A group of Americans are interested in raising the ill-fated Ocean liner Titanic. One of the team members finds out the Russians also have plans to raise the ship from its watery grave. Why all the interest ? A rare mineral on board could be used to power a sound beam that will knock any missile out of the air when entering us airspace. Written by
Colin Tinto <email@example.com>
When the team examines the horn retrieved from the wreck, they note that the instrument was presented to its owner after "three years service on the Olympic". The RMS Olympic, the Titanic's sister ship, was launched in 1910 and entered service in 1911. No one could've served 3 years on it by 1912, when the Titanic sank. See more »
You don't look like a scientist.
Dr. Gene Seagram:
What's a scientist supposed to look like?
I don't know... but if I saw you on the street I'd probably take you for a country club tennis pro. I'd never take you for a scientist.
Dr. Gene Seagram:
Well that makes us even. I'd never take you for a pirate.
See more »
One of the runaway budgets of 1979-80, along with "1941", "The Blues Brothers", "Star Trek" and "Heaven's Gate", that ended the era of the '70s auteur and ushered in one where studio executives and producers took took the creative reins back.
Problem with the flick seems to be they focused entirely on the maritime hardware and underwater models. No way could a script so devoid of character development get greenlit by Disney or Dreamworks today. For example, they'd have figured a way to make Anne Archer's character relevant (why she's even in this movie I have no idea).
Jordan's good as Pitt. I agree that somebody needs to wrestle the rights free and film three or four of Clive Cussler's books, but the action of this story was confined to the bottom of the Atlantic and was pretty boring.
I won't even touch on how terrible the underwater models are because, that's really a given. The scene where the Titanic is towed back into New York Harbor wasn't bad though.
Interesting example of how much filmmaking has changed in 20 years. You can just imagine the younger cast, sweeping camera movements and digital fx added if this were shot today. This one feels like something translated from book to screen in the 1960s, actually, like Alistair Maclean "Where Eagles Dare". Very epic, very corny, little or no character development.
7 of 7 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?