Okay, it's time to kick off the movie section of Guillame with a bang, and what better way to do it than with the most expensive movie ever made [for the time being] Titanic? Just look at everything the movie gives you for your entertainment dollar: Big sets! Pretty boy Leonardo DiCaprio! Period-piece babe Kate Winslet! Foul mouthed old ladies! Really big sets! Lots and lots of water! Plus, it's longer than the standard 90-120 mintue flick, so it's worth supporting just on those grounds. Length=Quality,or something to that effect.
Director James Cameron has stated that he wasn't making a disaster movie with "Titanic" and, to his credit, it isn't. Rather, it's a soupy romance where all the characters get bounced around by wave machines in the final act. The movie opens with an elderly Rose [Gloria Stuart] bumming a ride back to the site of the wreck for seemingly no other reason than to provide narration and to assure the audience that at least one of the characters is getting off the doomed dinghey. Listening to her recount her past rendevous are Bill Paxton, Suzy Amis [exactly what she added to the film is difficult to figure out] and a pack of howling, salty, pseudo-science types who probably deserved to be stuck in the middle of the ocean for months on end.
When the movie finally cuts back the Titanic setting off on her first, and only, voyage the sight is impressive. At that point in the movie you know you're in for a BIG movie. By that, I mean a that must been seen on the big screen to be properly enjoyed. Sweeping shots such as the one showing the Titanic and it's passengers [a trick Cameron enjoyed so much he did it at least twice] can be only fully enjoyed when seen on the big screen. Any future attempts to watch the film on videotape will seem comprimised. Plus, I suspect it will also bring the film's main problem into greater highlight.
Just what is up with the romance between Jack and Rose? The story doesn't even have the decency to make Rose's fiancee Cal [Billy Zane] the least bit appealing. I was surprised that he wasn't given a moustache he could twirl for added melodramatic sinister effect. Was the audience supposed to throw popcorn at him whenever he came on screen? His monomanical desire to come out ahead is shown to be such a driving factor that by the end of the film he's gunning after the couple in a ridiculous chase scene. But, really, that doesn't matter, since Jack and Rose make such a cute couple that if her other suitor had acted like he was somewhat human it would've detracted from their oh-so perfect relationship.
But if it wasn't the main plot that bothered me [even a cynic like me can enjoy a love conquers all plot] what was it then? Class. By portraying the first class passengers as such a group of blue-blood, old-money snobs to make Rose's rejection of their world the obvious choice, the film destroys any sympathy the audience might have for their plight, or, by extension, the plight of the ship. The reel-playing, Guinness chugging world of those in the lower decks is obviously the surroundings that the audience is supposed to identify with. The little guy fighting back against the stuffed shirts: what could be more American? [Side note: the film is most certainly from an American viewpoint, with DiCaprio as an expatriate who is trying to get back to the states. Plus, it meant that DiCaprio didn't have to worry about trying to flub his way through an accent. Personally, I'm looking forward to his next film- "The Man in The Iron Mask" which features Leo as the king of France. If that movie is as ludicrious as the previews make it out to be, it's going to be the guilty pleasure of the year.] Early in the film Rose makes a Freudian quip about the ship when Bruce Ismay [Jonathan Hyde] is yammering on about the length and power of the Titanic. Following along those lines, doesn't the Titanic finally come to symbolize the wealth, power, and privilege of those in the first class section? A microcosm of all that is wrong with society, with those in power literally living over the lower classes, with the only interaction between the groups coming from either life or death situations, some mean spirited jibing ["Son, do you have the slighest comprehension of what you're doing?...Well, you're about to go into the snake pit." as noted by the Unsinkable Molly Brown {Kathy Bates}]or when the dogs need to be walked. The ship was built by Scottish workers as one passenger noted, but it's there strictly so those in the know can putter about the seas in style.
When the Titanic does start to go down, the class issue is further intensified by having those in first class piling on to the too-few life boats while those in the lower decks are locked below while the water swells in behind them. But Cameron stages the sinking so well that one doesn't have time to dwell on any deeper meanings; the sense of confusion and horror the passengers feel is palatable. Plus, the movie shows how different passengers deal with the impending disaster, from Thomas Andrews [Victor Garber] setting the proper time on the dining room clock, to Captain Smith [Bernard Hill] stoically going down with the ship. But after everything is good and sunk, the movie has a shot of the Titanic as it appears in Rose's memories. I think the film was trying to convey a sense of loss when it shows the main dining room as it once was, but instead I couldn't help thinking that this kind of excess probably deserved to go down to the bottom of the deep blue sea.
So am I not recommending the film? Heck no, go on out and see it. The movie will fly by, you'll have a good cry, and you'll want to go back and watch it the next night. But think about what the movie is trying to say, as well as what it inadvertantly says.
So, anything you would like to say about my off the cuff commentary? If so, drop me a line at gleep9@hotmail.com I'd love to hear from ya.
You can either go down with the page or head back to the main page or swim on back to the movie page.
Get your own Free Home Page