S.O.S. Titanic (1979 TV Movie) User Reviews

Still better than Cameron's.

[robertalexanderlindsey · 6/10 · 13 August 2013]

O.K., so it might be a tad worse than some other Titanic films, and 'A Night to Remember' may be to 'S.O.S. Titanic' what '2001: A Space Odyssey' is to 'Star Wars: Attack of the Clones'. But remember how badly directed James Cameron's 1997 'Titanic' was, and bear in mind how badly 'Raise the Titanic' flopped at the box office in 1980. What I'm trying to say is, look at the better things attributed to 'S.O.S Titanic', like David Warner's awesome performance as schoolteacher Lawrence Beesley, who, in 1912, wrote the book 'The Loss of the S.S. Titanic', which stands as one of the most authentic and realistic eyewitness accounts ever written about any disaster. Or how about Howard Blake's wonderful soundtrack, or Cloris Leachman, or Ian Holm as White Star Line president J. Bruce Ismay. And even better, the fact that the original 1979 Television version is superior to the edited theatrical release that many of you have seen. It may not be the best, but 'S.O.S. Titanic' is second only to 'A Night to Remember' when it comes to retelling the story of history's most famous ship.

SOS Titanic Was Not THAT Bad!

[spirithunter1201 · 6/10 · 7 February 2005]

First of all, ANY Titanic film is going to be crushed by Cameron's version of this disaster! Not for its story line, but for its incredible attention to detail and its use of special effects. When this movie was made(1979)there was still so many mysteries about the sinking. Granted, the creativity is strained and the DVD version is hideously chopped and edited poorly, but the television version (I still have a tape of it from ABC when it aired again in 1981) is much clearer and the characters are not so 'rushed' through the plot. I do agree that Jansen did a sloppy job of playing Astor, though. Seemed like he always wanted to be somewhere else, however in the television version many of his scenes were redone and he sounds much better. This show marked my beginning with a fascination for the Titanic. I later met survivors in 1987 and for that, I love this movie. It's too bad the television version is not on DVD...it's much, much better.

Atmospheric telling of the story

[gus81 · 6/10 · 13 January 2005]

This film is an extremely atmospheric telling of the sinking of the Titanic. It used mainly real passengers to tell the story through, and as a result isn't too bad a production.

However, the special effects were terrible and inaccurate. Firstly, the film makers used the Queen Mary to film on as the Titanic - this ship looks totally different and is the same ship used for the Poseidon Adventure. In the long shots of the ship sinking, SOS Titanic simply colourised scenes from A Night to Remember. The scenes of the ship sinking were really hopeless - continuity was terrible and the water actually flowed down the deck TOWARD the submerged bow. This is the most important part in a Titanic story, so to handle it so sloppily really is unforgivable.

However, the scenes on board really captured the atmosphere of the times and the atmosphere of impending disaster to which all on board were fatally oblivious. The opening scenes as the Carpathia rescues survivors were really handled well (apart from Cpt. Rostron only organising the ship at the last minute - this wasn't true), and they conveyed a sense of numbed shock and loss. The characters are all real, which is a plus too.

All in all, this film does not impress in realistic special effects, nor in making the disaster look real; but it does well in telling a story and telling it with considerable atmosphere.

An ambitious & intelligent film

[zpzjones · 1 March 2004]

This is an intelligent mans' version of the Titanic tragedy & possibly my favorite film on the disaster. An ambitious production, it was filmed in England, Nova Scotia & Long Beach. It has the distinction of being the first Titanic movie filmed in color albeit for television. Contrary to previous posts it does not, to my knowledge, use recycled(colorized)footage from A Night To Remember. Bothe films use the newsreel footage of the original Queen Elizabeth being launched as a stand in for Titanic. If this had been made for the big screen it probably would've been better received as well as being better known today. The movie is based primarily on a book by 2nd Class pasenger/survivor Lawrence Beasley. Beasley's book came out in June 1912 only two months after the real disaster. So his recollections, such as getting into a lifeboat with his pajamas on, was still quite fresh and not diluted by forty or fifty years of time. Beesley is played here by David Warner who was the bodyguard Spicer in the Cameron-Titanic film. The film makers shot the picture in a sort of muted colors. that is to say what would be the opposite of splashy Technicolor. The 3rd Class gets the good treatment in this film. the scenes showing the Irish immigrants being ferried out to the liner are well done. Also the Phun Boats that marketed over priced Irish goods to wealthy ocean liner passengers. Beasley & his female consort Leigh Goodwin stand in for the generic 2nd Class passengers...adding to our consciousness the plights of the haves(1st Class)& the have nots(3rd Class). Some characterizations stand out: Maurice Roeves as stoker Fred Barrett, Geoffrey Whitehead as Thomas Andrews(he favors the real Andrews), Ian Holm as the best Bruce Ismay of any of the Titanic movies, Chloris Leachman as Molly Brown, David Janssen & Beverly Ross as the Astors, Harry Andrews as Captain Smith, Susan Saint James as a dignified Leigh Goodwin & D.Warner as a very thoughtful Lawrence Beasley. Exterior shots of the Queen Mary in Long Bch are obvious but it never hampens the story. It's just good film making to make the QM look like the Titanic. The soundtrack is excellent, mixed with elegant tunes from the period, from Victor Herbert to Scott Joplin as well as the film's original score. Particularly nice is the middle eastern theme playing while the women get a massage & their hair done as well as many other themes. Characters are included in this film that are left out in others ie: Leigh Goodwin, the two boot cleaners, Alvie the elevator boy, 1st Class stewardess Violet Jessop, Fred Barrett, Rene Harris etc. The film is wonderfully paced & takes it's time. The full uncut version(with Carpathia rescue at beginning)can run on t.v. for 3hrs. This is the version I'd recommend not the cut 90 min home vid version. There are long scenes of passengers going about their business like the elderly lady just sitting in her deck chair enjoying the excitement. This most likely was 1st Class passenger Emily Ryerson because the actress is made up to look just like a photo of Ryerson. The sinking of the ship is handled very well & shot from many of the passengers' points of view. There's no ship shown breaking in half as this was 1978 and before the wreck of the real ship was found. But the producers couldn't have been far off from the truth the way it is presented her.

Discrepancies abound as in every Titanic film. Violet Jessop while included here is shown as an old woman stewardess, not the young 25 yr old w/artist model looks that she was in 1912. Chief Officer,who drowned, is accurately shown writing a letter to his sister which he did but the film shows him writing words that 1st Officer Lighttoller had written in his own account of the sinking years later. And as stated earlier the QM is so obviously not the Titanic. Also the crew of the Carpathia are shown making rescue preparations at the site of the sinking instead of enroute to it.

So sit back and enjoy the Titanic tragedy events re-enacted sumptuously. Like I stated, it's a well mae & ambitious production intended for television at that. It gets a 9 out of 10 from me.

What Went for 'Realistic' in the 1970s - Holds up well

[joachimokeefe · 7/10 · 5 September 2014]

A TV movie to start with - but a 'British' TV movie from EMI in 1979, when offices still had typing pools and the Walkman was in development. Being British doesn't necessarily make it better than the Cameron film, but for a TV movie budget you get most of the A and B list of recent Hollywood Brits, familiar faces from TV giving it the full stiff upper, excellent costume and sets and an earnest attention to factual accuracy - the only serious mistake is to show the date as April 12th. How did they manage that? Expect static, horizontal camera angles, obvious matte paintings and rear projection, somewhat uninspired though atmospheric music, and note how Ian Holm's and David Warner's, ETC acting didn't change over the rest of their careers.

What may surprise you is the tension, and the effective depiction of people in a dreadful situation that will keep you watching, even if there is little more emotional involvement than in a drama-documentary or an episode of 'Kojak'.

That's what this is - a big-budget TV docudrama. And a really good one. Just not a cinema-filler. Punching above its weight on a Seven.

pretty good flick

[saywardstudio · 7/10 · 11 February 2005]

I have not seen the new 1997? version of the Titanic. Yes, I live somewhere deep in a cave under the ocean on a faraway planet. Anyway, I saw this one at the local library and thought, what the hey. (My daughter is enthralled with the Titanic, and she has seen the new one.... she lives on Earth, by the way! ;)) anyway, I thought we could watch it together.

This movie is good for several reasons. Not blockbuster good, but good. There are very few, if any, 'special effects', which is something I find really cool. You get the effect of the ship actually sinking and all this water rushing around and everything without any 'digital' enhancement, to my knowledge.(Ex, today, the water very well be computer generated.) Special tiltings of the camera and general good acting made it seem real.(Although the guy that was falling in love with the girl--the older, blonde guy...not the young Irish guy, who was also in love, but with a totally different girl..) seemed a bit sleepy or dazed or something throughout the whole thing. When he is on the lifeboat and there are people floating in the water, he's like, "come on." barely putting his arm over the side of the boat, and he could have been smoking a pipe and in his pajamas for all anyone would know, not "Come on!!!COME ON!!!" All wild eyed and loud as I would picture myself to be in that situation, not to mention trying as hard as I could to get as many people in the boat with me as I could. I chalked it up to he was dazed, confused, scared, and possibly tired.

I also found it refreshing that he and his 'girlfriend' meet and are talking earlier in the night, and they sort of 'break up' even though they weren't officially 'together', and I thought for sure they would be showcased in the lifeboat scene, "Ill save you, honey!!!" or whatever, but it didn't happen. I also thought one of them would die, but they're on the Carpathia(I love the sound of that name...have no idea what it means, it just sounds cool) "Well, that was scary, blah blah blah...) They totally leave you hanging! Are they going to go out again? Did they get married? After that, did they talk again? So, the movie makers didn't do two 'classic' movie moves in them saving each other or getting torn apart in death.

Also, it was fairly historically accurate from what I have read about the music being played right up to the end. Personally, who the heck is going to be actually listening to music running around trying to survive??

The ship going down was really cool the way they did it. It sounded eerie, too.

We are rolling up on the 100th anniversary of the ship going down in a few years. It is a never ending reminder to me that man is not always as smart as he seems, we can never tame nature, anything can happen at any time, and that segregating people by class is stupid and wrong. High society and finery will get you nowhere on a sinking ship.

Underrated

[safenoe · 7/10 · 26 May 2021]

I saw this awhile ago on VHS (yes VHS!) and I think one of the most horrifyingly sad scenes was of the baby with a life jacket left behind as the Titanic was being flooded to oblivion. I sometimes wonder what happened to the actor who played the baby.

Like all the others....

[QueenoftheGoons · 2/10 · 16 March 2022]

This is like all the others, even the German one, but it begins with the ship picking them up. I wish they had continued from there not went back and showed all that horror. It was said that God went down with the Titanic, seriously he wasn't even there! He was out having coffee while this awful thing happened. Oh that got the rich out though, gotta save the rich! Let the poor die, as always we the poor pay the toll. I bought it for David Warner, love him. Its like the others, very tragic and hard to watch because of it, also look quick for Nick Brimble!

Realism meets fantasy seemlessly.

[Aberlass · 8/10 · 15 May 1999]

This is a very underrated film. If you look unbiasedly at it you can see where James Cameron got his inspiration, as some scenes of his Titanic are identical to this version. This is a well crafted film that tries to tightly stick to the point. It is very interesting that David Warner features prominantly in this version & in Cameron's. Why??? This film is very atmospheric & authentic, but unlike Cameron's version, it doesn't have the emotive sentimentality & glamour. Overall, this is an intelligent informative family film, for people who appreciate qualities other than special effects.

Where's the plot?

[Johnny B · 6/10 · 23 September 1998]

This tv-film has a lot to offer when it comes to sets, costumes and acting. The model of the ship itself is nearly unbelievable - it reminded me of Cameron's monster movie. The only drawback I could find, unfortunately, is that the film seems to be only a documentary of what happened on that fatal voyage of April 1912. There is no overall plot. There were many sub-plots but none was given the importance to be the main one. Sadly this turned the movie into a sort of mini-series of independent stories which all come to wet end once the ship goes below. I liked very much the idea that the movie did not end once the liner sank, as many of this genre tend to bo, but it continues for some more minutes showing what happened to the survivors.

One of most intelligent of Titanic films

[JudyS · 9/10 · 26 September 1998]

This take on the "Titanic" falls into the "docudrama" category with only a few invented characters; most of the others are the canonical Titanic personnel. I particularly liked the dramatic device of having two second class passengers acting as a sort of "Greek chorus," commenting on events there, above and below. Most Titanic films concentrate on first and sometimes third classes, but virtually everyone ignores "the middle." By using mainly historical characters, the story has a real poignancy, but more focus than on the more famous "A Night to Remember."

Just Your Average Titanic Film

[timdalton007 · 6/10 · 25 April 2006]

With a good cast and an interesting concept of covering the four days before the sinking, I was hoping that this would be more then just another Titanic movie. Unfortunately the film turned into yet another Titanic movie despite its cast and somewhat original idea, the film fails to use both of these to any good effect.

The cast, while a good one, fails to live up to the film's potential. David Janssen fails to be either convincing or very good at being John Jacob Astor as does Harry Andrews as Captain Smith. With the exception of Ian Holm as Ismay, most of the crew and first class passengers are cardboard characters who we've seen countless times in other Titanic films (Cloris Leachman's Molly Brown is a perfect example). The film's two interesting characters, David Warner's Lawrence Beesley and Susan Saint James' Leigh Goodwin aren't seen very much throughout the film and their relationship falling apart before the sinking and them coming back together on the Carpathia after the sinking is an interesting before and after analogy that should have been explored more.

Outside of the actors, the films production values are another problem. Much of the film was shot aboard The Queen Mary and this is very much apparent. Watching the film one does not get the impression of being on the Titanic as one gets from the 1953 and 1997 films or the excellent 1958 film A Night To Remember. One instead gets the impression of being on the Queen Mary or in a hotel somewhere and not on board the titanic. The shots of the Titanic sinking look like they were shots from A Night To Remember that were colorized for the film an the rest of the Titianic shots are obviously models or the Queen Mary standing in, giving a low budget feel to the film.

The film's writing is also lacking. Summed up, it took the names of Titianic passengers and then mangled fact and fiction together to create the mess that is the plot of the film. The writing fails t capture the spirit of those on the Titanic and once the ship sinks, one does not feel for the characters who have died or who have survived. If anything, the writing makes the Ismay character seem almost sympathetic when he chooses to climb into the empty seat on a lifeboat. the film is also full of errors on those who sailed on the ship including Violet Jessop,w ho is portrayed an old woman in the film instead of being in her late twenties as she was in real life.

All together, S.O.S. Titanic is just an average film in general and an average film about the Titanic. It fails to not only capture the spirit of the Titanic story, but everything we have come to expect from the films on the sinking. This film is for die-hard titanic buffs only because I am sure the average person would simply lose interest quickly.

Great movie, but long version is best

[wadesisson · 9 April 2006]

SOS Titanic offers a very powerful look at the famed ocean liner and her doomed passengers. My only caution to present-day viewers is that the current DVD offers a shortened view of the original film. When this made-for-TV movie was released in 1979, it was about 30 minutes longer than the DVD you can buy or rent today. The original version was much better and more recent edits have taken away the great flow of the story as originally aired. If you remember this movie from the 70s and 80s, you will likely be disappointed by the DVD. It is hoped that a future DVD will address this and bring back SOS Titanic in its full, un-edited glory.

Films like this almost give TV Movies a good name.

[Wilbur-10 · 6/10 · 12 March 2001]

Sandwiched between 'Titanic' and 'A Night to Remember' from the 1950's, and Cameron's blockbuster from the 90's, 'SOS Titanic' is the weakest of the quartet, but still manages to be entertaining with all the elements of the basic story handled well.

In tune with its intended TV audience, the film begins more like a period soap opera with emphasis on the variety of characters on the ship, and particularly the class distinctions between them. The social and physical barriers are rather obviously shown, with the three decks containing the 1st Class, 2nd Class and steerage passengers all looking down from one to the other. Like 'Titanic' (1953) and 'Titanic' (1997), the concentration on the characters does detract from the historical aspects of the story, leaving 'A Night to Remember' as the most accurate depiction of the tragedy.

Some of the issues in the story do become laboured in 'SOS Titanic', with hymn singing intercut with shots of floating ice, characters asking about lifeboat drills, and a 1st Class passenger cutting open his lifejacket to show what the insides are made of. The Mills & Boon dialogue also begins to surface more frequently, with lines like "New York seems so far away" and "Tonight may be our last night but one".

Small gripes aside, the effects and acting are good throughout and the characters are made interesting enough for us to care about them when the inevitable happens. It may be the poor relation of the family of Titanic films, but it has more than enough credentials to justify a place of its own at the table.

David Warner had a prominent role in this film and in Cameron's 1997 version.

A Good, Basic Film on the Sinking of the RMS Titanic

[Uriah43 · 6/10 · 8 April 2021]

This film starts off with an introduction of certain key individuals who experienced the sinking of the RMS Titanic like "J. Bruce Ismay" (Ian Holm), "John Jacob Astor" (David Janssen), "Captain Edward J. Smith" (Harry Andrews), "Molly Brown" (Cloris Leachman) and the designer of the ship "Thomas Andrews" (Geoffrey Whitehead). Along with these people the film also includes fictional characters to add to the drama involved. From that point, the film then follows the passenger liner from its port in Southampton, England to Queenstown, Ireland and from there into the North Atlantic where disaster awaits. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that initially there were two versions of this film released with a long version lasting over two hours and a shorter one lasting 109 minutes. Having not seen the longer version I cannot comment on it but I found the shorter version to be a solid film none-the-less with decent performances all around. Admittedly, I would have preferred a film devoid of the fictional characters and more devoted to actual historical people and events--but even so this movie wasn't too bad overall. It did, however, have one major flaw related to the music played by the band at the end which the survivors recount as being either "Nearer, My God, to Thee" or "Autumn" rather than the lively blues or jazz ensemble depicted here. But other than that I thought it was a pretty good film by and large and I have rated it accordingly. Slightly above average.

Not bad

[jeffmills-56581 · 7/10 · 31 March 2023]

Not bad for the time, but certainly not the best . There is one glaring mistake near the end of the movie. After Ismay get on a lifeboat, you see Helen Mirren's maid character right next to him staring a hole right through him. A minute later, you see her down in the lounge trying to convince Thomas Andrew's to save himself. A pretty obvious blunder. All in all, not a bad film, but it almost seems like a TV movie rather than a big budget theatrical release. David Warner was also in james Cameron's titanic . That makes one of two actors who have appeared in more than one titanic film, the other being Bernard Fox.

Probably the Best of the Titanic movies!

[Sylviastel · 10/10 · 26 September 1998]

In 1979, this Titanic film did not have the grand special effects like any other movie. But this movie was shown on cable before National Geographic's premiere airing of Titanic when it was discovered by Bob Ballard. Well, this is my favorite Titanic film anyway. No, it is really an average movie but I always connect to that Sunday night memory when I first witnessed Titanic underwater and before most people were aware of it. I was thirteen and with my new VCR. I taped and saved the movie and the Titanic special. The special effects were nothing special. Strong acting from Susan St. James, Cloris Leachman, and Helen Mirren with a very small role. Helen's May Sloane says to Thomas Andrews, the ship's builder, "there will be many questions?" That scene in the smoking lounge is also a poignant since she is the last to see the man who built her and die with her. In the last moments of the ship, men knelt in prayer. What I will always take from this film is the ending. An ending which signified the true meaning of the disaster. The end of the film takes place in the following Monday morning on the Carpathia with all the survivors and the silence. Watching Susan St. James with her male companion was riveting. They were two second class passengers who lost no loved one from the disaster. At the last scene, Mrs. Astor is greeted by a Carpathian passenger who offers "it was God's will. You must move on. Coffee?" Mrs. Astor replies "No coffee, no God either. God went down with the Titanic." That was the last line of the movie. The last shot is over the water and the chairs with Titanic floating. There are other pieces of Titanic debris. But the debris represented the people which is enough for most squeamish viewers. The last film of Titanic filmed before the discovery. No, it's not Cameron. But it's a resolution. Something missing in the Cameron version.

DOESN'T ADD MUCH TO THE LEGEND BUT IT'LL DO...FOR NOW...!

[masonfisk · 6/10 · 13 August 2020]

A TV movie from 1979 tracing the events of that fateful April night from over a hundred years ago. Following the actual events & people who participated in the infamous iceberg crash, we get the boilerplate of what happened (even though there were a couple of films in the 50's, A Night to Remember & Titanic, which this film also draws from) w/middling to slight returns since we now have the '97 James Cameron version which seems to be the textbook account of the tragedy. Not even the interesting casting can get much more than 'oh they were in this' shrug from the most cynical of viewers but if you need to be a completist on all things Titanic, watch away. The cast includes Harry Andrews (one of the council of elders from Superman: The Movie), Susan Saint James, Helen Mirren, the late, great Ian Holm & David Warner (both of whom would star a couple of years later in Terry Gilliam's Time Bandits), David Janssen (TV's The Fugitive), Aubrey Morris & Warren Clarke (both of them from A Clockwork Orange) & Oscar winner Cloris Leachman as Molly Brown.

SOS Titanic

[glin2006 · 8/10 · 12 December 2007]

There are two versions of this film. One is much better than the other and runs for another 30 minutes and can now be viewed in its entirety on You Tube.

This is a made for TV film and as such, the budget is limited, but not entirely noticeable. Yes, some scenes are clearly shot on the Queen Mary, but the film is engrossing so you don't really take much notice.

SOS Titanic is also quite different from all of the other versions in that: (1) it starts with the ending and tells the story in a flashback format. And (2), it is the first Titanic film to feature all three passenger classes in some detail. And it also has the distinction of being the fist Titanic film to be filmed in colour.

There is some mis-casting. David Janson's Astor gives it his best shot, but does not quite pull it off, and Cloris Leachman is the worst Molly Brown I have seen. Some more real life characters are featured in this film, the Lift Boy and the 'Boot' boys. Even stewardess Violet Jessop is included, but incorrectly portrayed as an elderly stewardess when in fact Violet was in her mid 20s. J Bruce Ismay is portrayed far more accurately in this film and it is through his eyes that we flashback to the events.

There is no real plot line as such, and this film plays more like a documentary although does not quite manage to pull it off like 'A Night To Remember' did. There are a few small sub-plots, but this film is based on the book by 2nd class passenger and Titanic survivor Lawrence Beeseley. There is a short scene between him and his fictional female companion where they are shown on the middle decks discussing "them up there" and "those down there", which really emphasises the class distinction to good effect.

Although not actually seen, the near collision at Southampton IS mentioned in the dialogue, something all the other films always leave out. There is also a good scene showing the Tenders.

The soundtrack is excellent and the music is extremely atmospheric. You really feel like you are there. And with the a great many more scenes showing children, it really does have an effect on you, especially the opening sequence which is superb.

OK, Titanic's life boats did NOT have to wade their way through a field of ice to reach the Carpathia, and the crew on the Carpathia actually had everything prepared before the Titanic's boats reached her and not a mad rush as they arrive. But I think this can be forgiven and taken as a bit of poetic license. What is unforgivable is the glaring mistake about the date. They show it as Sunday April 12th, when as we all know it was Sunday April 14th.

But the costumes and sets are spot on and we see a lot more of this ship than in other films: The Turkish Baths, The Stewardess' rooms,The Gymnasium to name just a few.

All in all, a good film.

The sinking sequence is not the best of the bunch, and nothing will surpass Cameron's version in that area, but this film is not about special effects. The ship sinks intact in SOS Titanic but this was the accepted version in 1979.

"God Went Down With the Titanic"

[richardchatten · 8/10 · 10 September 2019]

Shot at Shepperton on a TV budget. Numerous familiar British faces, including a relatively young Helen Mirren, flit in and out of this good, straightforward account of the Titanic disaster along with several Irish actors below stairs, including a remarkably young and dashing Gerard McSorley (who I first encountered nearly twenty years later in an episode of 'Father Ted') as the nearest equivalent in this version to Leonardo DiCaprio in the 1997 epic.

David Warner had an exceptionally demeaning supporting role in James Cameron's later travesty, but is here soulful and sympathetic as real-life survivor Lawrence Beesley (1877-1967), who was entirely omitted from Cameron's version, but whose burgeoning romance with Susan Saint James gets the most screen time in this version and is far more interesting and touching to follow than the egregious scenes between DiCaprio & Kate Winslet which eat up footage in the remake.

Entertaining and evocative

[dosifei · 10/10 · 19 June 2002]

This is one of several film versions of the Titanic disaster. While not as meticulous as A Night to Remember, it is superior to Cameron's bloated epic. The film, originally made for television, gives a soap-opera like telling of the lives of those involved in the disaster, focusing on actual persons instead of fictitious ones. While the special effects are not so good, and the use of the Queen Mary as a set is obvious to anyone with a passing familiarity with ships, the script and acting are superb. David Janssen is terrific in one of his last roles as John Jacob Astor. Also excellent is Ian Holm as the ship's owner, Ismay. Holm portrays Ismay as a real man who suffers because of the disaster, not the cartoonish villain other films have made him. Harry Andrews is impressive as Captain Smith, Cloris Leachman definitive as a raucaus Molly Brown (much better than Kathy Bates's flat performance in Titanic), and David Warner is intelligent and understated as Lawrence Beasley. The rest of the women in the cast don't fare quite as well, however. Susan St. James is pretty wooden as Warner's fictional love interest, and Beverly Ross doesn't do much more than sigh and worry as Madeleine Astor.

The score for the film is extremely well-done and is one of the best assets

of the movie.

Don't expect pinpoint accuracy about the details of the disaster, but by all means, if you like a good melodrama and are interested in the Titanic, check this film out.

This one was my Favorite

[richard.fuller1 · 28 May 2004]

Cameron's was nothing more than a teen aged frolic and a technical masterpiece, but as far as catching the effectiveness of the era and expectations and afterwards, he is far below this one.

No doubt, this movie is where my fascination with David Warner began, as his portrayal of Lawrence Beesley is a marvel to listen to. Cameron felt the romance with Leigh Goodwin (portrayed by Susan St. James, Goodwin was a real woman on the Titanic, but I don't know if she knew Beesley, but the romance was fictitious regardless) was cold and icy. I found it to be utterly delightful compared to Jack and Rose's juvenile romp in the motor car.

And unknown to Cameron, Bernard Fox (best known as Doctor Bombay in Bewitched) who played Col. Archibald Gracie in the '97 Titanic movie, was Lookout Frederick Fleet in A Night To Remember.

So Fox and Warner are two actors who have been in two Titanic movies. What intriguing names.

Leachman's Molly Brown is a twist compared to Kathy Bates forgettable '97 interpretation or even Marilu Henner's out-of-date '96 telemovie portrayal.

It is fun to compare the movies and persons shown. This one did focus on a few more, such as the Harrises and the Marvins, the Countess of Rothes, Emma Bucknell, a bit more steerage.

The '96 telemovie with George C. Scott as the captain is the only one to show the Allisons, altho it doesn't clearly say what that was all about with the nanny, Alice Cleaver.

Lawrence Beesley would jump to the lifeboat while still holding his night clothes, he wasn't wearing them. Fred Barrett would ask him why he had them, and he replied he had no idea.

This movie was rich, however, with the shoeshine lads, the sensational music, from the sauna (as someone else mentioned) to the mundane (but it was all they had) steerage music.

There is a much stronger feeling of Irish third class here than in any other Titanic movies, and we get a more overal feel of those in peril here, as compared to Cameron's version with only Rose in danger.

Wireless operator Harold Bride as well as chief wireless operator Wilde have never been decently shown in a movie. Night to Remember had David McCallum and the '96 movie showed them also, but the overturned lifeboat has only been observed in Night To Remember, and only if you have really read about it, do you realize that is what is happening here in S.O.S. Titanic.

Great fun in having to pinpoint the Strauses because Mrs. Straus would call her maid by her first name, Ellen, and I recalled from reading that Mrs. Straus' maid's name was Ellen Bird.

The only way the Strauses were shown in this movie.

Interesting also to note that in 1912, wives were listed under their husbands names, but maids were listed individually.

The biggest complaint about this movie is the wrong date shown, which I suppose is inexcusable for the subject matter.

Pearl Harbor wasn't attacked on December 9th, 1941.

Still this one is nowhere near the worst. That would have to be the 1931 version. The '53 Babs Stanwyck one is a bit wincing also.

And I'm not familiar with the Queen Mary, so its usage here is hardly a hindrance to me.

Helen Mirren's moment as the maid who converses with Thomas Andrews is inspired.

In watching this one as I type this, the silence throughout much of it is as effective, if not more, than Cameron's symphony orchestra.

Sadly, I am aware that what I have just ordered is indeed an edited copy.

The opening with the Carpathia is missing, with Ian Holm's chilling "my ship" as he describes the Titanic.

Also missing is the elderly woman leading the steerage in song.

And I fear the wonderful exchange between the shoe shine lads is cut also.

The sauna may also be missing.

And one post lists Charles Herbert Lightoller as the First Officer, another post says he was the second Officer.

Lightoller was the Second Officer, highest ranking surviving officer from the Titanic.

An un-glitzy, truthful account of events on Titanic

[smsearle-17189 · 8/10 · 16 April 2018]

I enjoyed this! After watching the Cameron version I had another look at "A Night to Remember" which I really enjoyed for its lack of glamour and stiff upper lip un-sentimentality. So this "SOS Titanic" is really a happy compromise between the Hollywood extravaganza and the more understated "Night to Remember"I loved this version. Its awareness of human drama and social comment which was more credible than the Kate and Leo story and the story of the whole community on board was moving without being overly dramatic. It is my favourite version now.

One of the best titanic movies.

[elovette · 10/10 · 1 April 2020]

If you want a technical account of the titanic sinking then watch "A Night to Remember". If you want a romantic version of the sinking then watch Cameron's Titanic. If you want a good balanced dramatic version of the sinking then watch this version....SOS Titanic.

The 1970's made some very good expensive looking TV movies and this is one of them. There are many stars in this movie and it doesn't look low budget. I really enjoyed watching this version more than the James Cameron mega budget version.

An old, but rather impressive drama of the Titanic tragedy...

[paul_haakonsen · 8/10 · 4 February 2021]

I remember having seen this 1979 movie "S.O.S. Titanic" back some time in my childhood, but I could not remember the entire movie. And thus when I was presented with a chance to sit down to revisit the movie from writer James Costigan and director William Hale, of course I did so, especially since I've always had a life-long interest in the story of the Titanic.

And now let me just be one to say that the 1997 major blockbuster "Titanic" movie from James Cameron felt like a blatant rip-off of this 1979 movie. There were so many things that were in this movie that was in the Cameron movie as well, except that Cameron had a bigger budget and more exposure. But wow, talk about being a copy and paste job of this movie.

I was amazed how well this 1979 movie held up even now, 42 years after it was initially released. Sure, the effects were showing signs of aging, naturally, and some scenes were just bad to look at. But the spirit was there and the will to achieve it and present it in a believable manner. And taking into consideration that the movie is from 1979, then the effects were actually pretty darned good.

Something that was really impressive in this 1979 movie was the cast ensemble. Wow, Just wow. They had the likes of Ian Holm, Helen Mirren, Cloris Leachman, David Warner, Nick Brimble, Susan Saint James and Philip Stone on the cast list, just to chisel out the most recognizable of performers. And that was really a star ensemble. Lots of good performances.

I will say that the characters in the movie and portrayed in the storyline were wholesome and had lots of weight to them. It felt like it were people that you knew yourself and had been friends with for a long time. Very nicely done of writer James Costigan.

Now, the storyline in "S.O.S. Titanic" should not be new and strange to you, unless you've been living under a rock somewhere. But whilst it was something you already knew, writer James Costigan actually managed to make it a movie that had many layers to it, and you followed people from 3rd class, 2nd class, 1st class as well as the ship's staff, and you got to care about people from every layer and get to know them. So great accomplishment on the writing. And, unlike the 1997, this was not a sappy love story wrapped around the worst maritime tragedy in naval history.

I am rating the 1979 "S.O.S. Titanic" a well-deserved eight out of ten star. This movie was well-worth sitting down to watch again, even after 42 years of its release date.