Sherparsa
yes, it is certainly flawed due to many reasons, technicalities about how Titanic is actually cut in two pieces and so on included certainly ...but based on my presumptions regarding any movie about the doomed Titanic ship, never expected to like this one really! kinda liked it even more than James Cameron's Titanic actually, which is the most famous and best sold one! :-)the ending 'surprise' was also really good and made the entire movie worth watching despite feeling bored somewhere in the middle ...wouldn't be too much to say this movie's an underrated one and a little bit silly it didn't sell well in its own day! now that a rather good copy of it is on YouTube maybe it'll resurface again ...
Scott LeBrun
Strictly speaking, I found this to be acceptable entertainment. Its many detractors maintain that it's a poor, poor adaptation of the Clive Cussler novel. In fact, Cussler himself hated it so much that there would be no more adaptations of his work until "Sahara" in 2005. Does the execution of the movie fail to match the awesomeness of the concept? Sure. Could it have used a more accomplished director at the helm? It wouldn't have hurt. But it sustains interest for close to two hours. This viewer was caught up enough in the story that any flaws didn't detract from the experience.The U.S. government is in an intense search for an obscure mineral (for national defense purposes, of course) and believes that the only place it could be found is on board the wreckage of the Titanic. Since at this point in time, divers couldn't travel that deep into the ocean, people working on the project come up with this offbeat solution of using explosive devices to bring the massive ship to the surface.Political intrigue adds to the plot, as the Russians believe that by rights they should be allowed to retrieve the mineral. They do everything that they can to undermine the operation.The actors deliver decent performances, although there are precious few characters that really engage the viewer. One exception is the Titanic survivor John Bigalow, played by Sir Alec Guinness. There's a lot of familiar faces here: Jason Robards, David Selby, Richard Jordan, and Anne Archer as the stars, and a steady array of top notch character actors. The romantic subplot with Selby and Archer never really goes anywhere, but fortunately it doesn't take up TOO much of the running time.The special effects are adequate, and the actual event of the title is reasonably impressive.The most worthy component is really the rousing, emotionally rich music score by John Barry.Seven out of 10.
mikevonbach
What i mean by there are no more Matt Dillon's.The money that was spent to find this ore the time the man power and than the final decision was left up to some type of idealist a boy scout.The film had to many slow spots for me.I gave it a chance after reading some of the other reviews they were positive and many people seemed to enjoy it.BUT I have to be something that this film was not and that is honest.The Russians would have had those guys followed until that stuff came up.And also they take two toothless grave diggers to the exact spot.Now if i was one of the DIGGER guys just out of curiosity i would have come back two days later and dug it up.This film was poorly written.And no real navy guys would trust each other with that kind of secret THE ONE GUY ALREADY SAID THAT HIS ASSOCIATES NAME SOUNDS LIKE THE NAME OF A PIRATE..IN THE REAL WORLD THIS SCENARIO WOULD NEVER WORK THOSE TWO GRAVE DIGGERS WOULD BE LAYING DEAD BY NOW ...(AND YOU KNOW IT) I WISH THE WORLD WAS THE WAY IT'S BEING PORTRAYED IN THIS MOVIE BUT IT IS NOT. SORRY GUYS.
