Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘James Cameron’

I Intend To Write A Strongly Worded Letter To The White Star Line About All Of This

Posted in General Comments, Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 16, 2026| Leave a Comment »

“Titanic” (1997) — movie review
Today’s review is for the epic romantic disaster film “Titanic”, directed by James Cameron and starring Leonardo DiCaprio as Jack Dawson, a penniless artist who wins a ticket aboard the RMS Titanic and falls in love with a woman far above his station;  Kate Winslet as Rose DeWitt Bukater, the young aristocratic passenger trapped by family expectations in an unwanted engagement;  Billy Zane as Cal Hockley, Rose’s wealthy, controlling and violent fiancé whose pride and entitlement escalate as the voyage progresses;  Kathy Bates as “The Unsinkable” Molly Brown, the outspoken and newly rich American who befriends Jack and Rose;  Frances Fisher as Ruth DeWitt Bukater, Rose’s mother whose financial anxieties drive much of the pressure on her daughter;  Gloria Stuart as the older Rose, whose recollections frame the entire story for the modern‑day salvage crew led by Bill Paxton’s Brock Lovett;  Bernard Hill as Captain Edward James Smith, the dignified but ultimately doomed master of the ship;  David Warner as Spicer Lovejoy, Cal’s cold and watchful bodyguard and enforcer;  Victor Garber as Thomas Andrews, the ship’s designer whose growing realization of the disaster adds a quiet tragedy;  and Jonathan Hyde as J. Bruce Ismay, the White Star Line executive whose impatience and vanity help speed the ship toward catastrophe.
Background:  I never saw “Titanic” in theaters during its original release, even when it became obvious it was going to be a cultural event rather than “just” a movie.  I first saw this film while working in Saudi Arabia on a TV and since then a couple of times on progressively larger home TVs.  (Back then, Saudi Arabia did not show kissing or sexual content on TV, so this viewing was a “sanitized” / abbreviated version.)  This latest viewing was on a 48″ LCD screen from a little more than arms length.  I do regret never having seen it on a true theater screen, but I’ve gotten over it…  LoL.  The film went on to win 11 Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Director, and tying the all‑time record at the time.  The film was also notable for its massive budget, groundbreaking visual effects, and the sheer scale of its production, which included a near full‑size reconstruction of the ship.  It had the highest gross attendance of any film in 1997 and it remains one of the highest‑grossing films ever made and a defining work of 1990s cinema.
Plot:  The film begins in the present day (well, 1997-ish), with a salvage crew searching the wreck of the Titanic for a valuable diamond known as the “Heart of the Ocean”.  When they discover a drawing of a young woman wearing the necklace, the now‑elderly Rose contacts them and recounts her experience aboard the ship in 1912.  As a young woman, Rose feels suffocated by her engagement to Cal and the rigid expectations of high society.  She meets Jack, who saves her from a desperate moment (she is attempting suicide), and the two form a bond that quickly deepens into love.  Their relationship unfolds against the backdrop of the ship’s opulence and class divisions, culminating in the Titanic’s collision with an iceberg and the ensuing chaos as passengers struggle to survive.  The film follows Jack and Rose through the sinking, the lifeboat crisis, and the final tragedy that leaves Rose adrift in the freezing Atlantic.  Her survival and later life form the emotional coda to the story.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  yes, (I enjoyed this viewing);  the acting is strong and sincere;  the filming and effects are exceptional;  the problems are minor and mostly tied to melodrama;  and yes, I enjoyed the film.
Any good?  “Titanic” is a sweeping, old‑fashioned epic that blends romance, historical drama, and large‑scale spectacle.  Cameron’s script is straightforward and occasionally sentimental, but the emotional beats land, and the pacing holds together remarkably well for a three‑hour film.  The movie succeeds because it commits fully to its story, its characters, and its sense of tragedy.
Acting:  DiCaprio and Winslet carry the film with youthful energy and occasional genuine chemistry.  Winslet, in particular, gives Rose a depth that keeps the character from becoming a simple damsel‑in‑distress.  Zane leans into the villainy of Cal, sometimes broadly, but he (more or less) fits the heightened tone of the film.  As an aside, I’ve can’t say I’ve ever liked Zane in any role and I’m not sure how or why he continues to find roles.  But that’s probably just me…  Bates is a welcome presence, grounding her scenes with humor and warmth – and I wish she’d been in more of the film.  Gloria Stuart’s performance as the older Rose adds a layer of poignancy that frames the entire narrative.
Filming / FX:  The technical work remains astonishing for its day, but much of the film’s scale is achieved through rather crude computer animation (“crude” by today’s standards) in which both the ship and the people visible are clearly not real.  The combination of practical sets, miniatures, and early digital effects creates a sense of scale that still holds up.  The sinking sequence is meticulously staged, with clear geography and escalating tension.  Cameron’s attention to historical detail is evident in everything from the ship’s architecture to the costuming.  The cinematography balances grandeur with intimacy, and James Horner’s score reinforces the emotional arc without overwhelming it.
Problems:  The romantic scenes lean into melodrama (as does the heroics).  Cal’s villainy is mostly cartoonish, and the class commentary, while sincere, is not particularly nuanced.  The framing device with the salvage crew, though functional, feels slightly disconnected from the main story.  Still, these issues do not significantly detract from the film’s overall impact.
Did I enjoy the film?  Yes.  Despite its length and its sometimes broad emotional strokes, “Titanic” remains engaging, visually impressive, and emotionally resonant.  The final act, in particular, is gripping and tragic, and the film’s closing moments with the older Rose provide a satisfying sense of closure.
Final Recommendation:  Very highly recommended.  “Titanic” is a landmark film that combines technical mastery with a moderately compelling love story.  Whether viewed as a historical drama, a romance, or a large‑scale disaster epic, it delivers on all fronts and remains one of the defining cinematic experiences from its era.  Full disclosure:  It is really only since “Inception” that I’ve come to like DeCaprio and I still don’t really care for Winslet (but I haven’t seen her in many roles), so the film really starts out with two “almost” strikes (the leads) against it.  As mentioned, I’ve now seen this film several times and I can honestly say this is the first time I “really” enjoyed it.  I’m not entirely sure why this time was different than my earlier viewings, but it was.  Maybe the film just needed time to sink in…  (pun intended).
.
Click here (16 May) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Howdy, Uh, How’re You Guys Doin’?

Posted in General Comments, Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 16, 2026| Leave a Comment »

“The Abyss – Special Edition” (1989) — movie review
Today’s review is for the science-fiction underwater adventure “The Abyss – Special Edition” (1989), written and directed by James Cameron and starring Ed Harris as Bud Brigman (the foreman of an underwater drilling platform trying to hold his crew together under extreme pressure);  Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio as Lindsey Brigman (Bud’s estranged wife and the designer of the rig — brilliant, stubborn, and usually correct);  Michael Biehn as Lt. Coffey (the Navy SEAL leader whose stress and paranoia escalate the danger);  Leo Burmester as Catfish (Bud’s loyal right-hand man);  Todd Graff as Hippy (the tech specialist with a pet rat and a healthy distrust of authority);  and Kimberly Scott as One Night (a steady presence who keeps the crew grounded).  Together, they form the core of a story that mixes deep-sea tension, Cold War nerves, and first-contact wonder.
Background:  I first saw “The Abyss” on TV and VHS back in the early 90s, but it was the theatrical cut — the shorter version that trims out a major subplot and changes the tone of the ending.  I’ve seen this extended version on TV / cable, but I’ve had to wait several years now for it to fall to my price point to buy the streaming version.  This Special Edition restores almost 28 minutes of footage, including the entire “tidal wave” sequence and the broader Cold War context.  These additions make the story feel more complete and give the ending a lot more emotional and thematic weight.  Released in 1989, the film earned four Academy Award nominations and won the Oscar for Best Visual Effects — impressive given the era and the technical challenges of underwater filming.  Historically, the movie is significant for pioneering digital water effects (the “pseudopod” sequence) and for being one of the most difficult shoots in Hollywood history.  This was my first time watching the Special Edition all the way through, and it definitely changes how the film plays.
Plot:  The story begins when an American nuclear submarine crashes near a deep ocean trench.  A Navy SEAL team is sent to investigate and commandeers an underwater drilling platform (“Deep Core“) as their base of operations.  Bud and Lindsey, who are in the middle of a divorce, are forced to work together as the crew tries to support the SEAL mission.  As a hurricane approaches the surface support ships, strange events begin happening around the wrecked sub and platform, including lights, currents, and an encounter with a mysterious water-based entity.  As tensions rise, Lt. Coffey becomes increasingly unstable due to pressure sickness and the stress of a potential Cold War confrontation.  He attempts to use a recovered nuclear warhead to “neutralize” the unknown presence.  Bud and the crew try to stop him, leading to underwater chases, near-drownings, and a desperate attempt to disarm the warhead.  Bud volunteers for a one-way dive into the trench to disable the bomb manually.  The Special Edition expands the ending:  the alien species – “Non-Terrestrial Intelligence” (NTIs) reveal they have the power to destroy humanity and nearly do so with massive tidal waves — but they stand down after reading Bud’s messages to Lindsey and seeing examples of human compassion.  The film ends with the NTIs raising one of their enormous ships to the surface, bringing Bud and the crew safely back to daylight.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  strong across the board;  impressive for its time;  a few;  yes.
Any good?  Yes.  The Special Edition is a much better film than the theatrical cut.  The added scenes give the story more context and make the ending feel more emotionally earned rather than abrupt – as in the original.  The movie balances tension, character drama, and a sense of discovery in a way that still works today.  The underwater setting feels dangerous and claustrophobic, and the emotional core — Bud and Lindsey’s relationship — holds the whole thing together.  The restored Cold War subplot also gives the NTIs’ final decision more weight.  Overall, it’s a strong mix of sci-fi, adventure, and human drama.
Acting:  Harris and Mastrantonio carry the film.  Harris plays Bud as a working-class leader who cares deeply about his crew, and his emotional scenes feel honest rather than forced.  Mastrantonio is excellent as Lindsey — sharp, determined, and vulnerable without losing her edge.  Their chemistry sells the relationship even when they’re arguing.  Biehn does a convincing job as Coffey, showing the gradual slide into paranoia / depth related psychosis without turning it into a cartoon.  The supporting cast is steady, with Graff and Burmester adding some needed humor and warmth.  Nobody feels out of place, and the ensemble works well together.
Filming / FX:  The production was famous for being one of the hardest shoots ever, and it shows — in a good way.  The underwater sets look real because they are real.  The sense of weight, pressure, and danger comes through in almost every scene.  The digital water effects (the pseudopod) were groundbreaking at the time and still hold up surprisingly well.  The Special Edition’s tidal wave sequence is ambitious and adds scale to the story.  The lighting, sound design, and practical effects all contribute to a believable underwater world.  Some shots look dated now, but most of the film’s visuals still work because they’re grounded in physical sets and real water.  As an aside, I’d heard of “super‑oxygenated” fluids in the 1970s when I was high school, but I’d never seen the technology demonstrated in a Hollywood film before.  I thought that was “cool”!
Problems:  A few.  The movie is long — especially in this Special Edition — and some viewers may find the pacing slow in the middle (I didn’t).  The Cold War subplot, while important, can feel heavy-handed at times.  Coffey’s descent into paranoia is effective, but the film leans on it a bit too much to drive the conflict.  Some of the underwater dialogue is hard to hear (a common issue with diving scenes).  And the final rescue / revival scene, while emotional, stretches believability.  My personal problem is the use of “NTI“, implying they are from outer space (like “The Day The Earth Stood Still“) rather than a parallel or more advanced Earth species which just happened to evolve in the deep-water ocean (like “Atlantis” in various Aquaman films).  Other than superior technology, there was nothing to indicate the “aliens” were from off-world.  None of these issues break the film, but they stand out on a first viewing.
Did I enjoy the film?  Yes.  The Special Edition feels like the version Cameron probably always intended.  The story is more complete, the themes are clearer, and the ending lands better.  The underwater setting is still unique, and the characters feel real enough that you care what happens to them.  The movie has tension, heart, and a sense of wonder that many modern sci-fi films lack.  I fully enjoyed it – as I expected to — especially the expanded ending, which gives the film a more hopeful and thoughtful conclusion.
Final Recommendation:  Highly recommended. “The Abyss – Special Edition” is a well-made, ambitious sci-fi adventure that holds up remarkably well.  Its Oscar-winning visual effects were groundbreaking, and the restored footage adds depth and meaning to the story.  Rated PG-13 for language and some intense scenes, it’s suitable for most viewers.  If you like character-driven science fiction, underwater adventure, or James Cameron’s earlier work, this version is definitely worth your time.  The Special Edition is the better cut — more complete, more emotional, and more satisfying.
.
Click here (16 March) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started