"Where to, miss?"
"To the stars."
When Roger Ebert wrote about Titanic on December 19, 1997, he had nothing but praise for the film. He, as well as countless others, couldn't say enough for the 194 minute masterpiece depicting one of the greatest and most tragic stories in history. In Ebert's review, he almost immediately accepts the fact that, considering the story of the Titanic and the sad romance surrounding it, some things were inevitably a little predictable. "We know before the movie begins that certain things must happen," he says. Everybody knows what happened to the Titanic. It was a magnificent ship, supposedly unsinkable. However, it sank. Going into the movie, the audience is prepared for this great tragedy. Some people would look upon this predictability as something undesirable, something that would make the film less exciting to experience. Personally (and Ebert agrees), that is not the case. It may even be helpful that so many people know the background of the Titanic. Because of that, it is easier to focus on the characters and the beauties of the film rather than being bogged down with following the voyage and the plotline.
Ebert goes on to talk about Cameron's skill in showing off the entire ship. Enormous models were used with smaller models as well as special effects to achieve the Titanic that viewers know and love. He applauds the manner in which these different techniques compliment each other and miraculously avoid drawing attention away from what really matters. After commending nearly every aspect of Cameron's dramatic film, Ebert ends his review with a poetic and almost haunting thought.
The image from the Titanic that has haunted me, ever since I first read the
story of teh great ship, involves the moments right after it sank. The night sea
was quiet enough so that cries for help carried easily across the water to the
lifeboats, which drew prudently away. Still dressed up in the latest fashions,
hundreds froze and drowned. What an extraordinary position to find yourself in
after spending all of that money for a ticket on an unsinkable ship.
2 comments:
kate, that review by Roger Ebert was pretty sweet- don't you just think it's so fascinating all the techniques James Cameron used to make Titanic amazing?! The explanation Ebert gives about "the effects not being distracting" from the story is so true- I didn't even (and don't want to) notice the backwards writing or absurd amount of left-handed people waving goodbye when the Titanic embarks. (they flip-flopped the shots) I definitely think that in this day and age special effects in most 'epic' movies can be distracting, which shouldn't be the case at all. There's no point in making something you want to be meaningful over-the-top... unless it's like a super-hero movie. yeah
I totally agree,I know the movie is technically "predictable" because technically the ship "sinks" but why every time (and thats a lot of times) when I watch the Titanic do I still sit on the edge of my seat anxious for what's going to happen next.
Post a Comment