I love Cameron´s "Titanic," but "A Night to Remember" is still one of my favorite films. There is no reason to play the two movies off each other, since they have very different intentions. Despite the simpler technology employed, "A Night to Remember," by sticking to Walter Lord's excellent book, nevertheless remains the more realistic of the two films.
Some would compare these (or the other films) against each other or can judge them individually on the own merits. The Cameron version did benefit from advanced historical and technical research unavailable in the 1950s and in a market today that has to attract an audience very quickly with continuing focus on a younger demographic, (who are still going out to theaters and not staying home). The greater focus on the young couple today, was essential to hopefully get their 200 million back.....If the 1953 "Titanic" movie had been made today, the main star focus would have been on Robert Wagner, not Clifton Webb. But "A night to remember" is worth seeing again and stands well on it's own merits....greater views of the tragedy from different crew/passengers and the crews of other vessels who responded with varying urgency, (or none at all). Watching it again, reminds us how respectful a British film company was with the material that was part of Britain's history and knowing there were still survivors living then. Thanks for your insight.
Over seen by Commodore Boxhall , (Titanic senior navigation officer) A night to remember in Boxhalls own words were that it was nothing like the events that actualy happened . However it is far more true to life and includes the intriniscly fundamental part that Californian played in the night itself which wasnt even touched on in Camerons effort .
If you think about it everyone on the titanic would have a different view to the event from there own experience and feelings' and where they was at the time as well.
Totally agree. I saw "Titanic" with my family and remember feeling as it finished that it wasn't "A Night to Remember" which has some very poignant scenes and has a genuine feel of the sense of foreboding, the freezing cold conditions and the stoicism shown by so many on board. Big and Glossy isn't always best. All that money and they still had some very dodgy British and Irish accents Even Hornblower in the guise of Ioan Gruffudd turning up in a lifeboat at the end didn't do it for me and I promptly went home and watched my DVD of A Night to Remember.
Cameron's film is worth viewing but only for the recreation of the ship and its sinking. In every other respect, A Night To Remember is superior, especially with regards to acting and dialogue.
The acting though in the 1950s version has a awkward rigid quality to it, the drunk cook was pretty bad, apparently you hiccup a lot when you're drunk?
Wow! That last line was scathing. I don't think we should compare the two. A night to remember is more of a realsitic, almost a docudrama minus a narrator. Camerons Titanic was a romeo and juliette love stroy set on the Titanic. Both films equally as good as each other for different reasons.
James Cameron's film itself explains why James Cameron's version just misses the mark when he has Old Rose comment "That's a very fine forensic analysis... The reality, however, was somewhat different."
First time I saw 'A night to Remember' I was only about eight years old; this was before 'Titanic' came out (I know, I'm showing my age.) I found 'A Night to Remember so traumatic I couldn;'t bear to watch it again 'till I was in my thirties. That's how good a film it is.
Thank you Mr. Kermode for another spot on review- that shot of the serving cart moving slightly gave me chills, as it did when I first saw this phenomenal film! It is another lesson in how limitations yield the highest art; the bloated Titanic is so tiresome, with only one moving scene that I can remember.
Titanic owes alot to the film but I'd still say Titanic is the better movie. It won 11 oscars. The acting, soundtrack and effects were all better in Titanic. It's also more accurate too about the sinking, like the ship splitting before it sank. The portrayal of the captain is also more accurate it looks like in the 1997 version. A night to remember has lots of good points but score is quite dated now and not memorable. Both are very critical of the class divide. Cameron also took the action below deck as the ship was sinking, in the 1958 version all the action basically happens above deck. The 1997 is less accurate though in that most of the main characters are fictional. I do like the black and white cinematography and the cast in the 1958 version.
As usual, Mark Kermode is absolutely bang-on in his assessment, particular in relation to James Cameron's over-the top big budget remake. 'A Night To Remember' is superior in every respect. If you want an unmelodramatic and historically exact, yet poignant and riveting portrayal of the Titanic disaster, this is the film to watch.
A Night to Remember is infinitely superior to Cameron’s Titanic as it captures the collective experience, and the period so brilliantly without having to invent superfluous characters. The Titanic story flies in the face of conventional western storylines in being a Marxist story of the collective where no individual story is as important. I always thought it was a shame Sergei Eisenstein didn’t have a crack at it in the style of Battleship Potemkin.
A film called 'Titanic' missed the purpose of telling what happened that night, instead shoehorning in a minimal sketch of a love story, that succeeded in making a survivor of one woman alone. I would have liked to see many of the survivor's stories, like the baker (seen hanging on to the rearmost railed next to the main characters) or the Japanese student who survived by tying deckchairs together, pushing off from the side and paddling toward the lifeboats, any one of the survivors rather than showing a plucky Irishwoman and her kids drowning, or two rich elders lying in bed drowning, or dozens of tuxedoes and evening dresses underwater (when everyone was asleep but our lovers) and so on. Cameron's sympathies are not with life and living, but the need for one woman to live at the expense of three men's lives.
Kermode, A night to remember and the earlier 1953 'Titanic' formed the basis of Cameron's movie. In fact it was a remake combining the two previous movies, indeed Cameron even stole the dialogue from both movies. Cameron demonstrated how to remake the two previous movies, put a modern romantic film score and sell it to modern audiences and that is the genius of Cameron as a modern film maker. If you can't get your head around this Kermode, wtf are you doing as a critic when you have no idea of what your are critiquing 🙄
IF I WAS THE ARCHITECT OF THE TITANIC I WOULD PUT THREE TELESCOPES ON THE FRONT AND TWO ON THE SIDES AND TWO ASSIGNED TO EACH SIDE OF THE SHIP. IF THERE IS NO TELESCOPE THIS IS THE FIRST THING TO DO BEFORE CREATING A SHIP.
James Cameron's epic is undoubtedly the more spectacular but AN2R is a far better film. And yes Jimbo is my favourite director and Aliens is still in my top 3.
Mr. Kermode, first of all, you forgot to mention that the movie is based upon the classic book by Walter Lord, published in 1955. Second of all, why compare a film released in 1958 to a film that was not even thought of? As a Titanic Enthusiast for nearly 40 years, I find value in both films and find no need to bash either film. I could not help but notice that you didn't compare A Night to Remember to the Barbara Stanwyck/Clifton Webb dreck, "Titanic" (1953) That film won an Oscar for Best Original Story/Screenplay. People pick on Cameron's for accuracy. Titanic (1953) has a soap opera story that is worse and is inaccurate as hell. Why don't you target that one? Something tells me that jealousy of Cameron's film and its success is sneaking in.
He compares it to Cameron's Titanic because (a) this is a very short video and (b) everyone remember's Cameron's "Titanic and basically no one recalls the '53 movie. Also people don't just criticise Camerons' movie for "accuracy" they also criticise it for - terrible dialogue, stereotyped characters, and an awful cliched romance story that was outdated a good 30 years before he made his movie. It's a horrible over-blown, special effects laden turd of a moive that ceartainly doesn't deserve most of the Oscars it won. Oh, and it slanders the name of one of the ship's officers (a real person remember) by making him a villain.
The only reason why i didn't like the james cameron's as it was based around a love story and not the actual real crew and the survives story.Yes of course the visuals was stunning and the ship inside interiors and the sinking but the story just wasn't for me. I was bored as i didn't care about the characters and the necklace lol. Maybe one day we will get another titanic film but more of the sinking disaster type film like the poseidon adventure 1972
That's why Decaprio and Winslet weren't even nominated for any awards and 11 oscars went to Cameron's film, it didn't deserve them, A Night to Remember is the best movie of the Titanic!!!!!
A night to remember is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much better than the James Camron film. one really big problem about the 1997 film is that it doesn't focus on the main part of the story. instead, its these 2 main fictional characters and creates all this controversy with Cal and jack, from when he boards the ship to when he gets framed. the movie just focus on jack and rose but why make a film with Camron claiming it's about the titanic but it should have been called jack and rose. how about that in 1912?
No way. Titanic 1997 is by far the better film, it won 11 oscars. The cinematography, the music is better, the acting is better, nobody acts like they're about to horribly die in a night to remember, it's a bit too stoical. The 1997 version is even more accurate with the ship splitting in half before sinking.
Whoa! The Good Doctor takes a giant shit on Cameron's Titanic. Rather like his year-long snotty dismissal of Guy Ritchie, he seems to beagain playing to the hipster gallery.
No... playing to people that actually like good movies. Cameron's Titanic is a god-awaful bloated monstrosity and "A Night to Remermber" is far superior. Now go away Titanic fanboy...
A Night To Remember had inaccuracies throughout the movie and ship wreck scene was painfully stiff, this making 1997's Titanic far more enjoyable. :) Don't be a prisoner of the past.
I love A Night To Remember but I don't quite get the hate for Cameron's Titanic. It's spectacular, It's got a decent love story and the sinking of the ship is terrifying. I would recommend both.
Hated Titanic it was awful ANTR is so much better wonderful film,, How Titanic won 11 oscars as many as Brn Hur is beyond me the story of Rose and Jack was like the rest of the film laughable and his death scene just as silly onsidering the fact she was on a large piece of wood that Jack could have got on to is rediculous
yes i concur, saw n2r a cple times n yrs alter saw titanic at cinema n felt s=disapointed while everyone rnd said hw great it was, i kept quiet n whispered to my gf i tink v old english 50s n2r was btr!, n she said oh i want to c it.camerons film 2 nme is a lover story set in a ship that sinks, n v feminisation is ridicoulus.
@@redcardinalist - You're the one talking drivel. Yours isn't the only opinion. I happen to like both films, but don't appreciate Kermode's snobby opinion here.
A Night to Remember is definitely superior in every respect. Mark Kermode is as usual right on the money.
Absolutely, A Night to Remember is a true classic.
Yes it really captured the horror of the disaster whereas Cameron made it seem more like a love story.
CAMERSON HIMSELF SAID IT WAS A LOVE STORY MORE THAN THE SINKING
A Night to Remember is the Best Titanic film of All time Period!
@@scottmiller6495 Come on steady on there, the German version was quite interesting !
@@vimfuego8827 You're right, it's not bad at all.
I love Cameron´s "Titanic," but "A Night to Remember" is still one of my favorite films. There is no reason to play the two movies off each other, since they have very different intentions. Despite the simpler technology employed, "A Night to Remember," by sticking to Walter Lord's excellent book, nevertheless remains the more realistic of the two films.
I watched 'A Night To Remember' on Brazilian TV in early 1970s and it really is unforgettable.
Some would compare these (or the other films) against each other or can judge them individually on the own merits. The Cameron version did benefit from advanced historical and technical research unavailable in the 1950s and in a market today that has to attract an audience very quickly with continuing focus on a younger demographic, (who are still going out to theaters and not staying home). The greater focus on the young couple today, was essential to hopefully get their 200 million back.....If the 1953 "Titanic" movie had been made today, the main star focus would have been on Robert Wagner, not Clifton Webb.
But "A night to remember" is worth seeing again and stands well on it's own merits....greater views of the tragedy from different crew/passengers and the crews of other vessels who responded with varying urgency, (or none at all).
Watching it again, reminds us how respectful a British film company was with the material that was part of Britain's history and knowing there were still survivors living then. Thanks for your insight.
Definitely one of the best British movies ever made.
I just watched it- I would agree. Cameron said that his version was really a love story.
A night to remember was a far superior movie than titanic.
A Night to Remember is certainly one of my all-time favourite films.
Over seen by Commodore Boxhall , (Titanic senior navigation officer) A night to remember in Boxhalls own words were that it was nothing like the events that actualy happened . However it is far more true to life and includes the intriniscly fundamental part that Californian played in the night itself which wasnt even touched on in Camerons effort .
If you think about it everyone on the titanic would have a different view to the event from there own experience and feelings' and where they was at the time as well.
Totally agree. I saw "Titanic" with my family and remember feeling as it finished that it wasn't "A Night to Remember" which has some very poignant scenes and has a genuine feel of the sense of foreboding, the freezing cold conditions and the stoicism shown by so many on board. Big and Glossy isn't always best. All that money and they still had some very dodgy British and Irish accents Even Hornblower in the guise of Ioan Gruffudd turning up in a lifeboat at the end didn't do it for me and I promptly went home and watched my DVD of A Night to Remember.
Cameron's film is worth viewing but only for the recreation of the ship and its sinking. In every other respect, A Night To Remember is superior, especially with regards to acting and dialogue.
JoeStunner the attitudes seem more realistic to the time too.
Agreed, the bullshit love story with Winslet and Decaprio kill Cameron's film 🎥 and didn't deserve 11 oscars absolutely not!!!!!
The acting though in the 1950s version has a awkward rigid quality to it, the drunk cook was pretty bad, apparently you hiccup a lot when you're drunk?
100% agree with Mr Kermode. A Night to Remember is a film I go to again and again. Titanic was weak fluff.
I agree this is a much better film out of the two movies for so many reasons!
I love a night to remember but seeing Cameron's recreation of the sinking on a big cinema screen was awesome.
100% correct. I personally can’t understand the success of Cameron’s flick.
in two words-teenage girls'.
Wow! That last line was scathing. I don't think we should compare the two. A night to remember is more of a realsitic, almost a docudrama minus a narrator. Camerons Titanic was a romeo and juliette love stroy set on the Titanic. Both films equally as good as each other for different reasons.
So true but i just wasn't interested in the love story aspect that's what failed the film for me
@@bioshock6935 I agree actually. if you removed the jack and rose characters from it youd have a night to remember!
James Cameron's film itself explains why James Cameron's version just misses the mark when he has Old Rose comment "That's a very fine forensic analysis... The reality, however, was somewhat different."
The film is timeless!
First time I saw 'A night to Remember' I was only about eight years old; this was before 'Titanic' came out (I know, I'm showing my age.) I found 'A Night to Remember so traumatic I couldn;'t bear to watch it again 'till I was in my thirties. That's how good a film it is.
Thank you Mr. Kermode for another spot on review- that shot of the serving cart moving slightly gave me chills, as it did when I first saw this phenomenal film! It is another lesson in how limitations yield the highest art; the bloated Titanic is so tiresome, with only one moving scene that I can remember.
Titanic owes alot to the film but I'd still say Titanic is the better movie. It won 11 oscars. The acting, soundtrack and effects were all better in Titanic. It's also more accurate too about the sinking, like the ship splitting before it sank. The portrayal of the captain is also more accurate it looks like in the 1997 version. A night to remember has lots of good points but score is quite dated now and not memorable. Both are very critical of the class divide. Cameron also took the action below deck as the ship was sinking, in the 1958 version all the action basically happens above deck. The 1997 is less accurate though in that most of the main characters are fictional. I do like the black and white cinematography and the cast in the 1958 version.
@@lw3646 will disagree to my last breath. A night to remember. The standard to to which all others, re. Cameron, can only dream of.
James Cameron made this film over again in color but with a love story featuring a Gen-X couple who apparently time traveled from the 1990's.
ITA. The only aspect where the Cameron film tops ANTR is in the visual effects during the sinking scenes.
Well I can only agree. Titanic is a love story set aboard the Titanic. But come on it's still a very good movie.
As usual, Mark Kermode is absolutely bang-on in his assessment, particular in relation to James Cameron's over-the top big budget remake. 'A Night To Remember' is superior in every respect. If you want an unmelodramatic and historically exact, yet poignant and riveting portrayal of the Titanic disaster, this is the film to watch.
When it comes to films about the 'Titanic', there is 'A Night to Remember' then there is everything else.
2:18. Well said that man.
Why didn't they have a "telescope" at the front of the titanic to monitor the passage of the ship. They don't think about the first safety of running?
Name one ship which did.
A Night to Remember is infinitely superior to Cameron’s Titanic as it captures the collective experience, and the period so brilliantly without having to invent superfluous characters. The Titanic story flies in the face of conventional western storylines in being a Marxist story of the collective where no individual story is as important.
I always thought it was a shame Sergei Eisenstein didn’t have a crack at it in the style of Battleship Potemkin.
@@Airlane-rq9yd I agree totally. I'm just stating the collective nature of the unfolding drama, where no individual character dominates.
A film called 'Titanic' missed the purpose of telling what happened that night, instead shoehorning in a minimal sketch of a love story, that succeeded in making a survivor of one woman alone.
I would have liked to see many of the survivor's stories, like the baker (seen hanging on to the rearmost railed next to the main characters) or the Japanese student who survived by tying deckchairs together, pushing off from the side and paddling toward the lifeboats, any one of the survivors rather than showing a plucky Irishwoman and her kids drowning, or two rich elders lying in bed drowning, or dozens of tuxedoes and evening dresses underwater (when everyone was asleep but our lovers) and so on.
Cameron's sympathies are not with life and living, but the need for one woman to live at the expense of three men's lives.
My favourite account of the tragedy by far. despite the stern breaking off was not reproduced.
I just bought the movie and can't wait to watch it
Kermode, A night to remember and the earlier 1953 'Titanic' formed the basis of Cameron's movie. In fact it was a remake combining the two previous movies, indeed Cameron even stole the dialogue from both movies. Cameron demonstrated how to remake the two previous movies, put a modern romantic film score and sell it to modern audiences and that is the genius of Cameron as a modern film maker. If you can't get your head around this Kermode, wtf are you doing as a critic when you have no idea of what your are critiquing 🙄
Well said! I am in total agreement.
Well said.
IF I WAS THE ARCHITECT OF THE TITANIC I WOULD PUT THREE TELESCOPES ON THE FRONT AND TWO ON THE SIDES AND TWO ASSIGNED TO EACH SIDE OF THE SHIP. IF THERE IS NO TELESCOPE THIS IS THE FIRST THING TO DO BEFORE CREATING A SHIP.
I doubt, then, that anyone would ask you to design a ship.
So true; a good and relevant review.
Your very right. A Night to Remember was better than the Titanic. It is superior in every respect.
So much better movie than Stupid Titanic with DiCaprio !
A Night to Remember was the better film
Nicely said
@ 1:45 😆 🤣 😂
James Cameron's epic is undoubtedly the more spectacular but AN2R is a far better film.
And yes Jimbo is my favourite director and Aliens is still in my top 3.
Well said
Mr. Kermode, first of all, you forgot to mention that the movie is based upon the classic book by Walter Lord, published in 1955. Second of all, why compare a film released in 1958 to a film that was not even thought of? As a Titanic Enthusiast for nearly 40 years, I find value in both films and find no need to bash either film. I could not help but notice that you didn't compare A Night to Remember to the Barbara Stanwyck/Clifton Webb dreck, "Titanic" (1953) That film won an Oscar for Best Original Story/Screenplay. People pick on Cameron's for accuracy. Titanic (1953) has a soap opera story that is worse and is inaccurate as hell. Why don't you target that one? Something tells me that jealousy of Cameron's film and its success is sneaking in.
He compares it to Cameron's Titanic because (a) this is a very short video and (b) everyone remember's Cameron's "Titanic and basically no one recalls the '53 movie. Also people don't just criticise Camerons' movie for "accuracy" they also criticise it for - terrible dialogue, stereotyped characters, and an awful cliched romance story that was outdated a good 30 years before he made his movie. It's a horrible over-blown, special effects laden turd of a moive that ceartainly doesn't deserve most of the Oscars it won. Oh, and it slanders the name of one of the ship's officers (a real person remember) by making him a villain.
He does mention it was based on Walter Lord's book, at 0:48.
titanic is a love story but there are similar movies
The only reason why i didn't like the james cameron's as it was based around a love story and not the actual real crew and the survives story.Yes of course the visuals was stunning and the ship inside interiors and the sinking but the story just wasn't for me. I was bored as i didn't care about the characters and the necklace lol. Maybe one day we will get another titanic film but more of the sinking disaster type film like the poseidon adventure 1972
Quite right - good review.
The James Cameron film is terrible.
Only the love stuff. I don’t know how the hell you can say that about the sinking scenes
That's why Decaprio and Winslet weren't even nominated for any awards and 11 oscars went to Cameron's film, it didn't deserve them, A Night to Remember is the best movie of the Titanic!!!!!
A night to remember is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much better than the James Camron film. one really big problem about the 1997 film is that it doesn't focus on the main part of the story. instead, its these 2 main fictional characters and creates all this controversy with Cal and jack, from when he boards the ship to when he gets framed. the movie just focus on jack and rose but why make a film with Camron claiming it's about the titanic but it should have been called jack and rose. how about that in 1912?
No way. Titanic 1997 is by far the better film, it won 11 oscars. The cinematography, the music is better, the acting is better, nobody acts like they're about to horribly die in a night to remember, it's a bit too stoical. The 1997 version is even more accurate with the ship splitting in half before sinking.
I mean, I can definitely understand why you might like Cameron‘s version more, but “far better”? That’s kind of ridiculous to me
And there are too many inaccuracies in A Night To Remember. It's glaring and hard to ignore today.
@123rockfan I just find it really overrated, it's got a real stiff wooden quality to it which doesn't work in an disaster film.
Whoa! The Good Doctor takes a giant shit on Cameron's Titanic. Rather like his year-long snotty dismissal of Guy Ritchie, he seems to beagain playing to the hipster gallery.
No... playing to people that actually like good movies. Cameron's Titanic is a god-awaful bloated monstrosity and "A Night to Remermber" is far superior. Now go away Titanic fanboy...
A Night To Remember had inaccuracies throughout the movie and ship wreck scene was painfully stiff, this making 1997's Titanic far more enjoyable. :) Don't be a prisoner of the past.
I love A Night To Remember but I don't quite get the hate for Cameron's Titanic. It's spectacular, It's got a decent love story and the sinking of the ship is terrifying. I would recommend both.
Every character in Cameron's film was plastic.
Well said. They both have something to offer.
James Simpson that doesn’t matter if the sinking scene still holds up
Who expressed 'hate?'
It's a terrible cliche laden romance story with stereotyped characters that was old fashioneda good 30 years earlier
Hated Titanic it was awful ANTR is so much better wonderful film,, How Titanic won 11 oscars as many as Brn Hur is beyond me the story of Rose and Jack was like the rest of the film laughable and his death scene just as silly onsidering the fact she was on a large piece of wood that Jack could have got on to is rediculous
Did you like Forrest Gump?
yes i concur, saw n2r a cple times n yrs alter saw titanic at cinema n felt s=disapointed while everyone rnd said hw great it was, i kept quiet n whispered to my gf i tink v old english 50s n2r was btr!, n she said oh i want to c it.camerons film 2 nme is a lover story set in a ship that sinks, n v feminisation is ridicoulus.
Very snobby of him.
cobblers. Crap is crap. try not to talk drivel
@@redcardinalist - You're the one talking drivel. Yours isn't the only opinion.
I happen to like both films, but don't appreciate Kermode's snobby opinion here.
I don't agree with him but it's his opinion, that's what he's paid to do, give his honest opinion.