|
Post by Atreides on Apr 6, 2012 11:12:16 GMT -4
Apparently for all the "I'm only going to do it in 3D if we do it right" PR by Cameron, Ebert's review said that there are whole sections that aren't converted at all. I'm torn because, man, this is one of those films where I remember seeing it on the big screen was just so visually MASSIVE with the scale of everything but, yeah, it's also supercheesy. I saw it last night and I think Ebert was wrong. I took my 3D glasses off at times to double check and the effect was there even in quiet dialogue scenes. It is very subtle but it's there. The post-iceberg scenes with disaster all around are just incredible to behold with the extra dimension and cliched as it sounds, you feel like you're right there on the ship as it's going down. It's rare to see a movie these days being so earnest and unironic in the age of post-post-modern, too cool for the room hipsterism. Call me easy to please but I love this movie and the grand epic romantic spectacle of it all. We even stuck around for the credits and sang along to The Song.
|
|
huntergrayson
Guest
Nov 30, 2024 19:08:05 GMT -4
|
Post by huntergrayson on Apr 6, 2012 11:35:55 GMT -4
That's good to hear. Ebert has a MAJOR bug up his ass about 3D adding to picture dimness (which is totally a real issue since I was squinting through most of POTC4) and post-conversion 3D. Which I usually do but it can be done well.
It's actually amusing because a lot of critics are reevaluating their takes, being all "WHY did I think that I was too cool for this melodrama?" - which, from my post in the Dark Shadows thread, I'm kinda over postmodern, jadedness all the time - so I might end up seeing this again. I just wish I had someone to go with me to appreciate the cheese yet get swept up anyway.
But I also don't think it would be anything if the casting of the leads were different. It's really admirable that neither of them went too crazy or too commercial given the amount of fame and success they got from this.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 30, 2024 19:08:05 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2012 13:04:12 GMT -4
I'll go see it with you, huntergrayson. I don't mind cheese, when it's well done, and the sweep of this movie swept me away when it first came out. I don't like Leo, never have, and pretty much tuned out the young lovers (except when Kate put the tit in Titanic) because there was so much more to take in. A lot of little director touches like the Irish woman singing to her kids in steerage so they wouldn't be afraid. The upper class elderly couple holding each other as the water rose around them. Victor garber making sure the clock had the right time just before the North Atlantic crashes in. The scene where a mom is instructing her young daughter on the proper way to unfold a napkin (or whatever) in the dining room that gives Kate a sudden insight into the rest of her life with Billy Eyebrows. There's a lot of subtlety to go with the being hit over the head aspects. And, as other have said, it's nice to see a movie where there's no tongue-in-cheek post-everything smarm. So, shit yeah, I'm up for this in 3-D.
|
|
|
Post by Neurochick on Apr 6, 2012 14:09:59 GMT -4
Apparently for all the "I'm only going to do it in 3D if we do it right" PR by Cameron, Ebert's review said that there are whole sections that aren't converted at all. I'm torn because, man, this is one of those films where I remember seeing it on the big screen was just so visually MASSIVE with the scale of everything but, yeah, it's also supercheesy. My mom and I saw it on New Years Eve. The love story sucked, but the special effects were really, really good. The Jezebel review was stupid; it came off like some sanctimonious, elitist wrote it. In fact reading the review was more painful than watching the movie. BTW, when I saw the movie, I wasn't 15, I was thirty-eight, so there.
|
|
|
Post by lpatrice on Apr 6, 2012 21:36:59 GMT -4
I saw it last night, and I actually enjoyed more this time around. Yes the dialogue ranges from cheesy to awful and Billy Zane overacts something awful. But the movie has held up fantastically as far as special effects and what not. And I gotta say that although Kate Winslet is practically the patron saint of this board, her performance really was not that great (IMO). Her clothes/wardrobe in the movie is to die for. And I think her figure was amazing, but I don't really think she is that good looking. Leo on the other hand, sure was pretty. The destruction and sinking of the ship is still be best part of that movie and a wonderful movie sequence.
|
|
LoveSparky
Lady in Waiting
So, So, So Very Sexy...
Posts: 490
Jul 8, 2005 1:06:10 GMT -4
|
Post by LoveSparky on Apr 6, 2012 21:46:46 GMT -4
I never saw it in the theeahtuh, so I am sooooo looking forward to this.
|
|
|
Post by ikmccall on Apr 7, 2012 11:01:02 GMT -4
I doubt I'll see the 3D version in the theater but I've already watched 2 of the many documentaries on NatGeoTv. And I'll probably watch the rest of the docs.
|
|
ladytrentham
Blueblood
Now tomorrow morning, I'll breakfast in bed, and then get straight up into the tweeds.
Posts: 1,882
Jul 18, 2008 18:30:09 GMT -4
|
Post by ladytrentham on Apr 7, 2012 14:20:01 GMT -4
Saw it last night. In a nutshell: the ship still sinks.
IMHO, there was one moment where 3D genuinely added something to the story, and that's where you're in a lifeboat and the Carpathia comes looming in over you--Wow! That added a real emotional punch where there hadn't really been one before.
|
|
|
Post by divasahm on Apr 7, 2012 15:56:52 GMT -4
My 15-year-old (the one whose first song was a consonant-free attempt at The Song at 9 months) saw it in 3-D last night for the first time. She was still snuffling when I picked her up at the theater. Her review was very similar to what I'm reading here--above-average melodrama, somewhat manipulative but well-done, and absolutely gorgeous to watch. When I told her that it was the most expensive movie ever made (by far) at the time of its release, she said, "Well, every penny they spent is on the screen. THAT'S how to spend money on a movie."
It's hard to believe that she stayed out past midnight to see a movie that came out when she was an infant...and that she enjoyed it so much.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 30, 2024 19:08:05 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2012 23:25:00 GMT -4
Something about this movie works well despite the flaws from the melodrama in the script. That something for me are Kate and Leonardo.
I give some credit to the beauty of the special effects which have held up really well, a bit to the Celine Dion song, a bit to the musical score, and most of the credit to Kate and Leo. Had anyone else been cast, I probably would have watched it once and that would have been that. But Kate and Leo really made this movie. Kate and Leo Forever despite Leo's modelizer ways and Kate's appreciation for men who like to legally take on really terrible last names.
Edited to add:
I agree. Even without 3D, James Cameron's special effects made me feel like I actually was on that boat with Rose and Jack.
I don't generally have much or proper appreciation for special effects in most other movies, but I thought the effects were very well done here. I watched the movie primarily for Kate and Leo, but I wound up appreciating the way the scenes with water welling up everywhere in the ship along with the exceptional sets were juxtaposed with the little kids being told a bed-time story by their their mum and the old couple lying in their bed ready to die were done.
|
|