I'd like to do an extensive film commentary, and whether I can take this to the places I want it to go will remain to be seen, but for films like Titanic and JFK, doing a scene by scene analysis and delving into the non-fiction side as well as the fictional sounds really interesting to me. We all know pretty much what happened when Titanic sank on April 14th-15th 1912, but because there were no audio or visual recordings possible at that time, we are dependent on people's memory and testimony - sometimes given weeks or months after the disaster occurred. It creates a really interesting effect - take a step back, and everything is clear. We know exactly what happened. The ship side-swiped an iceberg at 11:40pm ship time, sent out distress signals (the first hard pieces of evidence which are set in stone), fires rockets, quickly gathers as many passengers as possible into lifeboats with the time constraints the crew have, and completely sinks by around 2:20am, two hours and forty minutes after the drama started. But what happens when we try to take a closer look?
When we take a closer look, Titanic is a bountiful source of endless mysteries - the mood shifted as those still onboard realised the ship was going to sink, and the more time that passed, and closer to the end we got, the less information of value we have - those with a chance to tell us were rowing as far from the ensuing disaster as they could. Without a machine that can see through time, solving these mysteries is nearly impossible - but the questions that come up amongst scholars are surprising, and these ones exist side-by-side with death, horror, tragedy and high drama - making them seem darker and more interesting. 654 adult passengers survived - each one with their own story (nearly all of them contradicting each other in some way), many of which can be traced back to the lifeboat they managed to board. In some cases the stories have been told many times, but more often there are voices that haven't merited the same attention - it's interesting to look at the film closely to see the added details James Cameron felt should be included, but which occur as background to his story involving Jack Dawson (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Rose Dewitt Bukater (Kate Winslet) - two fictional characters amongst others.
In regards to that story - some love it and some hate it. I've had a lifelong fascination with the steamship R.M.S. Titanic, and I've seen the film a few times, along with other films which depict the events of that night. I'll talk about what I like and don't like about it as I go through the commentary, which will be pretty detailed and scene by scene if not shot by shot. Cameron films are not where we're going to see nuance, surprising character detail, interesting complexity or anything like that. In a James Cameron film there's a certain bluntness and straightforward simplicity when it comes to character - so any intricate or delicate balance is thrown out in favour of broad stereotype and loud, brutally announced narrative moments. Cameron is a details man when it comes to effects, art design, action and set decoration - but character and story will often come second and third to the spectacle he's trying to produce. We'll see a lot of that in Titanic, but thankfully, as someone interested in the details behind the fictional story he's created, he focuses on what I'm focused on in this particular movie.
TITANIC Historical Commentary
A scene by scene look at the film
My father was obsessed with this one historical event - and he was obsessed with the ship. It was his hunger for more and more information that set me upon a path that has led to pretty much the same. For years in the early 80s, the dream was to find Titanic and bring it back to the surface - somehow reclaiming her, and undoing a moment in time we wish we could redress. Every time I see her advancing on that wall of ice, I want her to get by unharmed this time. She never does. In 1980, the Clive Cussler book Raise the Titanic was adapted for the big screen. It was a terrible movie. It was a big budget film which flopped, and really deserved to flop. That moment when the ship is brought back to the surface though - wow. That's quite a moment. What I didn't know at the time was that, even if the ship had of still been in one piece, the idea of raising it from the depths of the Atlantic was ridiculous. It's 12,500 feet down, and the ship weighed tens of thousands of tons. When salvagers managed to raise a 20 ton piece of the ship's hull, it took a monumental effort. The state the ship is in now, any chance to raise either half would result in it's disintegration. In any case - it's a moot point, as the ship is dug in deep and in pieces. Even raising it piece by piece would take many decades and untold millions or billions of dollars.
In the years before it was found (and there were serious questions about whether it could be found, or if it ever would be) I watched all the various films we had on the disaster. A Night to Remember was clearly the best, and is still a classic today, released as part of the Criterion Collection. There were those lesser films, Titanic (1953) and S.O.S. Titanic - a 1979 Made for TV production which substituted the R.M.S. Queen Mary for Titanic, though those of us who knew the ship well were unimpressed. None of them show the ship breaking in half, because up to the time the shipwreck was found, nobody thought it had. Even though roughly half of the survivors recounted it breaking in two, they were disbelieved over those who stated that it sank whole. Excuses were given for those thinking it had - they'd heard the boilers or other items shaking loose and crashing through the ship, and they'd seen the stern suddenly rise, making it look like the ship had broken. It seemed impossible - that Titanic could have been ripped apart. She was too strong.
In 1985 it was suddenly announced that Robert Ballard, of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, on a deep sea diving expedition, had found her. Photographs of the wreck came through slowly but surely. At first any view was incredible, but as time went on and equipment improved we caught more and more incredible sights. We learned that the ship had broken in two at the surface, just as those witnesses had claimed. We learned that there was a field of debris stretching for miles. We learned that the bow had plowed into the mud at the sea bottom so hard that it had buried itself deep - forever hiding the iceberg damage. Conflicting theories abounded - and it payed not to take too much notice. At one stage we were told that it wasn't the iceberg that sank her - that there was an explosion after the iceberg struck which doomed the ship. It was all wrong. Hypothesis after hypothesis based on the evidence gathered around the wreck. I just wish they'd dig up all that mud and expose the damage the iceberg did. Ultrasound surveying revealed that there wasn't a huge gash, which is proposed in all the literature published before the wreck was found. If you look at the proposed gash, you'll see that the ship would have sunk in minutes if it were true. Plates buckled, and water roared in. The damage was enough.
In the mid-90s we started hearing about James Cameron's film - and what we were hearing wasn't good. The movie's production had turned into a money-hungry monster that was going to sink the famous director. Production delays and effects were dragging things out, and the blasphemous words Heaven's Gate were being bandied about. I hadn't heard of such disastrous tidings since Superman IV was in production - you'd hardly think that this was going to be one of the most successful films of all time. The press had this one earmarked for failure. All of that kind of faded once we started seeing scenes from the film - the most realistic depiction of the ship and what happened that night. Cameron obviously cared about this subject matter a great deal - which is something I didn't know at the time. The sheer visual impressiveness reverberated for a couple of years once released - the ship itself more of a star than DiCaprio, although he came out of the film with a massive career boost and an adoring legion of teenage girl admirers. My father had seen the film twice at the movies before I even had a chance to go.
That brings us up to date - but we should always remember that 1,500 people died that night. This wasn't a fire at a fireworks factory where nobody gets hurt so we can all enjoy the show. A little reverence should be paid, and I find to do that it's best to think of the disaster on more human terms. This wasn't a grand story - a stage contained in iron with propellers attached - it was a conveyance carrying passengers like you or I, living their lives onboard in as ordinary a way as you can imagine. Some people picked at their food, some people chastised their children and some people tried not to put weight on their foot, for there were blisters on their toes. They were real people - most of them terrified to be suddenly confronted with dying. They weren't taking part in some gussied up opera, they were just making their way. They'd rather not be a part of history in this way - they'd rather live their lives all the way through, and leave history to somebody else. To them Titanic was just another ship - there was novelty, because everything was brand new, but that's as far as the romance went. They had their lives to live, problems to confront, and they did their best to survive...
__________________
Remember - everything has an ending except hope, and sausages - they have two.
Latest Review : Aftersun (2022)