to think titanic movie is cringy

[makkapacca]

Came out when I was 12 and I loved it but at 36 caught it on tv last night and it is so cringy. Whilst I think Winslet and Leo are great actors their acting in it is cringe although I don't know if it's their inexperience or just the script. Every 2nd line is 'Jack Rose'. I don't get how both were nominated for Oscars for it when it genuinely wasn't good acting by any means on either part and again I think both are genuinely brilliant in their other films.

Watching it is reminiscent of watching 90s Home and Away or just bad teenage tv acting. Yea the effects are great but the script in itself is just so mediocre and so 12 year old girl stuff. It didn't occur to me how little the film actually go into the subject matter of the Titanic like the creation of it and the aftermath of the sinking etc.

The rich in it like Cal and Rose's mum are so 1 dimensional greedy villains which is kind of hypocritical considering how wealthy Cameron himself is, and the poor Irish on 3rd class are just laughably bad and cliche with accents Irish people never have. And I say that as an Irish person myself so no racism.

A critic said after that the only reason it got oscar noms was because of the money it gained and I sort of agree. Again the effects and cinematography were great but the film itself was just a predictable cringe fest.

I thought the costumes and sets were amazing, and the recreation of the ship itself was impressive, plus the music was enjoyable (though My Heart Will Go On is definitely in the same bracket as Everything I Do from Robin Hood for me, as in it spent WAY too much time being played everywhere).

Other than that, lots of the script was beyond irritating, and it was packed with cliches and lazy storytelling. It also really irritated me that so many genuinely moving stories from the event were ignored in favour of a "pretty people's love story". (Although I do think Kate Winslet in particular is excellent and went on to do some brilliant work after this movie.)

I saw it when I was in my late 20s, I might have found it easier to cope with if I'd been a bit younger and not been quite so harsh; now I'm a lot older, I'd probably just regard it as just another film milestone in terms of costuming and effects.

I never understood why it won so many awards as I thought it was shite when it came out & it’s not going to improve with age.

I didn't like it. When I laughed at one part my friend slapped me in the face in the cinema.

Lots of shit films get nominated for Oscars, that doesn't mean they're held in esteem by critics. The Oscars is a political game where a lot of backscratching and 'persuasion' goes on. And it's America, of course they're going to applaud something that breaks all box office records.

But no one speaks of Titanic and Citizen Kane in the same breath.

I really did not enjoy it much when I saw it at the time, just too many cliches, and of course knowing in advance what happens in the end :)

Lots of shit films get nominated for Oscars, that doesn't mean they're held in esteem by critics

look at the reviews at time of release, they were generally universally favourable and positive across the board.

it was thought to be a bit ott and 'cringe' when it came out op!!

i'm old now...i remember it well...despite it getting oscars!

Actually you do have a point about the reviews.

Obviously the script/story is terrible: as you say it's just "JACK!" runs around a bit "ROSE!" runs around a bit "I'll never let you go"

I think what happened is that the studio punted a load of money on it and then were so relieved and thrilled it made even more that they rewarded him with all the Oscars. Plus ofc once it won the Oscars yet more money would come in. You know like betting on good form.

Even at the time no one compared it to citizen Kane.

To all those saying it wasn't lauded as royalty./ See below and you will see it was and compared to gone with the wind.

With regard to the film's overall design, Roger Ebert stated, "It is flawlessly crafted, intelligently constructed, strongly acted, and spellbinding... Movies like this are not merely difficult to make at all, but almost impossible to make well." He credited the "technical difficulties" with being "so daunting that it's a wonder when the filmmakers are also able to bring the drama and history into proportion" and "found [himself] convinced by both the story and the sad saga".[124] He named it his ninth best film of 1997.[125] On the television program Siskel & Ebert, the film received "two thumbs up" and was praised for its accuracy in recreating the ship's sinking; Ebert described the film as "a glorious Hollywood epic" and "well worth the wait," and Gene Siskel found Leonardo DiCaprio "captivating".[126] James Berardinelli stated, "Meticulous in detail, yet vast in scope and intent, Titanic is the kind of epic motion picture event that has become a rarity. You don't just watch Titanic, you experience it."[127] It was named his second best film of 1997.[128] Joseph McBride of Boxoffice Magazine concluded, "To describe Titanic as the greatest disaster movie ever made is to sell it short. James Cameron's recreation of the 1912 sinking of the 'unsinkable' liner is one of the most magnificent pieces of serious popular entertainment ever to emanate from Hollywood."[129]

The romantic and emotionally charged aspects of the film were equally praised. Andrew L. Urban of Urban Cinefile said, "You will walk out of Titanic not talking about budget or running time, but of its enormous emotive power, big as the engines of the ship itself, determined as its giant propellers to gouge into your heart, and as lasting as the love story that propels it."[130] Owen Gleiberman of Entertainment Weekly described the film as "a lush and terrifying spectacle of romantic doom. Writer-director James Cameron has restaged the defining catastrophe of the early 20th century on a human scale of such purified yearning and dread that he touches the deepest levels of popular moviemaking."[129] Janet Maslin of The New York Times commented that "Cameron's magnificent Titanic is the first spectacle in decades that honestly invites comparison to Gone With the Wind."[129] Adrian Turner of Radio Times awarded it four stars out of five, stating "Cameron's script wouldn't have sustained Clark Gable and Vivien Leigh for 80 minutes, but, somehow, he and his magical cast revive that old-style studio gloss for three riveting hours. Titanic is a sumptuous assault on the emotions, with a final hour that fully captures the horror and the freezing, paralysing fear of the moment. And there are single shots, such as an awesome albatross-like swoop past the steaming ship, when you sense Cameron hugging himself with the fun of it all."[131]

People weren't as used to "epic" films as they are now (for want of a better word for all those special effects and so on). It struck a number of chords back then that we are more used to hearing now.

Time is a great tester and I don't think it's generally considered a shit film now, but nobody truly has it up there with Citizen Kane, The Godfather or Casablanca. It was zeitgeisty at the time and it's remembered as such.

I was 7 when I first watched it and Leo was my first crush still my favourite movie got upset when DD started laughing at it

I do think gladiator has stood the test of time though it's still a brilliant film.

It's boring too imo.

If you think the film is “cringe”, you should check out the fan base on Instagram, OP

I didn't like it much when it came out, I was in my twenties.

Most people I knew then thought it was shit.

There was plenty of room for both of them on that giant piece of wood.

The thing is, it's all told from Rose's pov completely and no one can contradict her, them all being dead.

So yes she paints Cal as abusive and cowardly and her mum as grasping and snobby.

But he Cal could easily be the man his fiance first tried to dupe him into marriage, who then cheated on him and stole his only concrete bit of wealth.

I never liked the bit where Rose basically says she always loved Jack more than her actual husband, whose grandchildren just smile indulgently.

Bit weird.

The main thing I remember was being fucking enraged when old crone Kate deliberately dropped the massively expensive jewel into the water. I mean - what the actual fuck? Who on earth would keep a priceless necklace until they were about 90 and then throw it away in silly dramatics. It was worth about $250 million dollars.

Old people are more pragmatic. She could have given it to her granddaughter. Or charity. It made me SO cross! Build homes for Irish orphans. Or something.

I’m a bit of a cynic, but I love Titanic. Probably watched it 10x. When Katie throws the necklace overboard at the end, I tear up. I think it’s a wonderful movie.

it wasn't lauded as royalty...it just wasn't. how odd

Of course it was predictable: it was about the Titanic and we all know it sank!

I watched it at the cinema and although I wasn't wowed by it, I enjoyed it. It went on a bit though (as did the song) and I remember everyone kept going to stand up at the end, assuming it was finished, but then making that "Ugh!" noise and having to sit down again because it wasn't.

Leo was the premium heartthrob at the time

Kate got her kit off

It was a well made blockbuster film but nobody has ever compared it to Citizen Kane

I loved it when it came out but I was only 10 at the time.

Thing is we are talking 1997 here. Some of the top grossing films being Men in Black, Liar Liar, George of the Jungle. There was a lot of stupid comedy and a few R-rated thrillers like Face/Off and Con Air. Weepy epic romantic films often do well at the Oscars - see The English Patient.

I've always thought that it was a combo of the special effects and the brilliant chemistry between Leo and Kate.

it was the 'rise of the haters'

I always thought Kate Winslet looked amazing in it and I think I watched it more for the costumes than anything else .