Titanic: 25 Years Later

Titanic was my favorite film when I was a kid. Well, one of them at least. It holds my personal record for number of times I have seen a film in the theater—four. Titanic (Cameron, 1997) was released when I nine years old. I was truly obsessed—ripping every nuance to shreds and talking to my parents about Fabrizio at the dinner table for months (I was a weird kid). Like a baby hipster, I felt a personal point of pride that I liked Titanic historically, prior to the movie’s release and didn’t care for the sweeping love story. Even as a child, I found the main narrative formulaic, and was moved instead by the grandeur and scale of the piece, as well as Cameron’s hyped technical accuracy and attention to historical detail. I anticipated the film prior to its release, as I already knew about the ship. 

Titanic: Nothing on Earth Could Come Between a Nerdy Girl and her Intellectual Fixation

Books, Movies,…

My parents had bought me a children’s book about Robert G. Ballard’s recent explorations of the wreck, and soon I received a four-volume VHS History Channel documentary about the sinking. I was thrilled.

Titanic: The… Video Game?

I was also an avid player of Titanic: Adventure Out of Time, an open-world adventure game for PC set on the doomed vessel with three possible outcomes: either the ship sinks and history stays as is, or the Nazis win World War II, in one ending the Soviets win, and in another the Americans. World War II… on the Titanic? Pizza… on a bagel? There’s a framing narrative set in the London blitz and you, the player, must go back in time to your mission as a spy on the Titanic. I know it sounds outlandish, but it works in the game.

Anyway, there’s a mission and everything, and technically you can win one of those four endings. I mainly spent my time doing sets in the gym, checking out the Turkish baths, going to the squash courts, and taking the elevator to every deck and running through the hallways, knocking on every stateroom door. That’s how I like to play video games—not according to mission whatsoever, but rather, screwing around and finding my own amusement. See also, Red Dead Redemption and GTA. I’m not really a gamer. But I have deeply entrenched memories of playing Titanic Adventure Out of Time, with its haunting soundtrack.

See this walkthrough. Bumbling Through the Titanic, for a humorous commentary.

This is another funny walkthrough.

Check this one out to enjoy the music and follow the game long-play without commentary.

Sometimes I listen to this one to fall asleep. Your mileage may vary. 

Titanic: The Musical Extrava(skip)

I have not seen the musical Titanic, unrelated to the film, but released in the same prophetic year—1997. I’ve heard mixed reviews—the groundbreaking set tilted 180 degrees into the air while the actors sang and acted upon it. Even though it won the Tony Award for Best Musical in 1997, people often conflated and confabulated the musical with the blockbuster film. Perhaps it’s time for a major revival. I’d love to see John Doyle direct a production. He is known for inventive and pared-down productions. His 2006 revival of Sondheim’s Company (with Raul Esperza as Bobby) is my favorite rendition of the show, where the cast doubles as the orchestra. A minimalistic rendition of Titanic where the band literally plays on throughout the show, would be something. 

Titanic: The Re-Watch

I hadn’t re-watched Titanic in full since soon after the VHS release. While I fondly recall both purchasing and watching the two-VHS-set, I doubt I’ve seen the film its entirety since before high school. Over the intervening years, the film has become a trope in the pop cultural zeitgeist. It has been deconstructed, memed, parodied, and nearly become an abstraction of itself. Even though I hadn’t seen the full film, or even a large portion of it, in likely 20 years, I’ve seen every frame memorialized as a meme, from early YouTube comedy to GIFs, beyond, and back. An early YouTube favorite: Titanic in 5 Seconds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuSdU8tbcHY 

I decided to revisit Titanic in full after a number of commentators and critics whose work I admire had opined about it. For much more depth, look into Sarah Marshall’s podcast work, and Lindsey Ellis’ video essays on YouTube. A few weeks ago, I sat down to watch the entire 195 minute saga in one evening.

To get the full cinematic effect, I set a few ground rules. I would not break up the film in two days—I’d watch it in a night. Given the length, my age, fatigue, and need for bathroom breaks/sustenance/ refreshments, I gave myself liberal breaks—sue me. I honored the golden rule of the VHS, despite watching it streaming, and took an intermission right after Captain Smith says: “Well, you may just get your headlines, Mr. Ismay”. This signifies the moment when the management of White Star and the top officials onboard realize the inevitable and swift sinking of the ship, and the human toll therein. 

 Below is a list of musings, observations, and rambling–pro and con style—of my impressions of Titanic 25 years after its release.

PROS

The Sound Direction

I found myself utterly enthralled by the sound direction upon re-watch. The way a heavy industrial din is created between the engines, breaking water, and sheer volume of the vessel, the ship becomes a character itself. The use of the sound of the ship, which in other narratives would be non-diegetic sound, is transformed into diegetic sound here. The vessel is immense, imposing, and all-encompassing simply by the way it sounds. Scenes of dialogue set in interiors are very quiet, especially in first class, which Cameron uses to comment upon class structure, as well as Rose’s feelings of imprisonment in the sedate aristocracy. Third class, on the other hand, is always bustling. Using subtitles was great to grasp a lot of nuance especially among third class passengers speaking over one another. 

Even though I re-watched this on a laptop, I shivered or startled at every exterior shot. The sound of the engines and the ship cruising is an ever-present hum, which I found quite distressing and disconcerting viscerally—in a good way. It was effective as a child viewer and remains effective now in my 30s. It’s an apt use of filmmaking as metaphor—not just to connote the feeling of being on the actual Titanic, but the themes of underlying hubris, cruelty, and oppression in the shadow of the Industrial Revolution. The purrs and growls of the ship are awe-inspiring and menacing at once.

Of course that was a potent metaphor in 1997, with the dot-com boom (let us recall the Pets.com sock puppet), but now in 2022, it’s even more sobering as a meditation upon capitalism and the industrial complex. Titanic is an immense, behemoth, floating machine, yet she exists and operates via human toil—literal sweat and blood of the working class. Yet, the majestic machine is not immune to human fallibility. After Bush, 9/11, Madoff, Enron, the 2008 economic crisis, the Twitter Presidency of Hubris, drone strikes, and COVID, our culture seems one of Big Cynicism much more pronounced than anything the 1990’s could dream. The greed and exploitation of Titanic feel especially relevant today. 

The Technical Accuracy

Cameron’s vision of a technically accurate representation of the Titanic, complete with state-of-the-art cutting edge footage of the wreck itself, remains awe-inspiring. This has become something of a joke over time, as pundits have been apt to point out the many cut corners and shoddy mistakes that remain. Here is my favorite example—yes I am well aware that Neil Degrasse Tyson is himself a problematic figure whose fame has been somewhat tarnished since first blush—much like Jim Cameron.

Nevertheless, the sheer ambition of the film shines through to this day, shoddy CGI and incorrect sky aside. The attention to detail is exquisite and really impressive 25 years later. There is a real depth and nuance to the set design. Cameron’s full scale, historically and technically accurate Titanic replica remains a marvel, both from the perspective of film production history and spectatorship. I mean, how much of this would just be rotoscoped into a background or altered in post production if Titanic were released by a studio now?  Despite what a jerk I have read he is, I want to believe in the little boy nerd inside James Cameron who was inspired to make a film of this breadth and magnitude.

Fabrizio

Fabrizio was my favorite character when I was a child, and he still occupies a special place in my love for Titanic. I didn’t learn anything new from this re-watch, but he really did get short-changed. He appears in many key scenes alongside Jack before his untimely smokestack-related demise. He’s in the King of the World scene before he  gets cropped out. He’s in the introductory frame of the ‘REAL party” below deck where Jack takes Rose. He helps the third-class passengers break through a locked gate as water rises, and he’s right there when Mr. Ismay shoots himself. He even gets on a lifeboat, only to be crushed.

I’m not sure what Cameron is trying to say about Fabrizio. I’d love to see an alternative-narrative reboot based on his perspective. That being said, the accent and characterization are borderline Borat. I would not characterize Danny Nucci’s performance as ‘nuanced.’ But then, it doesn’t have to be. Notably, the caricature feels strongest with “I A-GO TO AMERICAAAAAAAA!!!!”. It’s endearing, but also, as the youth say, cringe.

Kate Winslet

This is probably the ship that launched a lifelong crush on Kate Winslet. See what I did there? The flame burns strongly as ever! It was exciting to re-watch especially after her brilliant turn in Mare of Eastown. She is given great range here and it’s excellent, especially considering that she was 21 when it was filmed. Remember all the scrutiny she got, and bullshit about her weight? She was treated poorly by the media, and I recall there was a lot of kerfuffle about whether or not she was sexy enough. Or something. Anyway, I love her. She’s always been fiercely outspoken and advocated for her own needs. 

Victor Garbor

Victor Garbor, what a treasure. He’s a triple threat and Broadway legend, and he gives the most empathic and humanizing performance as Thomas Andrews, architect of the ship. Notably, he is the only member of the crew to show concern about the insufficient lifeboat supply. He shows enormous compassion and empathy to Rose and Jack as the ship sinks was touched by the scene where, as the ship is visibly tilting, he takes a minute to adjust a clock. I adore the metaphor to his commitment to principle, order, and ethics. A fantastic performance by an excellent actor. Also, what a fox at this earlier stage in his career.

Pacing

I made certain to keep track of the timing, and it really is perfect. Exactly half of the film is set before the ship hits the iceberg, and half is set after. The exposition moves quickly because of the framing narrative in the present day and large ensemble cast aboard the ship. I wish there was more of an “Upstairs/Downstairs On a Boat” emphasis and that some of the ensemble cast was fleshed out, but they did what they could and it’s still well over three hours long. It was a bold choice by Cameron to put the suicide attempt before the 45-minute mark—the high dramatic tension sucks the viewer into the ‘A plot’ so you really care about Rose’s plight before a whiff of iceberg.

I contend the “A Plot” isn’t the framing device set in the contemporary day, but the “A Plot” is the romantic plot and stories of the characters on the boat, and the “B Plot” is the disaster movie after the iceberg strikes. The “A” plot invests you into the characters and their fates so that when the “B”  Plot begins, the drama is intensified beyond the historical narrative of the ship’s sinking. The iceberg hits right at the hour and thirty-minute mark. 

With the luxury of streaming, knowing that I was in for an hour-and-a-half of disaster-porn, I took more frequent breaks during this part than the first 90min.  Perhaps the best use of pacing and dramatic timing is when the boat is directly approaching the iceberg and trying to steer away.

The Iceberg

Cameron’s masterful use of tension is successful—every time, even though I know the end of the film, I get so invested that I believe maybe this time they will manage to steer away. Maybe they will graze the side and it won’t be so bad. The tension in the moments directly preceding and following the collision were physically palpable. I clenched my fists as I thought “maybe the damage really isn’t so bad, and they can pull through”. Now, that’s what I call dramatic tension. 

The only problem I had with the timing was that, once the ship had FULLY submerged, there were still 30 minutes left. Nevertheless, if I hadn’t been watching the clock, I may not have noticed. Upon finishing the film, it doesn’t lag. Sufficient time and care is taken to establish both the A and B plots, such that the fictional characters are three dimensional, and the disaster plot is thorough, accurate, and highly respectful of the victims and the traumas experienced. Cameron does a good job of shifting perspectives fairly quickly through the framing narrative and the main narrative, as well upper and lower decks. No single scene feels too long. Plenty feel heavy handed, but that’s a different story. If you’re going to do an epic, do an epic.

CONS

Leo’s Script

I strongly dislike the way Jack is written. This wasn’t news at the time of release, but the rest of the cast gets fairly era-appropriate but still accessible language. Jack, meanwhile, delivers lines that are standard vernacular for 1997. We get it, he’s lower class. Nevertheless, they really wouldn’t have to tweak the script to make his language both accurately Edwardian working class and accessible to the audience. Plenty of other films and theater productions have done so. 

It’s just lazy screenwriting. I think the script is my main criticism with the characterization of Jack. Leo is… fine. He doesn’t do it for me in this role, and I never got the teeny bopper fandom, but I adore his work as a mature actor. That being said, he has great soft-butch energy. (If you read Titanic with a queer subtext, as many do.)

The CGI

It’s probably a bad take to mock the CGI that was groundbreaking for its time. It’s really only noticeable in long pans across the exterior of the ship. Nevertheless, I feel like I’m watching an architectural rendering of some new development coming soon to gentrify my city.

Misc.

This film gives Pittsburgh, PA, my hometown and current residence, a bad reputation. Cal, the villain of the film (other than the real villains, which, of course, are capitalism and hubris) is a steel magnate from Pittsburgh.

Incidentally, I have a pet theory about his manservant/henchman who trails Jack and Rose. There’s a moment where Jack says “Good thing he isn’t a cop”, and Rose responds “I think he used to be!” The Titanic famously sank in 1912. The Homestead Strike occurred in 1892 in Homestead, PA, a suburb of Pittsburgh. What if Cal’s security detail is a former Pinkerton mercenary cop? It tracks with the way he pays off different crew members and ruthlessly hunts for Jack and Rose. 

If they hadn’t shot in Mexico, would the water look less inviting? While the ship is sinking, the way the scenes are shot make the water seem very inviting. And it’s hard for me to shake that feeling to this day. It’s the turquoise water of a swimming pool or mikveh. I don’t say this to diminish from the very real tragedy, merely as to express how the film aesthetically impacts me.

Concluding Thoughts

One thing I was not expecting was my visceral reaction to certain parts of Part 2 of the film. After the iceberg hits. I respect the canon tradition of the 2 VHS Titanic set, the one I had growing up, so I took an intermission and paused after Captain Smith says: “You may have your headline after all, Mr. Ismay.” Certain scenes of people being trapped below-deck, behind gates, and in stairwells (as water rises) reminded me of portrayals and accounts of 9/11. Of course, the film predates 9/11 and the tragedies are nearly nothing alike.

Cameron does a very good job of portraying trauma in a way that lets the audience empathize with the horror. Of course, I don’t mean to compare the actual traumatic events in our history. Not only do I feel that’s a tricky road ethically, but it’s also wasted energy. I raise the similarity to evoke not only Cameron’s skill as a filmmaker, but also the importance of artful and accessible catharsis. 

Titanic: Behind the Scenes

I would love to see a film about the production of Titanic, which was a notoriously challenging film to develop. James Cameron isn’t known for his warm-and-fuzzy bedside manner on set. The first scene filmed was “Draw me Like One of Your French Girls,” because of scheduling constraints. Filmmakers have said on the record that they would do it differently if they could.

Perhaps my favorite story about the production of Titanic is that during the leg of the shoot in Nova Scotia, a disgruntled crew member poisoned the clam chowder with PCP, and fed it to cast and crew. Allegedly, both Cameron and Bill Paxton were affected. Some people realized they were tripping and having a wild time, others were having a deep existential crisis. Cameron thought it was a neurotoxin in shellfish at first and claims he washed his mouth out. Bill Paxton said he didn’t feel much and went home to his trailer for a case of beer. After 50 cast and crew members went to the hospital and had toxicology screens, they determined it was PCP and not ergotism of some kind.

The Halifax police investigated this case for a whopping two years, but never determined who did it. That’s the backstage movie I want to see. Hell, I’ll take a backstage musical.