Badmovies.org Forum

Information Exchange => Reader Comments => Topic started by: Daniel on November 25, 2006, 04:09:49 PM



Title: Titanic
Post by: Daniel on November 25, 2006, 04:09:49 PM
Thank GOD I didn't have have to pay for this when it came out in theaters(I heard there was a breast shot in the film. That's what inspired me to go with my family to see it)! I can't believe the same guy who made Terminator and Terminator 2: Jugement Day made this crappy excuse based on a tragic day when a large ship sunk on the first day it sailed. I don't why my brother saw this movie again(he said he threw Milk Duds at the screen on the scene when Jack is holding Rose on the tip of the ship), even though he hatedit alot. Though, this movie does have interesting special effects and two good scenes: Kate Winslet's boobs(my mom covered my eyes during this scene but I moved so I could see the screen again)and when Leonardo Defaggio dies(OOOOOPS!! I spelled his name wrong!). There were more girls watching this turdy film at theaters than there were at a Hanson concert! Do like only good films? If so, stay away from this as possible. Do you like boring James Cameron films such as The Abyss and Piranha 2: The Spawning? If so, watch this movie. If you actully waste your time watching this film, give me your address so I can come to your home and beat you with a steel baseball bat. Don't worry. IT'S FREE!!!  :)


Title: Titanic
Post by: Jim on May 19, 2000, 08:16:07 AM
If you want to watch a movie about the Titanic rent A Night to Remember. It's a lot better than this and it's also funny to see how much Cameron ripped off this movie.


Title: Titanic
Post by: K. Jung on May 18, 2000, 09:13:09 PM
It seems that the time finally has come to clarify
the movie selection process of badmovies.org.

Movies here have been mostly B-movies with tight budget
but with unlimited imagination, by people who like movie making but with little talent.

That explains why badmovies.org did not review many mainstream bad movies such as Show Girls, Postman, and Armageddon or any crap like that. They are for imdb.com.

Max might not like Titanic, but there are too many stupid but fun movies worth his reviewing.

I think now is very appropriate time to review our collection and determine our criterion, removing some movies for the site's consistency.

As a huge fan of this site, I was amazed at Titanic here.
badmovies.org should invest its resources in a more focused way.

What about the following movies as the candidate.

1. Flesh(not Flash) Gordon 1, 2
2. Escape from New York

It we have our opinion on which movie should be in this site, that will be a lot better.




Title: Titanic
Post by: Lisa on May 18, 2000, 03:41:42 PM
I absolutely loved this movie and it brings me to tears everytime I watch it.  Now maybe I'm just a big sap, but it was a beautiful love story.  It showed that love can get us through even the most difficult situations and that we can love when all is taken from us as well.  Granted, anyone else would have been better cast than Leo, but the movie was wonderful.  I agree, the pg-13 rating was laughable...


Title: Titanic
Post by: Thundercracker on May 19, 2000, 10:59:51 AM
Firstly, I just want to say that I was thrilled to see Titanic on here.  I couldn't wait to see it torn apart by someone other than me and my friends.  I hate this movie, and James Cameron should be bloody ashamed of himself.  When I saw it in the theatre, I kept cheering for Billy Zane as he tried to shoot DiCrappio and Winslett, and I had to try terribly hard not to laugh when, after promising to never let him go, Winslett disgustedly pries DiCrappio's cold dead fingers from her wrist and lets him sink into the ocean.  


Title: Titanic
Post by: Mark on May 19, 2000, 11:09:18 AM
Sorry, but this isn't even close to being a bad movie.  Of all the obvious choices for recent bad movies (Twister, ID4, Godzilla(1998), Armageddon) Titanic is a waste of time to even mention on this site.  Bad choice, badmovies.org.


Title: Titanic
Post by: 69libra on May 21, 2000, 02:06:11 AM
I apologize for watching this scene of the wimpy-ass, pathetic fall that the propellor guy did, I watched it three times to remind myself how bad the nightmare was when I was sitting in the theatre watching this garbage. Time of yours was wasted when I attrubited my visual sense to the rememberance of that infernal ship, for this I apologize. How can one payback time? Until then.............


Title: Titanic
Post by: Paul Westbrook on May 24, 2000, 03:00:44 PM
I must agree with the vast majority of film fans out there, and being an expert of film knowledge, I must ask WHY IS TITANIC ON THIS SITE? It is a cinematic achievement of epic proportions. Few movies far and few between equal the epic nature of this piece of filmmaking. This is a terrific movie, and I totally disagree with whoever deemed this a bad movie. And I do know my movies. How about 2000 Maniacs. What if it ends up on a site devoted to Oscar Winning Films? Titanic as a bad movie is a gross error in judgement.


Title: Titanic
Post by: Max Levin on June 13, 2000, 10:46:33 PM
I agree with those who finds this suckass-movie to be completely bad! Guess what? I saw this crappaholic on Friday the 13;th! That day many things went rockbottom for my sake, I remember, but this movie was the worst thing of them all! Christ! I even suggest Leo Da Crappaholio to return to the big screen as the same throwback he was in Gilbert Grape( DA-AMN he´s fantastic as a no-brainer! >:D)! Am I the only one in this world to find the acting bad here? Jacks´ girlfriend( I hate her acting so much that I've forgot her name.) are so hysterical. "NoOo! NOT WITHOUT YoOoU!"=class of B-movie line. Many other actors are eyekillers too, but I don´t feel like dealing with them here. I hate this movie and James Cameron has become a p***y. That´s all folks!


Title: Titanic
Post by: Pantsman on July 04, 2000, 08:33:32 AM
Am I the only one who found this piece horse s**t movie sick? The whole thing was just to cash in on this horrible accident. It's just sick. Anyhow, there was only two good scenes in this s**tty film. The bobbie scene and the scene where Leo kicked the bucket (take that ya f**king wuss) }:D


Title: Titanic
Post by: on August 02, 2000, 04:22:56 AM
This movie belongs on this site. It's the biggest fluke in the history of the movie industry and yes Jim is right Cameron did rip off alot from A Night to Remember. Plus the fact that cameron hasnt done a movie since and wont untill 2002 when he MIGHT do True Lies 2 shows how money has carupted(sp) this once great director.


Title: Titanic
Post by: some dude on September 08, 2000, 09:33:34 PM
well man, ive seen only about 5 minutes of this movie, and well i turned it off after that. i guess this just goes to show you that budget doenst make a good movie, special efects dont make a good movie, its the skill of the actors and the writing capabilities of the writer to make a good movie. most of the movies on this site are said to be "bad movies" just because they didnt have a huge budget. i mena i was sickened by the fact that anyone would let cameron spend $200,000,000 on a peice of s**t film like that. come on man, you know that most of the "big-budget" movies get good reveiws because of the fact they have "big-name" actors in them or they were directed by "big-name" directors. its bulls**t man, i happen to rather enjoy b-movies man, just for the fact that they are completely different from any other movie. all hollywood does is make a bunch of movies while a certain trend is going. man screw hollywood, f**k em all! anyways titanic was an otherwise chrome plated peice of s**t.


Title: Titanic
Post by: BoyScoutKevin on September 16, 2000, 08:40:42 PM
After seeing all of you say you hate it, what can I say, but, I hate it, too. But, I hated it first. I must admit it had its moments, but, I hate it, because it is historically
inaccurate. The filmmakers may have got most of their facts right, but, they got the flavor of the times wrong. Go back to the 1953 version of "Titanic" and that one scene between the captain and the chief engineer, that has more historical accuracy, then the entire 194 minute length of the 1997 version of "Titanic.  


Title: Titanic
Post by: Chris K. on October 03, 2000, 05:53:50 PM
Already people are really treating badmovies.org with disrespect due to TITANIC being on this website as a bad film. Now as a "professional" film critic myself, I don't see what the problem is? So what if this guy hates TITANIC, big deal! It's his opinion and the owner is expressing it. If we all thought the same the world will just be dull as Hell. Mainly, I thought TITANIC was a boring-ass flick (as a professional, I'll bet my soul that the readers didn't see that one coming). Just wasted money (about $200,000,000 to be exact) down the ole' John Crapper if you ask me. The special effects were okay, but strictly fake as hell (I told you that the CGI effects are crap). TITANIC was strictly aimed at the teenage and adult women audience. In other words: a "Chick-Flick". James Cameron has lost his touch with films so badly. I like the fact that he made ALIENS and TERMINATOR, but he directed PIRANAH 2: THE SPAWNING for God's sake! The acting on TITANIC was also a bit stiff and inanimate. Plus some continuty errors as well (I don't think women, or men, gave people the middle finger in 1912). Leonardo De Caprio is also one of the most awful actors ever unearthed from the grounds of Hollywood (rumor has it that he is even gay, but I will not jump into controversial matters at this time). Lets face it, big budget films are dead. They died in the late 1980s when independent films were being shoved off to the corner. Here are some big budget failures to think about: GONE IN 60 SECONDS, ARMAGEDDON, DEEP IMPACT, STIGAMATA, THE HAUNTING, SCREAM, I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER, CEADERS FALLING ON TREES, AMERICAN PIE, etc. Even producer Jerry Brukheimer, who does not pour heart-and-soul in producing, shows that bigger bugets aren't always better. Shoud I go on? Because of these failures, Hollywood will keep trying until they are demolished from the film industry and independent movies will save filmaking. As for James Cameron, his carrer is definately over for sure. His crap-a-thon television show is going to die out in less than a week. Plus that, for Cameron to accept the Academy Awards and say "I'm king of the world!" and "Let's prey for everyone who died on the ship!" shows that he is one of the worlds leading ass-kissers ever known to walk on the face of the earth. I think directors like Herschell Gordon Lewis, Andy Milligan, George A. Romero, Lucio Fulci, Mario Bava, Dario Argento, and Ridley Scott are more influencial than Cameron. Cameron is just a hack like De Caprio. Cameron creating a rip-off of A NIGHT TO REMEMBER is just more pathetic than Guss Van Saint's idiodical and incoherant remake of PSYCHO. All I can say about Cameron is "Quit while you are ahead." Andto top it all off, the breif nude scene should have given this film an R rating. To be honest, the MPAA does a bad job at giving films rating's . In the 1960s and 1970s, some films that featured graphic violence and nudity have recieved a PG rating. What the hell is with that? The film's of the 1960s and 1970s are more gratuidous and racy than the films of today, and they give those films a PG! Unbelievable! MPAA needs to get their facts straightined out.
In conclusion, TITANIC is one of the most boring and unsatisfying films ever made for the general audience. Now I know I will recieve a bad reputation with some of the fans out there, but lets be honest with ourselves: TITANIC is a dud! 30 years from now people will call this time-waster a chessy love story that is so boring that when the name "James Cameron" is spoken, the audience will shiver in fear due to his lack of knowledge, common sense, and inteligence. So judge me if you will for my comments, but I stick to them and if you want to insult me then I will just keep on fighting until this review is read by the reader and they say "I agree with you." And I hope the reader will agree with me and post up his/her comments and give his two-cents on the film just like I did. I would really appreciate that.
 


Title: Titanic
Post by: BoyScoutKevin on October 08, 2000, 05:37:42 PM
No, tell us what your really think, but, I agree. Still, it was not only popular among audiences (hey, what do they know) making it the top grosssing film of 1997, but, one of the top grossing films of all time. It was popular among "professional" critics (hey, they should have known better) too. Except for "L.A. Confidential," it made more top ten lists, then any film that year. And it was popular among the people of Hollywood (hey they really should have known better) who awarded it the Oscar for best picture and ten other Oscars. Interestingly enough, it was shut out of the acting and screenwriting categories. That is the first time that has happened for any picture that has won eight or more Oscars. Make of that what you will.


Title: Titanic
Post by: Chris K. on October 11, 2000, 04:51:46 PM
Oh, I would also like to add that even though TITANIC won some Oscars, big deal! The Academy Awards are dead anyway. They even nominated SOUTH PARK for best musical score. SOUTH PARK was the "Worst Film Ever Made" by two stoners who failed to boost their career in BASEKETBALL. What is funny about the whole situation with SOUTH PARK is when it originaly aired on TV it did fine for at least three months until the ratings went down (and I mean down). But as some stupid twist of fate, SOUTH PARK had it's contract signed up once again and is now producing more horrible shows. Well to quit nitpicking on a bad television program all I have to say is SOUTH PARK is just yesterday's news, just like TITANIC. TITANIC is just plain boring. Plus, to all those SOUTH PARK-nerd fans watch a funnier show like THE SIMPSONS or TITUS.  


Title: Titanic
Post by: Josie on November 25, 2006, 04:09:49 PM
Interesting thing I've noticed about Titanic... people like it the first time they see it.  I saw it twice in the theatre.  The first time, I loved it... there was just too much eye candy for me not to love it (I'm a sucker for 'pretty' movies).  The second time, the eye candy was old and I started noticing things like the fact that Kate Winslet couldn't act her way out of a wet paper bag.  Just to test my theory, I rented the video and watched that... and sure enough, it was even worse the third time.  I suppose if I ever watch it again, it'll probably be even worse...

*wanders off now to watch 'The Mummy,' a movie that knows exactly what it is and doesn't try to be anything but*


Title: Titanic
Post by: Bats on November 25, 2006, 04:09:49 PM
Titanic.  What a lovely, soul-stirring and beautiful film this wasn't.  It's nearly as good as Waterworld in fact.  Cameron should stick to alien-bashing and flying piranhas and leave the love stories to Merchant Ivory.  It was like watching an Edwardian costume-drama version of Platoon.

Keep trying, James...  Not, on second thoughts, don't.


Title: Titanic
Post by: Chazilla on November 25, 2006, 04:09:03 PM
My jaw dropped when I saw this movie in theaters.  It just blew me away.  Certain dramatic aspects of the movie had serious flaws (there was quite a good reason that it did not get a best script nomination) and there were a few wince inducing moments (i.e. the teaching Kate to spit sequence).  But I loved, loved, loved it for its absolutely huge scope and vision.  Just watching the ship go down in microscopic detail was worth the price of admission.  It was a rather painless three hours, but I have not watched it twice.

Favorite moment, when the mentally overloaded Captain Smith staggers off the deck and onto the bridge to prep himself for going down with the ship.


Title: Titanic
Post by: DJ on August 22, 2003, 06:10:40 AM
I love this movie. It brings me to tears when that ship breaks and sinks. but the movie would have been better if Leonardo DeCRAPeo wasnt in it!!!


Title: Titanic
Post by: Alise on November 25, 2006, 04:10:12 PM
Oh jesus!  This movie sucked major donkey balls.  Sure like i'm really supposed to believe that someone of that low of a class like Leonardo is really going to get someone like the character Kate Winslet played to fall in love with him!  First of all he wouldn't have even been able to walk around that freely on the boat, he would have been forced to stay with his own "kind".  James Cameron is the anti-christ!...well, not really, Titanic is just a very bad movie.


Title: Titanic
Post by: Finn on November 25, 2006, 04:10:12 PM
The movie wasn´t THAT bad.The real problem was the lousy love story between two of the most useless characters ever.All Winslett really did in the movie was whine. And I mean all the time.Leo should have bushed her overboard when he had the chance.And DeCaprio role seemed like something out of a freak show:"Come one,come all!See the man with no personality!" Van Damme and Arnold have shown more facial expressions.
When I think about it, there`s nothing in the movie to make me even believe that Jack was in love with Rose.The way he acted he may have just been trying to get in to Rose`s pants.It makes more sense than the idea that he would have fallen for miss selfpity.


Title: Titanic
Post by: lostmissy on November 25, 2006, 04:10:12 PM
I'm going against the general flow here but I loved this movie. It was so surreal and sensuous! This was about the best period piece that was (to me) very convincing in both realism and detail . Yes I do know that 3rd class passengers would never be allowed the freedom of the ship that Leo got and that Kate could never had acted like she did but the "love story" angle allows the emotional involvement that underlies the movie theme ( I never got it...before). Yes it was very expensive(!) and Mr Cameron does seem to suffer from a small "ego" issue but this movie fits well in the grand epic tradition of the cinema . Now let me get back to my scotch and "It Came From Outer Space"!!


Title: Titanic
Post by: Luke S. on November 25, 2006, 04:09:49 PM
I thought the idea of badmovies.org was to remind us of how much we love film, not hate it! While this review was hysterical and true, it misses the main point of the site. We're supposed to LOVE Bad Movies! And this is impossible to love....


Title: Titanic
Post by: Juice on November 25, 2006, 04:09:49 PM
We have some people here calling the Titanic amazing and saying it's a beautiful lovestory, that shows love can get you through difficult situations... puke. Have you ever heard of Romeo & Juliet? Titanic is VERY, and I mean VERY cliché and nobody seems to see that because the movie looks beautiful. It's just s**t with lots of whipped cream on it (and I mean LOTS OF WHIPPED CREAM) and that's what makes it taste good. Cheap romantic clichés, cheap story... I've seen this somewhere else. Titanic is cliché. The story is s**t. All the effects, Kates boobs and other things that make this movie watchable are whipped cream.

IF YOU PUT ENOUGH WHIPPED CREAM ON s**t, IT MIGHT TASTE GOOD!


Title: Titanic
Post by: Dano on November 25, 2006, 04:10:12 PM
First of all, to all you people who are whining about how much you hated Titanic and how painful it was to watch, let me tell you a story.  This is the first movie I ever saw with the woman who is now my wife.  Because this was our first movie, she now thinks Celine Deion's "My Heart Will Go On" is "our song."  You people don't have any concept of what suffering is.  Stop crying.

Second, to the people who are apalled by Badmovies.Org running a review of Titanic, the name of the site is BADMOVIES.ORG.  Not Low-BudgetMovies.Org.  Not B-Movies.Org.  Not CultMovies.Org, or MoviesByNon-FamousPeople.Org, or BoxOfficeFlops.org, or MoviesTheOscarsWouldntTouchWithATenFootPole.org.  It is a site for BAD movies, movies that are very very easy to make fun of and laugh at, and I think the reviewer here and some of the posters have shown that Titanic is a laughable film.  Some people like to watch big pretty movies and so enjoyed Titanic - fine.  Some people are very emotional or sentimental and actually enjoyed the love story - fine.  But don't get mad when people make fun of a movie you like.  It's just fun.

As for the Oscars, someone nailed it when he said the Oscars are a joke.  In 1994, Martin Landau beat out Samuel Jackson's Jules in Pulp Fiction with a Bela Lugosi impersonation.  In 1990, Dances With Wolves (a movie badly deserving of a review on this site) beat Goodfellas.  In 1989, Driving Miss Daisy beat Glory.  Holly Hunter won an Oscar for the Piano for pity's sake!  Has anyone ever actually sat through that dreadful excuse for a movie??

Lighten up, Titanic Fans.  Putting the occasional Hollywood big-budget mega-hit piece of crap on this site is a good thing.


Title: Titanic
Post by: billybob on November 25, 2006, 04:10:12 PM
Well, I have to say the movie did stink, I was a formulaic Hollywood romance using a dramatic story.  But it had little to do with the events of that night in 1912.  But two things that bugged me the most of the movie are a couple of continuity errors that are usually found only in the lowest budget pieces of crap movies.  ONE, the water in the North Atlantic at that time of year is so cold that you will be paralyzed in under 10 minutes and dead shortly afterwards. They got that right in the end.  But the scene where they were struggling to escape from the room below decks where they were up to their armpits in icy water for 15 to 20 minutes of the movie and were barely affected (should have been dead).  TWO, she is in a life boat but jumps back on the ship because she is so in love with him that if he drowns she want to drown with him.  And then at the end when he does drown, she heroically swims to get the whistle and thereby saves her neck after he sinks.  Sorry, this is pure drivle to pull the heart strings of the audience and is just awful movie making errors.  Please, you may have loved the scene at the end. But it should not have been in conflict with the earlier scene.  This showed that it was not a love story but a story about teenage lust that follows no rhyme or reason.  The movie was not without its moments, like so many of the other movies reviewed here.  But it is proof that Hollywood is all about gliter, pomp, and promotion.  And that the Academy is a "let's all pat each other on the back" organization.  And not about the art of movie making.


Title: Titanic
Post by: Sennith on March 08, 2003, 10:39:31 PM
I hated this movie for two reasons: the fact that they turned a tragedy into a love story and Leornado Dicapiro.  They did this in the Pearl Harbor movie too, a love story in the Pearl Harbor setting.  


Title: Titanic
Post by: James Perry on November 25, 2006, 04:10:12 PM
Loved this film!  Loved it.

In my opinion it doesn't belong here among the mostly B-movies and laughibly bad ones.  Many of the comments above I not only disagree with but HIGHLY disagree with.  I found this film a visually striking, emotionally charged, suspensefully unfolding, wonderfully acted epic disaster film with a beautiful love story.  I was highly impressed with the whole production.  Kate Winslet is a real hottie (I'd seen her in Heavenly Creatures and couldn't take my eyes off her).  I don't hate Dicaprio like many others here (He was great in This Boy's Life with DeNiro...seen it?).  I would actually like to be like his character and break the monotony of my life and "take off" to a change of setting.  The scenes of the ship were amazing to watch...particularly as it's sinking.  I guess I can overlook the flaws in this film and enjoy it for the same reason I can watch many of the "actual" bad movies on this site and enjoy them.  

Come on folks!  This is just a Godzilla film without the Godzilla, all Japanese cast, voice dubbing or break-a-part buildings!  But seriously, you actually hate Titanic because you hate ALL movies like this for some reason:  love story, huge budget, overhyped, large SFX budget, Leo's in it, dominated the Oscars...etc.  So TRASH AWAY!  I also liked the Abyss which was trashed here.

(Actually, the DVD is something of a disappointment.  The picture quality is lacking for a movie that cost a zillion dollars to make.)


Title: Titanic
Post by: jessica on February 13, 2004, 11:16:25 AM
It was a brilliant movie I loved it it was and still is one of my favourite movies ever especialy that it had Leonardo Decaprio in it


Title: Titanic
Post by: pred19 on November 25, 2006, 04:09:49 PM
This is a movie I'd see once, or maybe twice just to see the ship fall apart for a second time.

Isn't it funny, how all the hype for this movie totally vanished once it came out on video. Movies like 'The Thing' did poorly at the box office, but has since gathered a huge following. 'Titanic', however, was a massive hit, and now is just a ghost of its former self.


Title: Titanic
Post by: on November 25, 2006, 04:09:03 PM
Titanic could of been an in depth character study and ultimately a great film, but instead Cameron makes a conventional love story and a rather cliched film.
**


Title: Titanic
Post by: Diana on November 25, 2006, 04:10:12 PM
I have seen Titanic numerous times,and though my husband and I do make fun of the flaws in the movie, we still like to watch it. I disagree that the acting was bad. I think Kate did a great job of portraying a "well raised" woman who is forced to marry an arrogant, snobby, possesive a***ole, just so her mother won't have to work for a living. And, she may have whined alot in the movie, but being stuck with a Fiance' like Cal, do you blame her? I just loved it when she spit in his face!! I wanted to spit in his face thoughout the whole movie.
  Yes, there are many flaws in the movie. There was no Chippawa Falls in 1912. No, Rose and Jack wouldn't have survived the freezing water in the boat, when they were trying to escape. The crewman at the wheel is being told "Hard over starboard, but he's turning the wheel to the left. And, Jack would have never been able to hold that confersation with Rose after they were in the water. But, every movie has it's flaws and that doesen't stop us from watching them. I also feel that Kathy Bates was a perfect pick for The Unsinkable Molly Brown.
  Oh, one more thing. Those of you who say things like "This movie sucked donkey balls". and spelling Leo's name, Decrappio, or Defaggio.  GROW UP!!!!!! I can't even acknowlwdge your criticism because you're soooo immature!!!!!
   


Title: Re: Titanic
Post by: Alain on April 12, 2007, 06:24:40 AM
Well as far as i'm concerned , the love story of this movie should have been excluded , actually what we wanted to see it's the ship sinking (1 hour and a half and kiss it goodbye) the rest sucks

and has anyone noticed that the water was very cold (a lot of people died from that)  but it doesn't seemed to be so for the water inside the ship for Rose and Jack (they should normally have died already) 

Oh and another thing I'm from province of Quebec , Canada and i am more than happy that Celine Dion decided to  live in the US (her voice gets on my and the majority of Quebecers very nerve..Yayy :thumbup:


Title: Re: Titanic
Post by: Flangepart on April 12, 2007, 02:28:18 PM
I hated this movie for two reasons: the fact that they turned a tragedy into a love story and Leornado Dicapiro.  They did this in the Pearl Harbor movie too, a love story in the Pearl Harbor setting.  
[color=]This explains why the Great Luke Ski song "Titanic Monday" includes the line "How many chic flicks have you seen, where over 1500 people died?" Oh, the SHIP was great, and some of the real people...but... I've said it before, i'll say it again. "Sleep with the fishes, leo!"[/color]


Title: Re: Titanic
Post by: watson11 on April 21, 2007, 12:45:57 AM
Hi,
  Titanic is a romantic movie and it topped the chart those days.Though the film did  not provide the correct information,this one is a must watch movie.I think I saw the film nearly a fifty times.Kate Winslet was mind blowing and so was Caprio.


Title: Re: Titanic
Post by: Michael Twomey on January 10, 2008, 01:44:47 PM
I tink tis is a disgrace.whoever wrote this sh## must have been watchin a different film.titanic is the best film that has ever been made and i dont give a sh## what anyone else thinks.


Title: The time has come
Post by: ere I am, J.F on March 05, 2008, 02:34:40 PM
As a practical achievement Titanic looks great, so good in fact that people don't notice the horrible dialogue, acting or stupid situations.
Of course we could always discuss if it should be on Badmovies.org because the director was established, the movie is big budget and it received many oscars.

We would find out that movies can still be very flaky, take Cleopatra, Heaven's Gate and still have a huge budget, Cameron was a protege of Roger Corman and most of his movies were and are big budget B-movies, this one was among the worst and the oscars is a popularity contest among the Hollywood studio.

Reasons why Titanic should be placed on here would be: a gunfight on board a sinking ship between hero and villain, the misstake of using the wrong guy that shoots passangers and then himself, flipping of the bird, Leo and Kate running down a corridor in slow-mo escaping water, a guy dropping some handy keys when they get trapped, steamy sex scene in automobile, the lovely couple kissing up on deck and distracting the look-out until the ship crashes into an iceberg, the old Rose asking if Paxton & crew want to know if Leo and she, "did it" and listeners finding it cute (hearing your great grandmother talk about her sexual escapades might not be as funny as this movie tries to make it).

If that's not enough how about the ridiculous reception where almost everyone declared it to be fantastic and Cameron himself running up in joy to grab his first oscar and later accepting his next one only to tell the audience to have a silent moment for the people that died on the Titanic, a real tear-jerker for sure.


Title: Re: Titanic
Post by: Gene on November 13, 2008, 12:20:29 AM
The only real travesty is this. this god-awful piece of cinematic crap beat L.A. Confidential for best pic of the year.


Title: Re: Titanic
Post by: BoyScoutKevin on November 13, 2008, 08:29:26 PM
The only real travesty is this. this god-awful piece of cinematic crap beat L.A. Confidential for best pic of the year.

Why am I not surprised by this. If you see the Academy Awards, what you will not see--many times--is the best film of the year receive the Oscar for Best Picture.


Title: Re: Titanic
Post by: WilliamWeird1313 on November 14, 2008, 10:36:44 AM
I hate the Oscars. Bunch of self-involved, self-adoring, egotistical, "look at me!", pat-yourself-on-the-back, masturbatory studio system b.s.


Title: Re: Titanic
Post by: Maskdt on November 19, 2008, 12:35:01 AM
I wasn't a fan when it came out, even though I was part of its "adolescent girls who have no idea what the hell it's like to be in a real relationship" target audience at the time. I've seen Kate Winslet and DiCaprio in other films, and they can act. But act, they didn't here. Probably because Cameron got so caught up in his "vision" that he forgot the most important aspect of screenwriting: rewrite, rewrite, rewrite. Frankly, if I ever hear or saw people talking and acting like that in real life, I'd wonder if there was something wrong with them...

Overall, poor writing, poor acting (actors didn't have much to work with), okay effects, way too much money spent on this in the wrong places.


Title: Re: Titanic
Post by: Kruhn on June 28, 2009, 01:01:06 AM
This review has been rather divisive. What I would like to tell to those who love their movies and act as if someone had murdered a close relative to understand that this is a movie. Understand this, the reviewer is entitled to his opinion. He  I agree-- that the movie has a lot of cringeworthy moments and it should be taken to this forum and ridiculed.

I personally have no ill will towards Kate Blanchett and Leonardo di Caprio. I also think that Mr. di Caprio is a movie star in the old school. I mean you only see this guy in the news only when there's a movie with him on it. That is commendable.

Now to the movie. I like the story of the Titanic, I watched and loved A Night to Remember and watched about every documentary on the Titanic. I was not going to watch this movie, but one Friday morning in beautiful and sunny San Juan, Puerto Rico, I was walking by the movie theater and it happened the movie was about to start, so I decided to catch it on an early matinee. The theater was half-full and I remembered the line for the next show. Now the movie's visuals were lovely, but the acting and the storyline stank. I mean this story was so incongruous that I was laughing all through the three hours it lasted. In fact the whole scene where Leo's character is handcuffed to the pillar and we the water rising outside, I started belting Under the Sea .

It is funny that twenty years prior to Titanic another movie, visually stunning, but with crappy acting was passed over many of the same Oscars this movie got. Perhaps I may be somewhat jaded, but I've only seen this movie once, as a fluke, and I believe it is one time too many.


Title: Re: Titanic
Post by: Jami on August 21, 2010, 02:35:00 AM
I am one of the biggest Titanic fans you will ever meet. Who cares about the flaws that really made no difference in the movie at all whatsoever. I know that people are entitled to their opinion and yes the Oscars are a joke but Titanic should not be on this website. And what we were we supposed to do for the first two hours? We needed some sort of story in there before the ship could sink. I hated what James Cameron did at the Oscars and I certainly know I'm not the only one. :) But please people...stop cursing it out! That goes for fans and haters. You can say what's on you mind but please... And Kate Winslet's acting was beautiful for those of you who can't spot talent when you see it (apparently,though, she did better in her natural British accent). And come on ladies and gay guys! Leo DiCaprio was a pretty yummy piece of eye candy.

Like I said before....I am one the biggest Titanic fans you'll ever meet. I've watched it 20 3/4 times. And although I will never change my mind whoever wrote this article: I was cracking up! (in a good way) You're pretty funny, man. :)