Historical Accuracy

I do not claim to be any form of Titanic expert. I don't know about you but I will scream the next time some 'Titanic' bore goes on about the 'false' funnel, or one of the other twenty or so minor, and totally incidental, errors. What I do care about is the mis-representation of an actual officer; and the pain caused to his relatives and community. From that perspective it is unfortunate that Cameron didn't simply use an 'un-named' fictitious officer to add the impact he was trying to create; for those of you not 'in the know' I am talking about the 'shooting' and suicide scene.

The two films under discussion follow very similar story lines; indeed when considering dialogue and camera angles Cameron could be accused of a bit of plagiarism; but imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

NtR tries to give the viewer a flavour of the range of passengers, and their stories. In doing so the audience doesn't form any real attachment to any particular passenger(s). Baker, the director of NtR, did give us a young couple; who had a conversation with Andrews, the ships designer, as the ship was going down. It is as though Cameron viewed NtR and decided to remedy this by majoring on the young couple, and so draw his audience in; he even echoes the conversation with Andrews.

In order to create a link with us plebs Cameron chose one of his young lovers to be a steerage type, enter DiCaprio stage right. However, for the relationship with the 'First Class' Winslet to be set up time is needed. In order to gain that time Cameron concentrates on the Titanic; and ignores the infuriating stupidity of the officers on RMS Californian, portrayed in painful detail in NtR. The ease with which DiCaprio gains access to the First Class area is certainly fictional licence, but I can live with this.

There is a feeling in Titanic that rich leans towards bad, and poor to good. A bit of balance could have been introduced. But cinema audiences do enjoy baddies in black hats and goodies in white; and Cameron has not built his career on moral or character complexity. In fairness at least Cameron spends more time showing the steerage passengers, although the working class Welsh/English/Scottish are very thin on the ground.

Overall both films are very similar; 'C-' Cameron junior - and don't let me catch you looking over Baker's shoulder again. Where Cameron scores is in the emotional impact; although Baker comes close due to the outrage you feel towards the officers on the Californian. When all is said and done any art form is there to make you feel and think; in this both films score well.

The Movies

I don't intend to describe either film; if you don't have a good idea already then you won't be reading this on the Internet!!

In both the films the dialogue and acting can get wooden. NtR probably suffers slightly more, or should I say Kenneth More. More, like many screen actors, does a great job playing himself; you know he is going to be a terribly decent chap. It is also noticeable that it is the 'lower class' crewmembers, in NtR, that let the side down on occasion.

Horner's score for Titanic is wonderful. Like all screen composers he plagiarises himself continually. In this score you will here shades of Jamanji, Casper and Aliens. But there are some good original pieces of scoring. For me, one of the highlights of the film is chapter 7; 'Ode to Titanic'.

The Discs

Titanic is the best Non-anamorphic picture I've seen; but is still a painfully missed opportunity. The 5.1 soundtrack is marvellous.

NtR suffers due to being old film stock; but not bad all the same. The Mono soundtrack cannot compete with Titanic; it is workmanlike.

The Extras

Mmm - Titanic take an 'E-'. The nearest I can get is an animated screen - although this is hidden on my machine! If you haven't seen it, and you have track access, try track 3.

NtR has an hour long 'Making of...' on side two. Interesting and informative.

In Conclusion

Titanic gives a melodramatic flavour; NtR shows us a broader canvas. These are two reasonable films, a combination could have given one great film; but would probably have been four hours long.

Martin Virgo