drednm Tale of the Titanic disaster in four parts. The first three tell the same basic story but through the eyes of passengers in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd class (steerage). The story lines overlap and all meet in the same disastrous finale: the sinking of the ship.Although there are no big names in the cast, several are familiar faces (Maria Doyle Kennedy, Linus Roache, Toby Jones, Steven Waddington, Stephen Campbell Moore, Celia Imrie, James Wilby, Linda Kash).To my knowledge this is the only "Titanic" story that has included the real-life Dorothy Gibson (played by Sophie Winkleman), an American movie actress, who survived the disaster. Back in the US, she was rushed into "Saved from the Titanic" within a month of the sinking. She played herself, recounting the disaster, but was so overcome by grief, she suffered a nervous breakdown during the filming and retired from acting. The 1912 film was an absolute sensation, one of the biggest hits of the time. The film was tragically lost in a 1914 studio fire.

Enoch Sneed One of the greatest human tragedies/dramas of the 20th Century is wasted in this clichéd, poorly acted mini-series. Why do writers (and directors, mentioning no names, but with the initials James Cameron) think they can do better than re-enacting the truth? Presumably Julian Fellowes was considered a suitable writer on the back of the success of 'Downton Abbey' set in the same era (of which I have seen not one second). If he had any interest or knowledge at all about Titanic it can only have been very basic (big ship, people on it, it sinks, people die). At least Cameron had genuine passion for his subject, Fellowes just gives us a by-the-numbers approach: snooty aristo's? check; plucky steerage passengers? check; immigrants, so we have an ethnic angle? check; doomed lovers... you get the idea.Even worse are the fictitious elements. Italian waiters locked in a cupboard? There were people who couldn't reach the boats, and the first boat was not launched until an hour after the collision, because the ship was badly organised and managed - that is the *real* tragedy of Titanic.The sinking itself is completely mishandled, a confusing mish-mash of scenes with no sense of increasing danger, just a desperate effort to tie-up all the plots which started in the first three episodes. The final scenes in the lifeboats are simply anti-climactic and fill out the running time.Watch this once if you're determined to be a Titanic completist, but otherwise forget it.

MovieCritic33-6 I thought I would re-write my review for the DVD and Blu-Ray version, as it might be of some interest or knowledge to some. I recently purchased my own copy of Titanic on Blu-Ray since and thought it would be of some use to share what I discovered. The DVD version has additional deleted scenes that fill in the gaps of where they put the commercial breaks. The most predominant scenes include: 1. Thomas Andrews and Benjamin Guggenheim in the first class smoking room as the ship is foundering as both the Manton's and Lightholler pass through. 2. A conversation on the bridge between Chief Officer Wilde and First Officer Murdoch. 3. A conversation on the bridge between First officer Murdoch and Captain Smith before Titanic's bridge is submerged. Other additional scenes (although not as drastic) are included that make the story lines better developed and flow much nicer between each episode. Also because of the added scenes, the characters' conclusions are much more satisfying (the only conclusion that still left me unsatisfied was that of Mary Maloney, in the end you are almost left wondering if you were ever supposed to really care about her or her story at all. I feel as though her character never truly developed as much as the other characters, because I was still lacking understanding for some of her actions). The deleted scenes are not bonus features and are included within the film. You have the option to "play all" episodes, or watch them one by one. I highly recommend the "play all" option, it has a running time of 187 minutes which will be long for some, but I find you are more aware and drawn into the stories, and because it is a drama it is much more of an emotional experience if you watch them consecutively because you are still in that mindset. The 1080i (not 1080p) high definition quality of the picture is beautiful and crisp. I didn't pay much attention to the sound quality but it was good for my ears (on a side note I did have to put subtitles on at times to understand some muddled dialogue because of some of their accents). Titanic is a two disc collection, Disc One contains all four episodes and the Set Up options. Disc Two contains 2 hours of bonus material for those interested, including: The making-of Featurette, Titanic: Behind-the-Production, Episode One Audio Commentary, and "The Curse of the Titanic Sisters" Documentary. Do not go on the opinion of others, watch it first then make your own judgements. Julian Fellowes' Titanic felt to me more like a re-imagining than a retelling of an all too familiar story. Titanic is told in such a style both visually and narratively, that I found it to be compelling. Of course that is just a personal opinion. If you still feel uncertain about purchasing Titanic, rent it (if you can) first it is your safest and cheapest option. 9 out of 10 stars

Hallam Drury I couldn't believe how bad the 2012 mini series 'Titanic' was. Insipid directing, poor acting and soap-opera script writing. What a missed opportunity. A hack attempt to milk the publicity of the 100 year anniversary of the Titanic to sell some advertising space on a network. It makes Maid in Manhattan look like To Kill a Mockingbird. Don't even get me started on the goofs that somehow made it into the final cut and the massive inaccuracies, such as the second class stairs being the entrance to the Officer's quarters. You kidding me? They didn't even bother to google the Titanic blueprints? What an absolute crock of a production.I was really looking forward to this series, and I have seen my fair share of TV-movie hatchet jobs, but I still can't believe the quality of this production. After Cameron's Titanic in 97, the bar was set quite high. If you were going to do another Titanic mini series, then you needed to bring something new to the table. It was the 96 mini series all over again, but done even more poorly. Can anyone tell me: what did this production bring to the table? Forget the poor quality of acting, directing, lighting. What did we learn about the disaster that we didn't already know? Why throw in a soap-opera to such a rich, historical story? Why not focus on the real life characters and what DID actually happen, which would have been far more interesting? Why not look at the building of the ship, the court case and the aftermath. Virtually no films have been made of these key events in the larger Titanic picture. In all, this was an absolute waste of time and as a Titanic enthusiast, I can't help but be appalled at how this turned out. It was very, very disappointing and I don't think this captured any part of the Titanic legacy.The actors seemed like 21st century actors wearing 1910's clothing. Parts of the ship were wrong. There was little to no chemistry between actors, and their motivations were unoriginal and melodramatic. At least James Cameron could balance a historical drama through the eyes of fictitious characters. It might have been a bit soppy, but at least there was attention to detail, historical accuracy and believable characters. This mini series only goes to show just how good of a job Cameron did. If you want to watch a film about Titanic, watch Cameron's Titanic, or A Night to Remember with Kenneth Moore. This is just rubbish.