Maybe I’m in a minority, but I thought Titanic was a bunch of melodramatic crap when there were more interesting true stories that the movie could have been about.
I guess I’m one of those people who would rather watch a low-budget movie with a good story than a big-budget movie with a lot of spectacle but a bad story. But I do understand people going to see a movie just for the spectacle. I’ve done it before. I just usually regret it.
I guess I’m one of those people who would rather watch a low-budget movie with a good story than a big-budget movie with a lot of spectacle but a bad story.
Ooooh, I’ve never thought about that. Yes, that would be great. Who would you cast? I just started thinking of British actors and the first ones to pop into my mind, Ian McKellen — but he’s obviously too old to play John Oldman (but perhaps the skeptic Doctor?) — and Tom Hiddleston. On second thought, I don’t know if David Tennant could be good as well. He’s definitely played a young-ish looking ageless man before… He’s better in roles that require high energy, whereas Hiddleston has a sort of cool about him that might be fitting.
I think it is a kind of spectacle that just doesn’t exist anymore. For example, going to a Marvel movie for the effects is sort of like watching a video game. When everything is pure CGI, it loses the appeal (for me).
But Titanic was right at the cusp of that. There is CGI, but there’s also bigatures and miniature work and practical effects, etc etc etc. In many ways it is James Cameron at his peak.
But totally agree that the plot is pretty corny and it could have been much better as a more historically-focused film which didn’t spend most of the time on a relatively generic love story.
The last movie I went to purely for the spectacle was Dunkirk and I was pleasantly surprised that it was an enjoyable film as well, so I guess sometimes it’s worth it even in more recent times.
Titanic is actually worth a watch though. Whereas for Minecraft, I found even the teaser to be a challenge.
Minecraft just seems like the type of movie where lines like, “Were gonna rock our blocks off!” And that will be their peak writing.
Maybe I’m in a minority, but I thought Titanic was a bunch of melodramatic crap when there were more interesting true stories that the movie could have been about.
It has that annoying James Cammron thing where the working class gets blamed for the actions of the rich.
It’s reached Rocky Horror Picture Show in my household.
It’s silly. You quote lines. You laugh at motives if you think about it.
That’s fair. But it’s worth watching even just for the effects and set work.
I guess I’m one of those people who would rather watch a low-budget movie with a good story than a big-budget movie with a lot of spectacle but a bad story. But I do understand people going to see a movie just for the spectacle. I’ve done it before. I just usually regret it.
Might I make a suggestion?
The Man From Earth
Thank you, I have seen it and I really love it! I hear there is a sequel, which seems needless so I never watched it. But I’ve seen that one twice.
I watched the sequel. It wasn’t as special as the first one, had probably twice the sets as the first one. (:O) Worth a watch, I’d say.
It was available for free for a while some years ago, iirc. Don’t know about now though.
First one great, second one still good, although it’s been a while since I saw it.
Good to hear it doesn’t suck, but eh. I don’t need to know any more of his story.
I’d like to see the movie done as a play.
Ooooh, I’ve never thought about that. Yes, that would be great. Who would you cast? I just started thinking of British actors and the first ones to pop into my mind, Ian McKellen — but he’s obviously too old to play John Oldman (but perhaps the skeptic Doctor?) — and Tom Hiddleston. On second thought, I don’t know if David Tennant could be good as well. He’s definitely played a young-ish looking ageless man before… He’s better in roles that require high energy, whereas Hiddleston has a sort of cool about him that might be fitting.
I think it is a kind of spectacle that just doesn’t exist anymore. For example, going to a Marvel movie for the effects is sort of like watching a video game. When everything is pure CGI, it loses the appeal (for me).
But Titanic was right at the cusp of that. There is CGI, but there’s also bigatures and miniature work and practical effects, etc etc etc. In many ways it is James Cameron at his peak.
But totally agree that the plot is pretty corny and it could have been much better as a more historically-focused film which didn’t spend most of the time on a relatively generic love story.
The last movie I went to purely for the spectacle was Dunkirk and I was pleasantly surprised that it was an enjoyable film as well, so I guess sometimes it’s worth it even in more recent times.
Christopher Nolan is one of the few that can nail big spectacle as well as story telling.
I just watched the trailer. Jesus Christ that looks awful.
A teaser is of course just a teaser and not the final product.
It can still be redeemed. Look at Sonic.
Sonic just needed a new CGI model to fix.
Minecraft would have to change, well, everything.
They could salvage it by having Chris Pratt.
/s
Surprised he’s not in it. Maybe he was unavailable.
Still better than Borderlands where they would have had to change the entire cast.
Yeah, I don’t have an issue with the actors (aside from Jack Black and Jason Momoa’s hair).
its almost a principal at this point.
admittedly, no semblance of logic at play… I spose ill get to it someday