A masterpiece, the most expensive film of the 50s...the script, effects...even the sound of the distress rockets are realistic compared with other versions
The soundtrack of this movie was breath-taking enough. Even though the ship didn't break in two in this movie, I still think it was better than the 97 version. That's just my opinion.
the reason it didnt break in half was because before September 1985, almost every survivor believed that the ship never split in half, until in 1985, a guy found proof that the ship did split in half
I can see why anyone would like this movie better than Titanic and vice versa, but people in the comments are exaggerating with how much better this movie is. Visually, Titanic is much more appealing, the acting is superior, the score is exponentially better, and the story is more memorable. It's been 22 years and people still quote scenes with Jack and Rose, like the film was released yesterday. Give it another 18 years and it will have aged the same amount ANTR did when Titanic was released (40 years). I didn't even know ANTR existed until the 2010's, so that goes to show how well this film aged. To be fair, even 22 years after ANTR (1980), the film still aged terribly. For context, Star Wars V: The Empire Strikes Back was released in 1980. 22 years later, with the existence of much-improved CGI, Titanic is and will continue to be a timeless classic. ANTR takes the cake when it comes to accuracy. ANTR shows the Californian, while Titanic does not. There's more focus on the RMS Carpathia. I love this because I care to learn more about the reality of what happened. Viewers get the full picture with this film. ANTR is my favorite of the two movies, but Titanic is a different kind of movie. The writers INTENDED for it to be a fictional story with real-life historical events for the purpose of *ENTERTAINMENT.* The ANTR book was written to *DOCUMENT* the sinking and lives lost through personal accounts; the movie followed suit. While ANTR was the more historically accurate movie, it had some inaccuracies in it that Titanic didn't have. There was no such ceremony that involved breaking a bottle on the ship. That only happened in the movie. ANTR shows binoculars, but the only pair on the ship was locked away and not used. The Californian was primarily used to transport cotton and didn't have passengers on board, but they state they had passengers on board in the film. ANTR shows the fourth funnel came down, but it stayed intact before the ship sank. They also show smoke coming out of all four of them but only three were operational. It's widely known when Frederick Fleet shouted there was an "Iceberg ahead!" the other crew member replied, "Thank you." In the movie, the person replied with a different statement. Lastly, the watertight doors closed after impact, not before as shown in ANTR. Like I said, the movies were intended for different audiences, so let's just enjoy them for what they are. Most of us watching this video favor ANTR because we put in the effort to find it through our research (we want accuracy over entertainment), but most people OVERALL favor Titanic because the story is more captivating. People are more empathetic and attached to the characters, regardless of whether or not they actually existed. The reason why we're repulsed by the Titanic love story is because it's fictional. It's a bias that has been overlooked by most critics of Titanic, which is sad, because it strips them from their ability to immerse themselves in the story and enjoy it for what it is.
georgyorgy2...Most people overall favor Titanic? You don't speak for me. I much prefer A Night to Remember. I never had to do any research to find this film. I saw it on television for the first time when I was about 10 years old, so I've always known about it. Titanic isn't really about Titanic. It's a fictional love story set on a ship that sinks. That's really what it's about. A Night to Remember is actually about the Titanic. Nobody ever said A Night to Remember is 100% accurate, but it's a damn site more accurate than Titanic is. You point out the inaccuracies in A Night to Remember but not the inaccuracies in Titanic. Why? Murdoch shooting someone and then shooting himself? Jack, Rose and Cal? The love story? Jack and Rose weren't believable either. They had thoughts and attitudes of a young 1990's couple, not a pair of kids who were born and raised prior to the 1920's. Jack, a third class passenger, going back and forth into 1st class? That would have NEVER happened. The whole story of the Californian is completely missing too.
I much prefer ANTR. Some stuff from the ‘97 film are hard for me to stomach. Among them are the reason why the ship was carrying far fewer lifeboats (the reason that Andrews gives is wrong) as well as its treatment of Bruce Ismay. I was a anti-Ismay guy for a long time but opinions have since changed. ANTR shows him as a coward but the ‘97 film was definitely far worse.
Such a shame less people see this movie. Probably the same reason why the general public prefer Schindler's List over The Pianist or any other holocaust movie.
Titanic 1997 trashed the story of the Titanic. You only feel concerned about freakin' Jack and Rose while in "A Night to Remember" you feel for Captain Smith, Mr. Andrews, Mr. Lightoller, and lots of other more characters. Plus the Nearer My God to Thee scene is WAY more emotional in this than the 1997 movie. Agreed totally with you. A night to remember is the greatest Titanic movie ever. no CGI either...
Just watched it last night; freaking loved it! Yeah, I agree with the three reasons here, but I also thought some of the cinematography was fucking incredible!
I think the old movie version is great. I think the modern one is so hollywood and inauthentic. A soap opera. With less high level technical effects i thought the old version superior, infinitely more giving of a deep sense of the titanic tragedy.
+Brenda Anne Du Faur What people tend to forget is that the 97 version isn't a non fiction, documentary like film like ANTR is. Cameron's version is a fictional story mixed in to a non fiction event. All the info that was presented in both films was based on what was known at the time. Neither version is 100% historically accurate, but both are great films for what they are. People always dub ANTR as the definitive accurate representation but truth is, there certainly were a few liberties taken in it's telling. For one thing, Bruce Ismay who in reality pushed captain Smith to rush through the ocean at full steam and make it to NY a day early is seen in ANTR as letting the captain decide, and Smith is actually the one claiming they may make it to NY a day early. Just one example. The 97 version while also having it's share of inaccuracies, is a masterpiece of cinema both in it's story telling and it's technological effects. You needed to have the Jack and Rose love story to REALLY appreciate the effects. They were able to showcase so much more of that ship than any other Titanic movie ever because they wove a fictional story into the tragedy. To quote George Lucas, "Special effects are tool means of telling a story, a special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing.".
Still the best version. Seen it many times and always have a knot in my stomach throughout. Cameron's version might have brilliant special effects but... his film does NOT have ONE iota of tension. It goes have a rather silly and far too modern script.
Titanic had that garbage romance and modern social mores thrown in A Night to Remember tried to be as accurate as they could be with what they knew at the time Several survivors from Titanic were advisors on ANTR so as regards atmosphere and overall setting its so much better then the 97 film
Jordanrb1996, I couldn't have said it better myself. The old version is a masterpiece and the modern version a sophomoric joke. When i hear anybody say the idiotic "i'm king of the world" my stomach turns. Give me a break. It's as bad as "if the glove doesnt fit you must acquit" (simpson trial). Geesum.Cameron and oliver stone must be best friends. They take an authentic depthful reality (Titanic, JFK) and render it false, fake, twisted, superficial, mindless, void of dimension, fact, truth...
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
When it comes to films on the subject, there is a 'Night to Remember' and everything else.
Absolutely correct.
A masterpiece, the most expensive film of the 50s...the script, effects...even the sound of the distress rockets are realistic compared with other versions
The soundtrack of this movie was breath-taking enough. Even though the ship didn't break in two in this movie, I still think it was better than the 97 version. That's just my opinion.
the reason it didnt break in half was because before September 1985, almost every survivor believed that the ship never split in half, until in 1985, a guy found proof that the ship did split in half
@TheBigFourth04 i already know
Naw this is doodoo. James Cameron's masterpiece will always be superior, and to pretty much any other movie out there.
I can see why anyone would like this movie better than Titanic and vice versa, but people in the comments are exaggerating with how much better this movie is.
Visually, Titanic is much more appealing, the acting is superior, the score is exponentially better, and the story is more memorable. It's been 22 years and people still quote scenes with Jack and Rose, like the film was released yesterday. Give it another 18 years and it will have aged the same amount ANTR did when Titanic was released (40 years). I didn't even know ANTR existed until the 2010's, so that goes to show how well this film aged. To be fair, even 22 years after ANTR (1980), the film still aged terribly. For context, Star Wars V: The Empire Strikes Back was released in 1980. 22 years later, with the existence of much-improved CGI, Titanic is and will continue to be a timeless classic.
ANTR takes the cake when it comes to accuracy. ANTR shows the Californian, while Titanic does not. There's more focus on the RMS Carpathia. I love this because I care to learn more about the reality of what happened. Viewers get the full picture with this film. ANTR is my favorite of the two movies, but Titanic is a different kind of movie. The writers INTENDED for it to be a fictional story with real-life historical events for the purpose of *ENTERTAINMENT.* The ANTR book was written to *DOCUMENT* the sinking and lives lost through personal accounts; the movie followed suit.
While ANTR was the more historically accurate movie, it had some inaccuracies in it that Titanic didn't have. There was no such ceremony that involved breaking a bottle on the ship. That only happened in the movie. ANTR shows binoculars, but the only pair on the ship was locked away and not used. The Californian was primarily used to transport cotton and didn't have passengers on board, but they state they had passengers on board in the film. ANTR shows the fourth funnel came down, but it stayed intact before the ship sank. They also show smoke coming out of all four of them but only three were operational. It's widely known when Frederick Fleet shouted there was an "Iceberg ahead!" the other crew member replied, "Thank you." In the movie, the person replied with a different statement. Lastly, the watertight doors closed after impact, not before as shown in ANTR.
Like I said, the movies were intended for different audiences, so let's just enjoy them for what they are. Most of us watching this video favor ANTR because we put in the effort to find it through our research (we want accuracy over entertainment), but most people OVERALL favor Titanic because the story is more captivating. People are more empathetic and attached to the characters, regardless of whether or not they actually existed. The reason why we're repulsed by the Titanic love story is because it's fictional. It's a bias that has been overlooked by most critics of Titanic, which is sad, because it strips them from their ability to immerse themselves in the story and enjoy it for what it is.
georgyorgy2 I like both movies, but titanic better
georgyorgy2...Most people overall favor Titanic? You don't speak for me. I much prefer A Night to Remember. I never had to do any research to find this film. I saw it on television for the first time when I was about 10 years old, so I've always known about it. Titanic isn't really about Titanic. It's a fictional love story set on a ship that sinks. That's really what it's about. A Night to Remember is actually about the Titanic. Nobody ever said A Night to Remember is 100% accurate, but it's a damn site more accurate than Titanic is.
You point out the inaccuracies in A Night to Remember but not the inaccuracies in Titanic. Why? Murdoch shooting someone and then shooting himself? Jack, Rose and Cal? The love story? Jack and Rose weren't believable either. They had thoughts and attitudes of a young 1990's couple, not a pair of kids who were born and raised prior to the 1920's. Jack, a third class passenger, going back and forth into 1st class? That would have NEVER happened. The whole story of the Californian is completely missing too.
I much prefer ANTR. Some stuff from the ‘97 film are hard for me to stomach. Among them are the reason why the ship was carrying far fewer lifeboats (the reason that Andrews gives is wrong) as well as its treatment of Bruce Ismay. I was a anti-Ismay guy for a long time but opinions have since changed. ANTR shows him as a coward but the ‘97 film was definitely far worse.
Such a shame less people see this movie. Probably the same reason why the general public prefer Schindler's List over The Pianist or any other holocaust movie.
I love this movie, but...I love Cameron's version too. They're both great.
Titanic 1997 trashed the story of the Titanic. You only feel concerned about freakin' Jack and Rose while in "A Night to Remember" you feel for Captain Smith, Mr. Andrews, Mr. Lightoller, and lots of other more characters. Plus the Nearer My God to Thee scene is WAY more emotional in this than the 1997 movie. Agreed totally with you. A night to remember is the greatest Titanic movie ever. no CGI either...
It’s so easy to agree
"Best TITANIC movie ever"
I couldn't agree more
Best Titanic film - by far.
Breathtaking... Looks great!
4th officer and navigator Joseph Boxhall was technical advisor
0:47 Haha, is that the kid's real voice?
Just watched it last night; freaking loved it! Yeah, I agree with the three reasons here, but I also thought some of the cinematography was fucking incredible!
Before the titanic, there was a night to remember.
Just seen this movie, much better than '97 edition
First. Watcha say? Nuthin. That's what I thought.
I think the old movie version is great. I think the modern one is so hollywood and inauthentic. A soap opera. With less high level technical effects i thought the old version superior, infinitely more giving of a deep sense of the titanic tragedy.
+Brenda Anne Du Faur What people tend to forget is that the 97 version isn't a non fiction, documentary like film like ANTR is. Cameron's version is a fictional story mixed in to a non fiction event. All the info that was presented in both films was based on what was known at the time. Neither version is 100% historically accurate, but both are great films for what they are. People always dub ANTR as the definitive accurate representation but truth is, there certainly were a few liberties taken in it's telling. For one thing, Bruce Ismay who in reality pushed captain Smith to rush through the ocean at full steam and make it to NY a day early is seen in ANTR as letting the captain decide, and Smith is actually the one claiming they may make it to NY a day early. Just one example. The 97 version while also having it's share of inaccuracies, is a masterpiece of cinema both in it's story telling and it's technological effects. You needed to have the Jack and Rose love story to REALLY appreciate the effects. They were able to showcase so much more of that ship than any other Titanic movie ever because they wove a fictional story into the tragedy. To quote George Lucas, "Special effects are tool means of telling a story, a special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing.".
Have some respect for the hard work that has been done in 97, a lot of people worked really hard. Go so the making of for yourself
It is the best of the Titanic movies!
3 can be translated as: Eat it, Cameron =D
Derek Power Cameron’s titanic was still better
@@benb4397 this one is better because no shitty romance and I hate romance
the intro was not titanic, its the lusitania
That’s what it showed in the movie they couldn’t do something like that back then and there’s no footage of the titanic getting out of its dock
Still the best version. Seen it many times and always have a knot in my stomach throughout. Cameron's version might have brilliant special effects but... his film does NOT have ONE iota of tension. It goes have a rather silly and far too modern script.
Titanic had that garbage romance and modern social mores thrown in
A Night to Remember tried to be as accurate as they could be with what they knew at the time
Several survivors from Titanic were advisors on ANTR
so as regards atmosphere and overall setting its so much better then the 97 film
that voice is like a Japanese dubbed film voice lol
James Cameron plagiarized this film.
Not all but key scenes. He admitted it at least.
@@Thunderchild-gz4gcIt's pretty obvious. How could one deny it?
Jordanrb1996,
I couldn't have said it better myself. The old version is a masterpiece and the modern version a sophomoric joke. When i hear anybody say the idiotic "i'm king of the world" my stomach turns. Give me a break. It's as bad as "if the glove doesnt fit you must acquit" (simpson trial). Geesum.Cameron and oliver stone must be best friends. They take an authentic depthful reality (Titanic, JFK) and render it false, fake, twisted, superficial, mindless, void of dimension, fact, truth...
Brenda Anne Du Faur i just watched the movie for the first time and i gotta say it was really good and emotional but not as good as this
I hope Titanic never gets a Criterion release.