This movie does not hold up...
It doesn't. Outside of the now VERY dated special effects we're left with two very empty characters shouting at some very bad and embarrassing dialogue.
It doesn't. Outside of the now VERY dated special effects we're left with two very empty characters shouting at some very bad and embarrassing dialogue.
Says the namesake of THE single worst sci-fi TV show ever created.
Oh no. "Space: 1999" the first season us highly regarded as one of the best sci-fi had to offer. It's season two that sucked after Fred Frieberger came in and made it more "kid" friendly. Frieberger destroyed "Star Trek The Original Series" third season.
shareI was only kidding, the OP seemed so arrogant. There are pluses for Space: 1999, like no puppets being used, and creepy horror moments.
Absent those original Lightstorm FX, you would not have the CGI that you have today. Period. Exclamation point.
It’s always so easy for youth to sneer at the past. Call me in 50 years, if you’re still alive, and tell me how you feel.
I like watching it for the sinking but that's about it.
shareI haven't seen the movie in a while, but I remember only watching it on TV sometimes to see the end when the ship is sinking and I suppose that scene lasts about a little over an hour? Anything before that I didn't find to be very good. I only like the sinking because it's so well done.
To me, the special effects are the only thing that hold up really well in Titanic. So in that case, I half disagree with the OP.
There is a little bit of disagreement here, which indo t think any one denies.
shareI never did like it but I'm a dude.
shareagreeds. It have terrible script and character. james cameron write film like high school play, for high school peoples. rose is not pretty enough, she look like plain janes. jack is not manly's at all, he wuss. for good romances you need very beatiful ladies and manly mans with good manly characteristic. james cameron not recover from this film. been hack ever since. avatard poor film. he realease seqeuls sometime in next centurys.
share[deleted]
sorry. i mean no offence to fan of this film!
i like james camoron film The Abyss, which i compare to titanic, as both i find similar. i think romanse story in that film very good, and very good actor. ed harris is manlys and mary elizabeh mastrontonio is pretty (not megan fox pretties but pretty) and can act!! i understand cameron need younger actor for titanic, but he can write good script like abyss for titanic instead of mediocore script, and cast better actor.
"Also, explain how this movie turned Leo into a heartthrob to millions of teenage girls and women around the world, and how it shot Kate Winslet to stardom?"
yes but popularity is not qualities. fangirl like leo becuase he pretty boy but man do not like this nancy boys much.
kate winslet i find is mediocer. there are better actress around than her. i
I saw this last night & it's still so good! I love how well they fleshed out the Rose girl. She carried the movie to me! Jack has good chemistry with her & I really liked the special effects. It's not exactly cgi type stuff but it's good & holds up. Hey we don't need stupid cgi to have good effects u know.
sharewell good for you biggs. i will not critic your tastes as that is not fair we all have own taste if you like this film i am happy for you!
shareLeo became a hearthrob because of mass adolescent female hysteria, the same reason why the movie made much more money than it had a right. It was the same kind of hysteria that swept the planet when Diana Spenser kicked the bucket. As for Kate Winslet’s alleged superstardom: Kate who? That did not last.
shareNo no no! This movie made so much money because of the madness of the sinking ship not just because of Leo. Kate also got Nominated & won in another movie as well as Leo u know.
shareThe movie made a lot of money because everyone heard how much money was spent on the production, and figured it had to be good! And we heard that we got to see Kate Winslet's tits!
share