Error message

Notice: Undefined index: und in BeanBagLatestMedia->view() (line 172 of /home/relmag/public_html/sites/default/modules/bean_bag/plugins/bean/

Notice: Undefined variable: summary in BeanBagLatestMedia->view() (line 176 of /home/relmag/public_html/sites/default/modules/bean_bag/plugins/bean/

Titanic 3D

Somehow, our film reviewer had never seen Titanic—until now. Here's what he thought, 15 years after its original release.

In order to review the 3D re-release of Titanic, I first had to get permission from my younger brother, Adam. You see, when the big boat movie first surfaced (ahem) in 1997, Adam and I made an agreement—known between the two of us as “The Pact”—to never watch the movie for our entire lives unless the other person watched it first. Which is impossible, see? The result of The Pact has been that Adam and I are among the last living Americans who have spent the last decade and a half in a state of perpetual Titanic-lessness. We were not the kings of the world, our hearts did not go on, and we were proud of it. 

Well, Adam was proud of it. As my love of movies grew over the years, my intense curiosity about the record-breaking phenomenon (11 Oscars and, until Avatar, the highest box-office gross) grew along with it. At film school, it became absurdly difficult to avoid the most popular movie of all time. I was actually required at one point to watch Titanic for a class, and I managed to pass the final exam without answering any questions from personal experience. Thus, when the opportunity arose to review the movie for RELEVANT, I had to get permission from Adam. I was summarily released from The Pact on the conditions that 1) I mention him in the article (Hi, Adam) and 2) I wouldn’t tell his wife until afterward (Hi, Veronica).

And so it was that history and adolescent shortsightedness conspired to send me into the movie theater a few days ago with a rare cinematic gift—the privilege of seeing Titanic for the very first time, on a big screen, fifteen years removed from the hype. Normally it would be an odd thing to review a movie a generation too late, like telling people the odds on a horse a week after the race. But because I’d never seen Titanic and no one talks about it now like they did when I was 16, I got the chance to just ... watch the movie. And l loved it.

Since most of you have seen the movie already, we’ll hit the 3D part first. It’s fine—forgettable, but not in a bad way. It’s one of the best conversions from 2D so far, but that isn’t saying much. Unlike Avatar, James Cameron’s 3D opus, Titanic wasn’t designed with stereoscopic wonders in mind. After-the-fact 3D conversions are notoriously dark, and I would have loved for Titanic to have been a little brighter, for its Oscar-winning photography to have glowed and glistened a little more. It’s hard to tell if that was the movie’s fault or the movie theater’s fault for having a mediocre projector. Still, the vertigo-inducing high shots were a little more vertiginous, the huge ballroom shots were little more cavernous, and the dialogue shots a little more ... well, the 3D didn’t really affect the dialogue scenes. Either way, it was still a nice enough way to see the movie.

I think the real success of Titanic is that it never tries to be anything other than a universally accessible blockbuster. Not everything about Titanic is perfect, but everything fits perfectly together. The sound design is immersive and detailed. The special effects—a now-rare blend of CGI, models and practical effects—are exceptional by 1997 standards and at least impressive by today’s. Gorgeous sets and costumes surround the actors, whose performances are as broad as the screenplay they serve. Some might see Cameron’s heavy-handed dialogue and swooning camera moves as flaws, but I see them as part of a recipe that calls for nothing but equal parts spectacle, romance and suspense. Titanic isn’t a movie that needs to be cool or subtle because it’s pretty much everything else.

Titanic in 2012 is, as I’m sure the 2D version was in 1997, marvelous and grand entertainment. It’s a straightforward story told in skillfully broad, melodramatic strokes, in what USA Today aptly called, “an earnest lack of irony.” There’s no hidden meaning here, just large emotions on a large ship. Jack Dawson and Rose DeWitt Bukater’s romance (enacted by Leo and Kate, in case you’d forgotten) is not a postmodern story of lost identity. It’s not a metaphor for youth being trampled by the burgeoning forces of technology. It’s ultimately not even a rich versus poor thing, although there’s plenty of socioeconomic tension in the film. It’s a love story. It’s a boy and a girl who are fortunate to find each other on the most unfortunate boat in history. You hope like the dickens that they will both survive, but alas ... and yet their love survives. Isn’t that wonderful? Well, I thought it was wonderful.

Which brings me to what may be the one original observation made possible by seeing Titanic in 2012: At fifteen years old, Titanic may already be a relic of a time gone by. Not a time in early twentieth-century history, not a moment in movie-technology history, but a moment in audience history. I would never have thought this if it hadn’t been for the reactions of the people around me in the movie theater. While most of us sat enraptured and overwhelmed, there was a constant stream of laughter and “Seriously?”s coming from pockets of the audience. When I looked to see who it was, I shocked to see that it wasn’t the frat boys sitting to my right, nor the twentysomethings beneath me, nor the mother/daughter team near the front. It was the high school girls! The very demographic that poured over half a billion dollars into the box offices of 1997 by seeing the movie three, five, even ten times was the one heaping scorn on Titanic in 2012. What could have happened that turned the bread and butter of Titanic into its greatest detractors? In 1997, many people (not all of them girls, apparently; the audience I sat in was at least 40 percent guys) had intensely personal experiences with the movie, but perhaps that was before their opinions were posted on social media and commented on by everyone they ever met. While Titanic’s un-cynical hugeness made it immensely popular when it was first released, I wonder if its lack of coolness could have weathered the pounding that its fan base would now have taken on Facebook. I felt that what I was witnessing was not a pure reaction to the movie, but rather a kind meta-reaction to the film’s previous popularity—a reaction to everyone else’s reaction, not unlike a comment trail under a blog or status update or (gulp) Internet movie review.

Maybe I’m thinking too hard. Thank goodness for immersive, old-fashioned, no-heavy-thought-required escapes like Titanic—still an enormous and rapturous experience for everyone but 15-year-old girls and my brother, Adam.

Dan Cava is an independent filmmaker and the co-host of the Moviemakers podcast, available soon on iTunes. Dan's directorial work can be seen at He writes film reviews for RELEVANT magazine.



Timothy Snyder reviewed…

Titanic, for lack of a better comparison, is the Grand Theft Auto 3 of movies. The individual pieces have been done much better by others, but when everything is brought together, you get something truly breathtaking. Titanic is such a ridiculous mash-up of so many genres and themes, it's really no surprise that it was the highest grossing movie of all time. There is something for everyone.

And like you said, it never tries to be anything but universally appealing. Personally, I would say that is where Cameron's Avatar failed. It tried to be more which exposed it's deepest flaws (mediocre dialogue, stock characters, overdone story,blatantpolitical bias).

Glad you were able to have a proper experience of Titanic, even if it took you 15 years (I can't believe Titanic came out 15 years ago. I'm so old)

Does this mean your brother is going to watch it now?


JayLow1 reviewed…

Awesome article! I thought the movie was wonderful 15 years ago, and now in 3-D has made it one of the best movie experiences. I too, had an issue with the younger audience laughing at the wrong parts. I didnt get why, but I tried to enjoy the movie as Id done 15 years ago. I continue to watch this when I can or as often as I want. I enjoy watching movies on my iPad using my Sling adapter which offers TV on the run. I can stream my Titanic recording off the DVR or watch live TV too. This was one of the best suggestions from my coworker at DISH. Ive never had more time to enjoy hit movies till now.


Jack reviewed…

worst. movie. ever.

...but I think I want to pay the $23.50 or whatever it costs to go to the movies today just so when Rose lets go of Jack I can yell: "LIAR!!" (in the same spirit of Princess Bride). "I'll never let go Jack" - BULLCRAP, I SAY! BULLCRAP, ROSE! You lying little wench. Probably had a boyfriend waiting for her at the very next port as she let Jack drown to the bottom of the sea.



April reviewed…

First of all, prior to her letting go of Jack. He makes her promise to go on and live, to do all of the things they talked about doing and then to die an old lady in her bed. He said not to let go of that promise. Guess what, she didn't let goofthe promise.Second, she wouldn't have attempted suicide to get away from her fiance if she had a boyfriend waiting for her at the very next port. Finally, Jack was already dead when she let go, I think you missed thatlittle detail.Hate if you want, but at least be somewhat intelligent about it and not spout the same pathetic anti-Titanic yada yada that just shows how the majority of people can't pick up on major details.


Dawson_Rita reviewed…

Many people have been awaiting this. I have even come across some posts like My romeo is back in Titanic 3D. The 3D version is indeed very good and as usual the Titanic lovers enjoyed it to the extreme. I loved it and also the same old look of Leonardo is something that nobody can forgo.

Please log in or register to review