quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I've written about Georgians on Titanic. In doing so, I read a great deal of information about what happened and interviewed some of leading experts (at the time, anyhow - around 2002). The hisorical portrayal of what happened is pretty accurate - especially the physical aspects of the ship taking on water, foundering, and breaking up.

Now the love story added to appeal to audiences? That was pretty cringe-worthy. But the movie is a credible portrayal of a momentous historical event.

It's Romeo and Juliet set on a historical event. As I've said above, nobody gives Shakespeare stick for getting the nuance of Danish medieval politics wrong.

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

It's been a long time since I've seen Titanic, but nothing stands out in my memory that was horrendous in the portrayal of First Officer Murdoch.

warspite1

William McMaster Murdoch was not a made up character. He was very real. He served as an officer on board Titanic on that fateful night.

As far as we know from all the witness statements, Officer Murdoch did his duty that night, despite the fact that as an officer he knew he was unlikely to survive the sinking.

Yes there were reports of an officer shooting himself just before Titanic went down, but even if correct, there are no witnesses that can confirm who that officer was.

But Cameron decided it was Murdoch. But that is not the least of it. Because Cameron also decided to make First Officer Murdoch a bribe-taking coward who murdered two unarmed steerage class passengers (Irish naturally) before shooting himself.

Apparently the scenes were altered from the original Cameron dreamed up to make the bribe taking more ambiguous. But the given the way Murdoch throws the money back at Billy Zane's character (and the narrative that goes with it), there is little doubt what was being conveyed - and to suggest otherwise is simply disingenuous.

So this officer, a man who did his duty in helping to save passengers, and has a memorial in his hometown of Dalbeattie in Scotland where he is considered a hero, and where at the time the film was made he had close relatives (nephew) still living, has his name trashed for no good reason than making a buck.

I read quite a considerable bit on the sinking, but quite some time in the past so I may not be exactly up to speed.

Agreed that it was insensitive to use a named character. IIRC Cameron himself acknowledged and apologised for it, but some thoughts:

- There are far too many independent accounts of a officer shooting himself for it to simply not have happened.

- The general consensus (last I checked) is that it was Murdoch who committed suicide, given the fact that he was in charge when the ship struck the iceberg. Occam's Razor, at any rate, makes sense here.

- From a quick glace at the screenplay, I think it was intended to be played off as Murdoch having too much to do to be interested in some first class passenger throwing wads of cash around. That wasn't how it came across on screen, however.

- The bribe always seemed more a mechanic to reflect Cal's nefariousness plot than Murdoch, who does make a point of coming clean before the end.

- For Murdoch, the shooting of the Irish character serves to put a actual human cost on the collision with the iceberg. As well as a less subtle commentary on class conflict in the film - after all the overwhelming majority of casualties were third class.

The really interesting thing for me is that if you cut the bribery twist out, there's a strong argument based on the historical evidence that:

- Murdoch was armed
- there definitely was shooting, at people or otherwise
- An officer (very likely Murdoch) did shoot themselves as the ship started on it's final plunge.

quote:

Soz . I must confess I haven't watched it since the one and only time at the cinema 22 years ago. The taste it left in my mouth has never gone away. So much heroism, so much good about the human spirit on show to be celebrated that night in the midst of such an awful tragedy - but Cameron was only really interested in faux political statements and cheap cliches. Yes there is a place for showing the other side, and what can happen to humans under the most intense pressure, but to use an actual character in that way with no proof to support what he was being accused of is disgusting.

I think you're wrong on Cameron's motivations. I think it's the recent Nat Geo documentary where he discusses the extent to which he developed an emotional connection to the story after diving on the wreck, and had a desire to get the story right as a result.

I'm sure he even had an edit done to the film when someone pointed out that the stars at night were wrong for that time of year.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jagsdomain

Am I the only one that that hated Titanic?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

The context, as I roughly remember, was that you were sceptical of the sincerity of Japanese apologies for war crimes, despite there being an extensive list of apologies made by the Japanese state.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Worth considering.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Unrelated, what would have been your preferred term, were you the screenwriter trying to find a reasonable term that would be understood on the mass market?

I was meaning in the context of a term that would communicate the message and tone and be understood in a broad enough setting.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Now, I'll concede that the pistol-whipping and the like was perhaps too far

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Personally, I find the notion of the descendants of deceased persons fastidiously defending the reputation of their deceased relatives quite bizarre.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Even more so in cases where there is some historical debate as to their reputation (say, Stalin as linked above).

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

You may as well ask to add another four hours to the story and have it start in Belfast with the laying of the keel.

Understandable, in my view given that Cameron was likely interested in making his own film and not dogmatically following A Night to Remember.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

MM - my quoting skills are lacking...

So in a nutshell:

Japanese apologies for what happened before and during WW2 have been 'limp' at best, and a bit too little too late. Which is odd because the Japanese culture generally takes pride in honor. That just seemed (honor) to crawl under a rock from 1930-1945. To claim they have made many 'real' or 'many' apologies since then is well, not well informed.

Screwing with a person's actual behavior, whether living or dead - fairly unforgivable. Why does 'artistic license' trump reality?

In today's world (and that of 2 decades ago), introducing hatred is just wrong - and that is exactly what Cameron did. And it is clear from this thread that he played in that domain.

And I will now owe Warspite an extra pint, but the Californian episode could easily have replaced some BS singing in the film.

Enjoy the day all,
Frank

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

MM - my quoting skills are lacking...

So in a nutshell:

Japanese apologies for what happened before and during WW2 have been 'limp' at best, and a bit too little too late. Which is odd because the Japanese culture generally takes pride in honor. That just seemed (honor) to crawl under a rock from 1930-1945. To claim they have made many 'real' or 'many' apologies since then is well, not well informed.

Screwing with a person's actual behavior, whether living or dead - fairly unforgivable. Why does 'artistic license' trump reality?

In today's world (and that of 2 decades ago), introducing hatred is just wrong - and that is exactly what Cameron did. And it is clear from this thread that he played in that domain.

And I will now owe Warspite an extra pint, but the Californian episode could easily have replaced some BS singing in the film.

Enjoy the day all,
Frank

Art serves to hold up a mirror to our faces that we may recognize the warts on our behaviours. Cameron was not inciting hatred, he was showing us the trope that operated in the minds of many at that time. All that is required is for the viewer to ask themselves if they found it believable at first blush, before questioning the convenient ethnic stereotype.

quote:

If you wish to link the two, and make something of that link, then please be my guest. The floor is yours as I simply don’t have the energy to respond to that.

quote:

Yes, this is worth considering and is certainly good to hear. Its 20 years late, but we all make mistakes and at least he appears to show genuine contrition in that clip. That being the case – and acknowledging that many, many millions will see the film, while a National Geographic documentary…not so much, I still don’t understand - if he truly feels that way (and listen to what he says) why future DVD’s could not have something added at the end of the film or within the box to state that the portrayal of Officer Murdoch is not necessarily factually correct and that the director used artistic licence. There is absolutely no evidence he took a bribe or shot anyone, and no proof that he took his own life.

quote:

My preferred term? Well unless one is after cheap, unnecessary, point scoring (heaven forbid) why the need to reference Murdoch’s nationality at all? I mean genuinely, why would the director want an Irish emigrant who’s had his way to the boat deck barred at every opportunity by the evil British crew (who’ve locked all the gates to keep them pesky peasants back) mention to the British officer (apparently the man solely responsible for the fact Tommy and co can’t get on a boat), and the man that is about to murder him and another steerage class passenger in cold blood, about his nationality? Why, if its unimportant and just a saying, would that nationality need be expressed in an American term i.e. a term that can be 'understood by the mass market'? After all if its not important and just a line Tommy could have used any Irish colloquialism - or he could have said “….you [evil], [Feckin’], [heartless] bastard" – or simply “bastard”. But no, it was “Limey Bastard” Why? Why was it SO important to get the understanding of Murdoch's nationality right that Cameron felt he needed to use a word that the Tommy character more than likely would have never even heard of (despite his apparent slavish devotion to making an historically accurate film)? What was the message that Cameron was seeking to convey? I can’t possibly imagine…….

quote:

Well each to their own. It’s easy to say of course because the Italian scenario I presented to you with your relatives will not (hopefully) ever come about – but I think your comment would be unlikely to find too much support. We are not, after all, talking about 200 hundred plus years ago. This awful film was made 85 years after the event and destroys a man’s reputation with no proof.

quote:

Why so extreme? To add in the Californian does not mean Cameron has to make a slavish reproduction of A Night to Remember does it? A Night to Remember features a four stack liner and an iceberg – so does Titanic, but the latter is still Cameron’s own film. It would still be so had he added in the Californian. Why would the addition of two, maybe three scenes of a few minutes each be such a burden? Heart-breakingly, frustratingly, the Californian didn't play the key role she could have that night, and her omission from the film reduces Cameron’s film from both an entertainment point of view and in terms of historical accuracy.

Why the unhelpful comment about the laying of the keel? This isn't a history of the ship. The film is a…ahem… love story set against the back drop of a tragic event that occurred on her maiden crossing of the Atlantic; a tragic event that the director is keen to tell us he wanted to record accurately. There are many reasons why Rose and Jack ended up in the water – well she had the comfort of a door – the Californian provides one of those reasons. Don’t get me wrong, Cameron was entitled to pick and choose what he wanted to show, but if the decision is made to remove such important parts of the story, he shouldn't then 'give it the large' about how historically accurate it is and how every star in the sky had to be right.

quote:

Japanese apologies for what happened before and during WW2 have been 'limp' at best, and a bit too little too late. Which is odd because the Japanese culture generally takes pride in honor. That just seemed (honor) to crawl under a rock from 1930-1945. To claim they have made many 'real' or 'many' apologies since then is well, not well informed.

quote:

I'm assuming the racial hatred accusation is in response to the whole British officer shoots unarmed Irish passenger scene.

If so then I personally wouldn't level that accusation at Cameron. I certainly have no reason to believe he's that way inclined (although it becomes harder to defend when adding in the locked gates and the pistol whipping). But what I do accuse him of is unthinking, boring, lazy-arsed, cliche ridden, direct by numbers, formulaic cobblers.

quote:

And yes, one example of that is the good old staple of the upper class British / down-trodden Irish routine - always guaranteed to put bums on seats....

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

It just makes me wonder what would consist of a "proper" apology in your viewing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I would also think that it goes without saying that artistic licence is used in an artistic production, right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I find it highly amusing that you have such objections to a single specific word in a screenplay with thousands.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Let's assume the Italian scenario did come about, because it offers a good window to perhaps change your view on the issue.

In the scenario that a deceased relative is accused committing a war crime, do you:

1) Vehemently oppose such accusations as they smear the reputation of the relative?
2) Do nothing?

If you choose option 1, and the accusations happen to have basis in truth, you're now in the position where you need to make a decision as to what's more important: reputation or the truth (and I hope and think that the truth would win!).

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

As with any film, you're constrained by time. A film cannot be indefinite, and the introduction of the Californian (new ship, setting and characters) would require a considerable investment of time to make it understandable (and therefore effective).

Such an investment would cost far more than it adds. There's a reason that the film shows no ships other than the Titanic between the departure scenes and the ending on the Carpathia.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Titanic won Oscars for:

Best Picture
Best Director
Best Art Direction
Best Cinematography
Best Costume Design
Best Film Editing
Best Original Dramatic Score
Best Original Song
Best Sound Mixing
Best Sound Editing
Best Visual Effects

Aggregated reviews of Titanic level out at 89%.

But warspite1 thinks that Cameron directs by numbers. [&:]

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

If you wish to link the two, and make something of that link, then please be my guest. The floor is yours as I simply don’t have the energy to respond to that.

The only link is that in both cases there was a strong degree of scepticism towards attempts at making amends. That's all.

It just makes me wonder what would consist of a "proper" apology in your viewing.

quote:

Yes, this is worth considering and is certainly good to hear. Its 20 years late, but we all make mistakes and at least he appears to show genuine contrition in that clip. That being the case – and acknowledging that many, many millions will see the film, while a National Geographic documentary…not so much, I still don’t understand - if he truly feels that way (and listen to what he says) why future DVD’s could not have something added at the end of the film or within the box to state that the portrayal of Officer Murdoch is not necessarily factually correct and that the director used artistic licence. There is absolutely no evidence he took a bribe or shot anyone, and no proof that he took his own life.

It's been ages since I watched the film with the Director's Commentary, but I'm sure a similar conversation takes place on it as to the one outlined above.

I would also think that it goes without saying that artistic licence is used in an artistic production, right?

quote:

My preferred term? Well unless one is after cheap, unnecessary, point scoring (heaven forbid) why the need to reference Murdoch’s nationality at all? I mean genuinely, why would the director want an Irish emigrant who’s had his way to the boat deck barred at every opportunity by the evil British crew (who’ve locked all the gates to keep them pesky peasants back) mention to the British officer (apparently the man solely responsible for the fact Tommy and co can’t get on a boat), and the man that is about to murder him and another steerage class passenger in cold blood, about his nationality? Why, if its unimportant and just a saying, would that nationality need be expressed in an American term i.e. a term that can be 'understood by the mass market'? After all if its not important and just a line Tommy could have used any Irish colloquialism - or he could have said “….you [evil], [Feckin’], [heartless] bastard" – or simply “bastard”. But no, it was “Limey Bastard” Why? Why was it SO important to get the understanding of Murdoch's nationality right that Cameron felt he needed to use a word that the Tommy character more than likely would have never even heard of (despite his apparent slavish devotion to making an historically accurate film)? What was the message that Cameron was seeking to convey? I can’t possibly imagine…….

I find it highly amusing that you have such objections to a single specific word in a screenplay with thousands.

quote:

Well each to their own. It’s easy to say of course because the Italian scenario I presented to you with your relatives will not (hopefully) ever come about – but I think your comment would be unlikely to find too much support. We are not, after all, talking about 200 hundred plus years ago. This awful film was made 85 years after the event and destroys a man’s reputation with no proof.

Let's assume the Italian scenario did come about, because it offers a good window to perhaps change your view on the issue.

In the scenario that a deceased relative is accused committing a war crime, do you:

1) Vehemently oppose such accusations as they smear the reputation of the relative?
2) Do nothing?

option 3 - do some research before heading down a road? Which I think is the crux of the matter in this discussion?

If you choose option 1, and the accusations happen to have basis in truth, you're now in the position where you need to make a decision as to what's more important: reputation or the truth (and I hope and think that the truth would win!).

In a broad context, there's historically been a lot of this in post WW2 Germany in relation to Nazi war crimes. The fact that the dead have no reputation in the legal context is actually a very good concept (IMO).

Here we just disagree.

quote:

Why so extreme? To add in the Californian does not mean Cameron has to make a slavish reproduction of A Night to Remember does it? A Night to Remember features a four stack liner and an iceberg – so does Titanic, but the latter is still Cameron’s own film. It would still be so had he added in the Californian. Why would the addition of two, maybe three scenes of a few minutes each be such a burden? Heart-breakingly, frustratingly, the Californian didn't play the key role she could have that night, and her omission from the film reduces Cameron’s film from both an entertainment point of view and in terms of historical accuracy.

Why the unhelpful comment about the laying of the keel? This isn't a history of the ship. The film is a…ahem… love story set against the back drop of a tragic event that occurred on her maiden crossing of the Atlantic; a tragic event that the director is keen to tell us he wanted to record accurately. There are many reasons why Rose and Jack ended up in the water – well she had the comfort of a door – the Californian provides one of those reasons. Don’t get me wrong, Cameron was entitled to pick and choose what he wanted to show, but if the decision is made to remove such important parts of the story, he shouldn't then 'give it the large' about how historically accurate it is and how every star in the sky had to be right.

As with any film, you're constrained by time. A film cannot be indefinite, and the introduction of the Californian (new ship, setting and characters) would require a considerable investment of time to make it understandable (and therefore effective).

Such an investment would cost far more than it adds. There's a reason that the film shows no ships other than the Titanic between the departure scenes and the ending on the Carpathia.

quote:

Japanese apologies for what happened before and during WW2 have been 'limp' at best, and a bit too little too late. Which is odd because the Japanese culture generally takes pride in honor. That just seemed (honor) to crawl under a rock from 1930-1945. To claim they have made many 'real' or 'many' apologies since then is well, not well informed.

Have you seen the wording of any of the Japanese apologies for WW2 actions?

You can view a list here.

The underlying issue isn't as much the apologies, but the reparations (or lack thereof). It is worth remembering that the score was settled in regards to wartime reparations in the post-war period between the nations.

Score was never settled. Mac made sure of that (ducks to avoid Mac fan bricks). And Wiki is not exactly a 'source' with this audience.

quote:

I'm assuming the racial hatred accusation is in response to the whole British officer shoots unarmed Irish passenger scene.

If so then I personally wouldn't level that accusation at Cameron. I certainly have no reason to believe he's that way inclined (although it becomes harder to defend when adding in the locked gates and the pistol whipping). But what I do accuse him of is unthinking, boring, lazy-arsed, cliche ridden, direct by numbers, formulaic cobblers.

Titanic won Oscars for:

Best Picture
Best Director
Best Art Direction
Best Cinematography
Best Costume Design
Best Film Editing
Best Original Dramatic Score
Best Original Song
Best Sound Mixing
Best Sound Editing
Best Visual Effects

If I didn't know better I would say you are his publicist.

Aggregated reviews of Titanic level out at 89%.

But warspite1 thinks that Cameron directs by numbers. [&:]

quote:

And yes, one example of that is the good old staple of the upper class British / down-trodden Irish routine - always guaranteed to put bums on seats....

This is the Edwardian period. That was actually a genuine reflection of the stratified class and social structure at the time...

quote:

Not really - and as I have said I have not researched this one much, but they knew there were not enough boats aboard. And even if ferrying, when the ship sinks in an hour you really cannot 'ferry', particularly in the North Atlantic.

quote:

A proper apology normally consists of the word apologise, and admission that something done was wrong, and appropriate amends made.

quote:

Yes, that artistic licence is used does indeed go without saying. As has been proven on this and other film threads over the years, not everyone has a deep prior knowledge of every film they watch. What is artistic licence and what is fact can therefore be blurred – either innocently or to satisfy a film makers own bias.

quote:

I’m pleased something I’ve written has amused you – it seems to happen quite a lot . I’d hoped I’d made clear what I was objecting to, but it seems you believe it’s the word in itself. So clearly I’ve not done a very good job. Oh well I tried.

That said of course, yes one could say I also object to the use of the word itself. For someone who wanted to make a film sooo accurate he oversaw every star position in the night sky (or whatever) his choice of that word, used by that character, was wrong and from an historical accuracy point of view Tommy may just as well have said: “Yo dog, where you at? Why you say I can’t be takin’ this boat man?” But as said, if it was just the word then I wouldn’t even waste time commenting on it, but it wasn’t just the word as I thought I'd made clear.

quote:

Sorry but I genuinely don’t understand your point re the Italian scenario. You say that if ‘the accusations have basis in truth’ – but that is the whole point about Murdoch. His actions that night are presented as fact. He was, as Cameron now admits, not just some generic character. He was a real person who actually served. The issue is that with Murdoch and the crime of bribe-taking and the crime of murder, there is no evidence whatsoever. THAT is the whole point and why he shouldn’t have been treated like that and why there was – and remains - such upset.

quote:

You believe – and more importantly – Cameron believed, that the removal of the Californian from the story was justified. You appear to have changed your mind on the rationale – first you said it was because he didn’t want to muddy the waters on blame (hubris over bad luck) and now you say it’s because of time. But that is not important, it could be both, it could be either, it could be whatever, the reason is not the point at all.

You say ‘such an investment would cost far more than it adds’. That is a very bold statement to make if the goal is to make an historically accurate movie. Californian was an important part of the events that night and why 1,500 people died. I mean if it’s a time issue they could remove the bit about the iceberg right?

quote:

But I don’t consider Titanic a watchable film, let alone a particularly historically accurate one. The removal of Californian was, in my view, just another error by the director. If you are happy with it then I’m glad.

quote:

Well I’m not going to get into a debate about that! In conversations over the years where Titanic comes up, the overwhelming view of people – 99% women – is that Titanic is a great film, and they then start gushing over Jack and Rose as it’s clear, from conversations I’ve witnessed at least, that it was the love story that provokes this reaction. But the film obviously pleased a lot of people and made Mr Cameron very rich.

quote:

What do I most object to about the film and where does a director take responsibility (as opposed to screen play, music etc.) I don’t know enough about the film world to know. So whether I am right in specifically blaming Cameron – as opposed to others involved – who knows. But fwiw, my personal objections (and I’m conscious it’s been 20 years) are (in no particular order):

Historically inaccurate with key events missing, the treatment of Murdoch, wholly unbelievable (and frankly excruciating) love story, even worse dialogue (did I notice no award for best screenplay?), formulaic rich guy = bad/poor guy = salt of the earth, formulaic Brit = the bad guy (didn’t David Warner’s character have a gun? (Brits do like guns in this film don’t they?) – but in time honoured fashion he refuses to shoot the hero but instead devises a dastardly plot to murder him that allows for the hero’s escape), steerage class passengers being purposely kept below decks, the lazy, unnecessary British/Irish undercurrent, Rose swanning about all over the ship for ages up to her nipples in the freezing Atlantic looking for Jack who’s also exposed to the freezing water for ages (did they hit a tropical zone right after striking the iceberg?). I’m sure there’s more – but one day I will look at the film again – if I can stomach it – just to see if there are any redeeming features (Rose’s charlies aside) that I may have missed first time round.

quote:

That the other party involved in the interaction is actually Scottish (and not British) is a nice subtle postcolonial commentary on the nature of identity politics.

quote:

It was to personalize the story with Rose's connection to the ships and events on it. The characters involved in the plot had no connection or awareness of the Californian, therefore not including it made perfect sense.

quote:

I thought that Scotland is part of Britain and therefore the people of Scotland are British.

quote:

They are not English nor Welsh who are also British since England and Wales is part of England.

quote:

But if that ship not assisting is the reason for the two being in the tropically warm North Atlantic, then simply adding another piece of fictional dialog where they wonder why there is no other ship coming to rescue them would warrant the inclusion of the Californian. Especially if someone would have speculated about the Californians lights to the front of them where one of them could have heard it if not having seen lights themselves.

quote:

As far as a ship's crew member taking a bribe, if they thought that they were going down with the ship, why would they take it? They would drown and have no further use for money.

quote:

quote:

They are not English nor Welsh who are also British since England and Wales is part of England.



No.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Pacing is going back and forth, I think that you mean tempo. But a few seconds of dialog and someone pointing to the horizon would not have upset the tempo - especially if it was a crew member. Then that could explain any bribes as just a means of jumping ahead of a lot of people, most of whom would have been expected to be saved if that ship went to their rescue.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Limey is an American slang term for British sailors.

Haven't read this whole thread, so this is just a little side note.

I've heard the term originated because of the limes' the Brits used in their cocktails. Add to that the practice seems to have originate in malarial regions when the British used it to counteract their distaste for the quinine in their drinks. Don't know if that's true, but at any rate there it is.[;)]

I heard it in reference to the British sailors who had to drink the juice of one lemon or lime a day to eliminate scurvy. That is why the British sailors are referred to Limeys.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Limey is an American slang term for British sailors.

Haven't read this whole thread, so this is just a little side note.

I've heard the term originated because of the limes' the Brits used in their cocktails. Add to that the practice seems to have originate in malarial regions when the British used it to counteract their distaste for the quinine in their drinks. Don't know if that's true, but at any rate there it is.[;)]

I heard it in reference to the British sailors who had to drink the juice of one lemon or lime a day to eliminate scurvy. That is why the British sailors are referred to Limeys.

Makes about as much sense as my postulation.

Wonder if there's a true/real source for the slang.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Seems to me Cameron has done all three, or would you dispute that as well?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I think it is important to not confuse bias with the desire to tell a story. The portrayal of Murdoch's character must be considered in the context of his role in the film of developing the major plot conflict between DiCaprio and Zane's characters, as well as his final actions demonstrating to Zane that money doesn't get you everything you want.

Murdoch's character servers as an illustration that you can't buy yourself out of every situation to a character that buys his way through life. That the illustration comes from Murdoch, who is in a situation that he simply can't get out of by any means, makes it even more appropriate in a dramatic sense.

I prefer my characters in drama to be a little more three dimensional. Your mileage may vary.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

The film is set in 1912. Anglo-Irish tensions are building. The issue of Irish Home Rule is still on-going and won't see any progress for another two years (and then not get implemented due to WW1), and two years after that Ireland will erupt in a war for independence.

Given that context, a degree of tension between the Irish and British characters is exactly true to history.

That the other party involved in the interaction is actually Scottish (and not British) is a nice subtle postcolonial commentary on the nature of identity politics. You'll likely disagree, but any film analysis of Titanic (or any film in general) will show you that everything is done for a reason.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

My counter-point is simple; there's no evidence that he didn't take a bribe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I would be cautious as to how you frame the upset, which was exceptionally localised (abet very vocal).

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

The point of Cameron's film was not to deliver a blow-by-blow of the sinking.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

You must be fun to go to the cinema with.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Are you suggesting that women's opinions on the qualities of what makes a movie good are less valid than those of men?

How...Edwardian. [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

To address point by point:

- The film was overwhelmingly praised for its historical accuracy by a large number within the Titanic academic community (of which some of the most informed served as historical advisors).
- The love story is (by Cameron's own admission), Romeo and Juliet on a boat. If you consider that bad, you must really hate Shakespeare.
- I am not sure what issue you have with the dialogue beyond a specific scene? At any rate, it didn't seem to detract from the movie as a whole.
- As noted above, the rich/poor distinction was a modern reframing of Shakespeare.
- David Warner's character was American, an ex-Pinkerton.
- Irish/British undercurrent was filled with tension at the time (far more than the norm for the time period) and therefore historically accurate.
- I think it's reasonable to bend the effects of hypothermia for the sake of drama.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Limey is an American slang term for British sailors.

Haven't read this whole thread, so this is just a little side note.

I've heard the term originated because of the limes' the Brits used in their cocktails. Add to that the practice seems to have originate in malarial regions when the British used it to counteract their distaste for the quinine in their drinks. Don't know if that's true, but at any rate there it is.[;)]

I heard it in reference to the British sailors who had to drink the juice of one lemon or lime a day to eliminate scurvy. That is why the British sailors are referred to Limeys.

Makes about as much sense as my postulation.

Wonder if there's a true/real source for the slang.

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Limey is an American slang term for British sailors.

Haven't read this whole thread, so this is just a little side note.

I've heard the term originated because of the limes' the Brits used in their cocktails. Add to that the practice seems to have originate in malarial regions when the British used it to counteract their distaste for the quinine in their drinks. Don't know if that's true, but at any rate there it is.[;)]

I heard it in reference to the British sailors who had to drink the juice of one lemon or lime a day to eliminate scurvy. That is why the British sailors are referred to Limeys.

Makes about as much sense as my postulation.

Wonder if there's a true/real source for the slang.

warspite1

This (in bold) is the source of the nickname that I was taught as a kid. I've never heard anything to suggest otherwise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Limey is an American slang term for British sailors.

Haven't read this whole thread, so this is just a little side note.

I've heard the term originated because of the limes' the Brits used in their cocktails. Add to that the practice seems to have originate in malarial regions when the British used it to counteract their distaste for the quinine in their drinks. Don't know if that's true, but at any rate there it is.[;)]

I heard it in reference to the British sailors who had to drink the juice of one lemon or lime a day to eliminate scurvy. That is why the British sailors are referred to Limeys.

Makes about as much sense as my postulation.

Wonder if there's a true/real source for the slang.

It's true - the citrus fruit juice was the only way for sailors to get dietary vitamin C during long months away from land. I was a sea cadet and we learned some of the British terminology and traditions (they didn't let us try grog, though).

Did you know that the other term for a sailor in the days of wooden ships, "tar", refers to the coal tar or petroleum tar put in their hair to keep lice from taking up residence. Most sailors let their hair grow and braided it into a pigtail at the back. Because of the tar in their hair, a shoulder apron was added to their uniform to keep the tar off their tunics. This is the blue cloth outlined with three white lines that you see in British sailor's uniforms (and Japanese schoolgirls' uniforms too!).

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Limey is an American slang term for British sailors.

Haven't read this whole thread, so this is just a little side note.

I've heard the term originated because of the limes' the Brits used in their cocktails. Add to that the practice seems to have originate in malarial regions when the British used it to counteract their distaste for the quinine in their drinks. Don't know if that's true, but at any rate there it is.[;)]

I heard it in reference to the British sailors who had to drink the juice of one lemon or lime a day to eliminate scurvy. That is why the British sailors are referred to Limeys.

Makes about as much sense as my postulation.

Wonder if there's a true/real source for the slang.

warspite1

This (in bold) is the source of the nickname that I was taught as a kid. I've never heard anything to suggest otherwise.

And that is supported by a quick 'google' that I just finished. So we have a winner. Nice to know. BTW, my 'google' search said the term is no longer considered derogatory. I myself never considered it that way, and I'm no spring chicken.[;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Pacing is going back and forth, I think that you mean tempo. But a few seconds of dialog and someone pointing to the horizon would not have upset the tempo - especially if it was a crew member. Then that could explain any bribes as just a means of jumping ahead of a lot of people, most of whom would have been expected to be saved if that ship went to their rescue.

The decision not to include the Californian was the right one. The story establishes that the Carpathia was en-route, but unlikely to arrive in time.

A recent re-appraisal establishes that the Californian would have been in the same situation.

Read more about it here.

Including the Californian (beyond the already discussed deleted scenes) would have added nothing to the story that was not already being done by the Carpathia.

quote:

Ah the old confusion line you love to use on me. We differ in our opinions – that does not mean I am confused – it means we have different opinions. I understand that a story teller tells a story. I am also fully aware that a story may be told for a variety of reasons and in a variety of ways. You don’t believe there was bias intended? Fine. I, rightly or wrongly, but for the reasons patiently outlined, do believe that Cameron had an angle in how he wanted the story told - and personally I don't like the angle ergo - this is not a film I like. No confusion - just my opinion.

quote:

I further understand fully how Murdoch’s character was used Cameron as part of the DiCaprio/Zane story line. Thank-you for pointing out the moral of the ‘we don’t get everything we want in life – no matter how rich’ – but I think I managed to work that out too. The point remains that in my opinion Murdoch did not need to be used in this way. It was unforgivable to abuse this human being in such a way.

quote:

To arrogantly dismiss my view as being one of someone who doesn’t want their characters interestingly written is disappointing. As I’ve also said (but you once again seem unwilling to read what I write) I wouldn’t have had this issue if an unidentified officer was used, so it has nothing to do with how I want my characters to appear.

quote:

I understand quite a bit about the history of Ireland thank-you, and as an English Protestant married to an Irish Catholic, I really don’t need to be given a totally unnecessary ‘history lesson’. Having a historical knowledge of that absurdity – as well as being in London on several occasions when bombs went off - probably makes me more sensitive to irresponsible nonsense like this (there were enough real life situations on both side of the divide that made up ones are simply unhelpful).

quote:

Quite why you mention Murdoch being Scottish and ‘not British’ is truly alarming from the point of view of your own knowledge of the United Kingdom but I’ll gloss over that together with whatever ‘post-colonial’ point you were endeavouring to make.

quote:

That comment shows how diametrically opposed we are in terms of what we believe is acceptable and so will comment no further.

quote:

As I’ve said, if the story was designed simply as a love story that happened to be set against the backdrop of the sinking then fine. It’s when I’m told by people such as yourself about how “Titanic is probably one of the most factually accurate movies based on a historical event”. That the fact that it isn’t gets really rather annoying.

quote:

Thank-you – I’ll buy the popcorn and we can go together

quote:

Oh dear…… No, I am suggesting that, in my personal experience, those that liked the film – nay, raved about it – were overwhelmingly in the female camp and their comments centred on the love story aspect. How you decide that I’ve said their opinions are less valid is very disappointing.

quote:


Your opinion is you like the film, mine is I don’t.
- I don’t know the number that praised it as opposed to those who were disappointed with its accuracy, nor do I know the number who praised it – but with reservations. Without wishing to state the obvious, the fact that historical advisors were employed means nothing. Do you think there were no historical advisors on Pearl Harbor or U-571 or Battle of the Bulge? Please.
- That is a quite ridiculous thing to say. I must hate Shakespeare because I didn’t like Titanic? Do you have any idea how many films have been made of Christmas Carol? Are you suggesting that unless I like every adaptation of that book I must hate Charles Dickins? How thoroughly absurd.
- The dialogue was obvious and hackneyed, but then I didn’t like Pearl Harbor either
- Re the English actor David Warner’s character – your point is noted (as said it was 22 years ago) however I don’t recall him having an American accent - maybe he did in which case I fully accept that I was wrong on that point.
- If you are comfortable with the Irish/British undercurrent no problem – too irritatingly obvious for me
- If you like bending the effects of hypothermia to that level no problem – too much for me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Pacing is going back and forth, I think that you mean tempo. But a few seconds of dialog and someone pointing to the horizon would not have upset the tempo - especially if it was a crew member. Then that could explain any bribes as just a means of jumping ahead of a lot of people, most of whom would have been expected to be saved if that ship went to their rescue.

The decision not to include the Californian was the right one. The story establishes that the Carpathia was en-route, but unlikely to arrive in time.

A recent re-appraisal establishes that the Californian would have been in the same situation.

Read more about it here.

Including the Californian (beyond the already discussed deleted scenes) would have added nothing to the story that was not already being done by the Carpathia.

Since you don't know in advance when something will occur, you can't justify not going there to alleviate the damage/death. In fact, that same report indicates that if the Californian did establish contact with the Titanic it could have gotten the false location corrected and actually would have been able to arrive just when the Titanic sank. Then boats could have been launched, people unloaded from the Titanic's boats, and all of those boats could have been used to rescue people in the water - some of whom where alive for awhile. Also, the knowledge on the Titanic that the Californian was coming could have lessened the panic.

The correct location could also have assisted the Carpathia in getting to the correct location as well.

quote:

When she first saw the rockets, the "Californian" could have pushed through the ice to the open water without any serious risk and so could have come to the assistance of the "Titanic." Had she done so she might have saved many if not all the lives that were lost.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

You are deluded. The Californian was stopped, it was maintaining a low level watch and that is all. In fact, in that link that you posted, the last two sentences on page 15 are:

quote:

When she first saw the rockets, the "Californian" could have pushed through the ice to the open water without any serious risk and so could have come to the assistance of the "Titanic." Had she done so she might have saved many if not all the lives that were lost.

Since the Californian was maybe only 5 miles away but no more than 10 miles away, and in sight of the Titanic when she hit the iceberg. Then the Titanic was sending up signal rockets, and asking for help by radio and possibly by blinker light, the Californian could have quickly made her way to the Titanic. So the Californian should have been included in the movie for historical accuracy about the senseless loss of life. That would have been much better than including some singing.

Also, if you want to go on about the social division between the classes, what are the chances of such a love story even happening in that situation? Especially if there was also a Protestant and Roman Catholic difference which at that time could have been just as great?

quote:

You are deluded. The Californian was stopped, it was maintaining a low level watch and that is all. In fact, in that link that you posted, the last two sentences on page 15 are:

quote:

Since the Californian was maybe only 5 miles away but no more than 10 miles away, and in sight of the Titanic when she hit the iceberg. Then the Titanic was sending up signal rockets, and asking for help by radio and possibly by blinker light, the Californian could have quickly made her way to the Titanic. So the Californian should have been included in the movie for historical accuracy about the senseless loss of life. That would have been much better than including some singing.

quote:

Also, if you want to go on about the social division between the classes, what are the chances of such a love story even happening in that situation? Especially if there was also a Protestant and Roman Catholic difference which at that time could have been just as great?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Out of curiosity, what about the angle made you so uncomfortable?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Unforgivable in what manner?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I'd be interested to here your views on how this specific case differs from that of other individuals who are portrayed in the film.

Bruce Ismay immediately comes to mind. Would you decry his depiction as unacceptable?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Well, at the very least it's obvious that you'd have a preference for introducing a new ship and characters half-way in to the movie, so I'm questioning if you enjoy character-driven movies at all at this point...

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Then you should be sufficiently informed to know that the interaction under discussion is, if anything, completely historical.

Just a general recollection of a lecture many moons ago, around how individual identities tend to be washed away and instead replaced with an identity that is crystalized in opposition to each other in situations where there is a significant imbalance of power (say, between an Irish third class passenger and a middle class ships officer). I've butchered the technical language but that's the general gist of it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

It's fine to do so, but in the circumstances of the sinking and the points discussed about the practical balance of power between a ships officer and a high-profile first class passenger, it is almost certain that some attempts were made to influence the Titanic's officers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Like it or not, the Titanic is one of the most factually accurate movies based on a historical event.

That is demonstrated across two areas:
- Contextual accuracy: accurate representation of social norms in the Anglosphere prior to WW1.
- Visual accuracy: uniforms, clothing, the set (both interior and exterior), the footage of the wreck and the ships machinery were all faithfully reproduced.
- Technical accuracy: The sinking component of the film conforms very close to our current understanding of how the ship sank (even your valued A Night to Remember had the ship sink intact).

If it is so sloppy, then perhaps you would suggest a film comparable that had such success at the box office?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Salt or sugar?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

I would like you to clarify your meaning here then. Does the love story cheapen the experience?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

- As outlined above, the aspects of the Titanic that were reproduced for the purposes of the film were done so with the utmost attention to detail. There's a good segment in the Nat Geo documentary where Cameron is concerned about the colour of paint on the walls of one of the suites not matching the actual wreck.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

- Would you care to provide an example of what you consider good dialogue in a film? Just so I can have a reference as for your judgement on the matter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

- If the love story was so distasteful for you, given the fact that the love story was a more or less direct insertion of R&J, then yes, I do suggest that you're not a fan of R&J.