Titanic 4K UHD (1997)

[Jim Collins]

Where do I sign for this to include the open matte version?
Also, this better be packed with special features, since it took so long to arrive. I still have high hopes that one day they'll release an extended edition of the movie!

[Matt89]

Originally Posted by steev210

Matt, James Cameron's "Titanic" vs Irwin Allen's "The Poseidon Adventure". Who wins? I know you're a big fan of both.

Oh damn that's hard lol.

I think Titanic would win overall for me personally, but The Poseidon Adventure is certainly my favourite disaster film. Titanic I'd categorize as more of a historical drama.

Love both of them though!

[mpls1981]

Originally Posted by Jim Collins

Where do I sign for this to include the open matte version?
Also, this better be packed with special features, since it took so long to arrive. I still have high hopes that one day they'll release an extended edition of the movie!

I've seen a 4K HDR full matte version. I know it's not official, but great watch on 120 inch screen.

[Chad Rouch]

Originally Posted by Cinema84

I ask because even though he's shot many of his films in 2.35:1, I've seen reports of him preferring open matte versions for home video, which would be oddball. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what I've read?

That mostly stems from the old "The Abyss" Special Edition LaserDisc where in the liner notes he said he preferred the full frame, open matte version to the 2.35:1 letterboxed version because of the "low resolving power of NTSC video". I'm pretty sure his stance is far more nuanced now that we are a few generations away from NTSC video.

[liamjaco1998]

Originally Posted by Jim Collins

Where do I sign for this to include the open matte version?
Also, this better be packed with special features, since it took so long to arrive. I still have high hopes that one day they'll release an extended edition of the movie!

If they didn’t do it for its 10th anniversary or the current 25th anniversary I can’t say they’ll do it ever. As the film is already what James Cameron wanted from the beginning.

[Stop Revisionism]

JC can tinker with this and the Avatars all he wants just as long as he leaves his good movies alone and does not go full T2.

[Matt89]

I have an open-matte version saved somewhere on an external. Also have a 35mm scan of the film from the 1990s, looks pretty cool, print damage and all.

[liamjaco1998]

Originally Posted by Stop Revisionism

JC can tinker with this and the Avatars all he wants just as long as he leaves his good movies alone and does not go full T2.

I don’t understand why he just doesn’t add to or replace the dated cgi, the green screen, the face replacement and the stunt doubles rather than messing with the grading, HFR and cinematography.

[SpacemanDoug]

Originally Posted by Matt89

I don't love the cheesy dialogue in the first half (the "I'm the king of the world" bit IMO has aged pretty badly - along with some very obviously '90s hairstyles), but iceberg onwards Titanic is an absolute masterclass in action/adventure filmmaking. And as someone who's been obsessed with the disaster since I was a little kid, the attention to detail is simply extraordinary.

Yea that first half is a rough watch in retrospect, definitely not aged as well as one would think and sadly James' career hasn't really improved since then

[gates70]

Originally Posted by liamjaco1998

It seems someone’s not secure in their masculinity.

Looking forward to the response on this one

[DaylightsEnd]

Originally Posted by liamjaco1998

I don’t understand why he just doesn’t add to or replace the dated cgi, the green screen, the face replacement and the stunt doubles rather than messing with the grading, HFR and cinematography.

Titanic is a bit slow. Maybe he can go full-Lucas, add in some cgi cartoon monkeys and a car chase or two below decks, spice it up a bit for the kids....

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by DaylightsEnd

Titanic is a bit slow. Maybe he can go full-Lucas, add in some cgi cartoon monkeys and a car chase or two below decks, spice it up a bit for the kids....

Titanic Rocks...make it happen.

Cameron could also put some rocks in front of Rose keeping Jack from being able to get on the door.

[Kyle15]

Originally Posted by liamjaco1998

It seems someone’s not secure in their masculinity.

[Kyle15]

Originally Posted by SpacemanDoug

Yea that first half is a rough watch in retrospect, definitely not aged as well as one would think and sadly James' career hasn't really improved since then

I always loved the bits of quintessential 90s-ism that couldn't help worming its way in there despite going for historical accuracy. It's all so charming it never bothered me.

[DaylightsEnd]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

Dammmitt!!!!!! Frikkin' spoilers on this website are off the chain. Inexcusable. Pre-order canceled.

[wasim h]

Originally Posted by Matt89

Not sure what you mean here? How can you not watch the film through a modern day lens? None of us lived in 1912, it is theoretically impossible to watch it through a 1912 lens so...yeah of course you're watching the film through a modern-day lens lol. The film itself is looking back on the tragedy from a 1990s perspective anyway. And you'd need to in order to make the film watchable because while the set design and the depiction of the disaster was (mostly) pretty bang on, they also had to make it look like a movie.

If you really wanted to watch the sinking as it happened in 1912 you'd basically have to turn off all the set lights lol. April 14, 1912 was the night of a new moon so Titanic was actually sailing in complete darkness (which is f*cking WILD when you think about it - they were sailing at full speed through an ice field and nearly blind). The iceberg wasn't visible until moments before they hit it because in addition to there being no moon, there was a flat calm which made the icebergs almost impossible to see without water lapping at the base. The iceberg was nothing but a black mark on the horizon, only visible because its mass blocked out the stars.

We also know that when the ship broke, the stern didn't slam back into the water causing a massive tidal wave like it does in the film. When the lights went out everyone was plunged into COMPLETE and TOTAL darkness. Plus the lights had been gradually dimming anyway as the ship began to fill with water. It's why nearly all of the survivors didn't even see the ship break. If it was so obvious the ship broke apart as it sank, that would've been reflected in survivor testimony, which it wasn't. Jack Thayer was one of the few survivors to testify that the ship broke, and it was only because he jumped into the water right near the end that he was close enough to the ship to witness it. Mostly everyone else in that vicinity did not survive the sinking.

So yeah, you're not only watching a historical event through a modern lens (obviously), but you're literally looking at it through the "magic" of cinema. The ship wasn't as visible from the lifeboats as the film would lead one to believe. But with that said, if Cameron depicted the sinking as it actually occurred, everyone would be complaining that they couldn't see anything.

Still those technical details has nothing to do with what would a poor teenage character say in 1912 in that position

U can see or read interviews from people who lived in the 20s or 30s they dont think or look at stuff like we look at them today

So yeah that line in particular makes sense for a character like jack experiencing that feeling at the time

[THF90]

Originally Posted by dcx4610

I've never understood this logic. My buddy has a similar opinon of movies like 127 Hours, Into the Wild, Titanic, etc. "I know what's going to happen so why watch?"

The acting, presentation, narrative, cinematoagraph, direction? I'm watching a movie for more than just the ending and story personally...

I guess it's the same for people that only enjoy waching movies once. Honestly, I think that's the majorty of people.

I don't think Titanic is a great movie but it's extremely well done as far as the set pieces are concerned and the acting (outside of poor Leo) is good. It's certainly worth seeing at least once. From a technical presentation at the very least, it's brilliant and well reserched.

Very good points as I love 127 Hours and Into the Wild.

[Matt89]

Originally Posted by wasim h

Still those technical details has nothing to do with what would a poor teenage character say in 1912 in that position

U can see or read interviews from people who lived in the 20s or 30s they dont think or look at stuff like we look at them today

So yeah that line in particular makes sense for a character like jack experiencing that feeling at the time

Lol...

I'm not saying it's an unrealistic line. I just think his delivery is bad and that's what's caused it to age poorly IMO (in my opinion).

[liamjaco1998]

Originally Posted by Matt89

Lol...

I'm not saying it's an unrealistic line. I just think his delivery is bad and that's what's caused it to age poorly IMO (in my opinion).

Wait? Excitement in someone’s voice aged poorly? 😂

[Member-222782]

Originally Posted by liamjaco1998

I don’t understand why he just doesn’t add to or replace the dated cgi, the green screen, the face replacement and the stunt doubles rather than messing with the grading, HFR and cinematography.

I would do a complete revision. Erase DiCaprio and Winslet and replace them with The Rock and Lady Gaga. Reshoot the ending. The ship still sinks but they're in the Caribbean and it's 1978. Replace the Celine Dione song with The Love Boat theme.