cannot truly move its viewers without devoting proper time to its characters. The first half of the film relies on more than just a developing romantic drama to drive itself. So many other flavors are at work here. First and foremost, comedy. The spit lying unbeknownst on Jack's chin as he is presented to the first class ladies; Jack's lack of silverware knowledge at the dinner table; Cal's dismissal of Picasso; these moments, among others, comically underscore the development of Jack and Rose's romance. Other factors at work during the first half of the film to keep the entertainment level high: the marvelous cinematography, with sweeping shots of the monumental ship; exquisite period detail in sets, costumes, language and mannerisms; colorful supporting characters, such as Kathy Bates' Molly Brown; and the unforgettable score by James Horner. Every bit of music is impeccably paired with what is onscreen. Its greatest accomplishment is that the music never seems out of place, so rare in film today. It is never obvious, yet omnipresent. This is yet another category for which TITANIC deserves Oscar recognition. The developing romance is filled with so many magical moments, both visual and emotional. The film's finest moment, in my eyes, is the nude drawing scene. For such a seemingly outrageous concept, the scene fits perfectly into the framework of the characters and the film. After Rose has conceded her evident affection of Jack, to Jack, she brings him back to her suite to be drawn like the women she has seen in Jack's other drawings--nude. For the occasion, she wears only the 56-karat Heart of the Ocean diamond necklace her fiance Cal (Zane) had previously given her. It is the only time she wears the jewel. After dropping her robe, a speechless Jack positions her on the couch. During this scene, this behemoth of a film achieves a scarce level of subtle, cinematic poetry. Little dialogue is exchanged, but the scene swelters with eroticism. Seeing Jack's eyes peering over the paper at Rose is to see artistic determination, the search for perfection-- Jack wants to capture Rose's very essence in one drawing. The halfway point of the film is preceded by a physical manifestation of Rose and Jack's growing love for each other. This could be the finest-executed example of a teen love scene since 1989's SAY ANYTHING... The scene exemplifies the youthful exuberance of Jack and Rose, but also the universal and timeless experience of falling in love. The few words that are spoken during this scene are the film's best dialogue. In this scene, Mr. Cameron whittles down the feelings of Rose and Jack into just the minimal number of words, an appropriate and deft maneuver. When the iceberg hits, it really does not seem like something that could sink Titanic. This was, after all, an "unsinkable" ship. The blind arrogance of its creators is humbled by a tiny-in-comparison chunk of frozen water floating in the North Atlantic. The damage is done. The ship will sink, proclaims its builder and staunch admirer, Mr. Andrews (a brilliant Victor Garber). Mr. Cameron hits another high note with the dumbfounded reactions of the various crew members upon finding out that the unsinkable is indeed, sinking. The second half of the film defines the capacity of the cinematic art. Describing the sights Mr. Cameron unleashes is next to impossible. It is here where parts of TITANIC become simply ineffable, where one can truly understand and accept the medium of film as unique from the other arts. There are certain things that only novels can do best, and there are certain things that only poems can do best. No novel or poem could hope to better the second half of TITANIC for what it is. And that is a visual magnum opus. Seeing the great ship fill with water, slowly dip head-first into the water, and finally ending up straight in the air, only to slowly ease into the Atlantic ocean...all of this is an utterly remarkable visual experience. But TITANIC aspires beyond this. The eye candy is only half the story. After spending so much time with Jack and Rose's building romance, the film certainly does not forget them. Because the audience has invested so much into them, their numerous subsequent separations are that much more heart-wrenching. The actual sinking appears to unfold in real time, which is a definite plus. The gradual tension plus the feeling of inevitability allows for moment by moment changes from intensity to pathos. One cannot forget the humbled Mr. Andrews leaning against the dining room mantle, gently fixing the clock as a half- empty brandy glass slides off the mantle. There are so many of these tiny, poignant moments, which hardly ever fall into sentimentality. Mr. Cameron captures so many characters' feelings during this time of desperation. But he never loses focus on Jack and Rose. They are the main story, always. There are, however, minute scratches on this diamond of a film. Some of Cameron's dialogue is mediocre at best. And there are moments when the central romance becomes cheesy. But what needs to be considered here is that Jack and Rose are kids! There is ALWAYS cheesiness in a youthful romance (as well as older romance). That is really the way that kids in love speak to each other. Also, the perhaps-too-sharp contrast between rich and poor often comes out in unnecessarily harsh lines spoken by Rose's mother and, especially, Cal Hockley. Thankfully, though, these weaknesses are easily eclipsed by the prevailing positives evident throughout. Along with DiCaprio and Winslet, so many other actors perform splendidly. Kathy Bates is always delightful as the Unsinkable Molly Brown; Frances Fisher nails her role as the class-aware mother, who is actually given a small dose of humanization (rare for the upper class in this film) when she explains that the family fortune is depleted; Bill Paxton and Gloria Stuart each do very well during the present day bookends, with Stuart especially showing Rose's undying fire. But there are two supporting performances of special note: Victor Garber as the honorable Mr. Andrews, and Billy Zane as the oh-so-evil Cal Hockley. Garber deserves an Oscar nomination for his earnest, intense performance as the ship's main designer. He is, at first, rightfully proud of his ship. But when the iceberg hits, he is the first to accept that "the ship will sink." When he walks up the grand staircase, and Rose inquires about why everyone is being made to wear their life-vests, Garber's eyes (and watch his extraordinarily expressive eyebrows here) burn with guilt, shame, and fear as he explains to Rose of the inevitable. The other performance worth discussing is Billy Zane's portrayal of Cal Hockley. As performed, Hockley is completely unlikable, and unfortunately one-dimensional in that respect. It is difficult to say whether the blame should fall more on Zane or on Mr. Cameron, for writing lines that could not really be taken very far. Surprisingly though, Zane does very well with what the character ends up being. Occasionally, there is even some subtlety gracing his performance (!). It is easy to hate Cal, but impossible to feel anything else, which is a weakness in any character. Beyond characters and performances, the technical achievements of this film are beyond astounding. The visual effects are quite simply the best effects in cinema, not only for their visible attributes, but also for the way they bolster the story, rather than supercede it. Also, the sound is perhaps the clearest and most skillfully utilized I have ever heard. So many tiny conversations, sound effects, and background noises come across so clearly without ever getting in the way. This is the way technical aspects of a film should work. After all is said and done, one question remains: Why is TITANIC such a great film? Yes, the acting, the tragic story, and the technical marvels are all executed wonderfully, but what really pushes TITANIC to the top of the heap? Perhaps it is the film's massive ambition, only equalled by the size of the actual Titanic. The immense ambition plus the near-flawless execution amount to the complete cinematic experience. This, in a nutshell, albeit a rather large and expensive nutshell, is the true power of film.

TITANIC--rating: **** (out of four)/ alternative scale: 9.6/10.0

    ----------------
    WARNING:

    Spoilers below...

    **
    SPOILER WARNING!!  DO NOT READ IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN
    THE FILM!!**
    I wanted to take some time to discuss the final few minutes of
    TITANIC.

I found the scene where the 100-year old Rose throws the diamond into the ocean to be a misstep. It was especially irritating that this scene happened after so many brilliant moments. I did find her gesture, symbolic as it was, necessary. Why not leave the idea open to audience interpretation? The fate of the diamond could have been much more tantalizing had it been left ambiguous. I can understand the reasons Rose has for letting the diamond fall to rest along the ocean floor, with the rest of Titanic. However, I still feel that it was a poor choice, and at such an inopportune moment, too! However, I thought the following scene was perfect. After one last beautiful visual transition from present-day-sunken Titanic to the majestic, original Titanic, Rose's dream of being with Jack one last time fulfilled my passion to see Jack one last time as well. Some have said that this scene was corny and cheesy, and I can see why they get that impression. But, Mr. Cameron, if you're reading this, just know that I, at least, think you hit just the right note. Allowing Rose and Jack one final embrace was absolutely the best way to cap the greatest film romance in years, in my humble opinion.

The review above was posted to the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due to ASCII to HTML conversion.

Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews