Maybe as a dramatic documentary ... but as a story based on history ... no. It falls flat.
Here's my breakdown:
STORY: Most know the general story so I won't belabor that. But this telling of the history has some problems as to storytelling and film-making:
1. There are no characters here who we get to know. It's as if the characters were without personalities, like robots.
This is not supposed to be a documentary; so how can are we supposed to be emotionally invested in human props???
It left me with a cold, sinking feeling the whole film --- yes, like being out on icy waters.
2. It jumps around trying to give us a sense of the diversity of passengers, and also convey the timeline. The problem is that in doing so we get a very superficial view of people, and the timeline feels horribly crooked. It's frayed.
3. The absurdity in human behavior here is either magnificent incompetence or errors in capturing the facts. Dunno.
4. The constant introduction of new characters that are seemingly important nearing the end makes absolutely no sense!
ACTING: Yes, as I've stressed so many times, the Brits acting skill has no parallel. However, here they are at there most stiff, which undermines the film. Yes, things run amok near the end, but still, it's too late (the film was already sinking).
TEMPO: The pace is OK, but the film jumps around unnecessarily and introduces useless side plots that make it feel jumbled.
CINEMATOGRAPHY: OK considering the story
DIRECTING / WRITING: There's a reason this feels like its directed by someone with a myopic brain, Baker shifted to TV just four years after this. That tells me he couldn't produce good feature-length film. As to the writers ... as per usual, they were "TV-people" and obviously this was an attempt that proved they should have stuck to TV.
Is it a good film? No, unless you just want to watch a massive ship sink
Should you watch this once? Yes. You will see a potentially good film ruined by its stewards.
Rating: 4.0.
Here's my breakdown:
STORY: Most know the general story so I won't belabor that. But this telling of the history has some problems as to storytelling and film-making:
1. There are no characters here who we get to know. It's as if the characters were without personalities, like robots.
This is not supposed to be a documentary; so how can are we supposed to be emotionally invested in human props???
It left me with a cold, sinking feeling the whole film --- yes, like being out on icy waters.
2. It jumps around trying to give us a sense of the diversity of passengers, and also convey the timeline. The problem is that in doing so we get a very superficial view of people, and the timeline feels horribly crooked. It's frayed.
3. The absurdity in human behavior here is either magnificent incompetence or errors in capturing the facts. Dunno.
4. The constant introduction of new characters that are seemingly important nearing the end makes absolutely no sense!
ACTING: Yes, as I've stressed so many times, the Brits acting skill has no parallel. However, here they are at there most stiff, which undermines the film. Yes, things run amok near the end, but still, it's too late (the film was already sinking).
TEMPO: The pace is OK, but the film jumps around unnecessarily and introduces useless side plots that make it feel jumbled.
CINEMATOGRAPHY: OK considering the story
DIRECTING / WRITING: There's a reason this feels like its directed by someone with a myopic brain, Baker shifted to TV just four years after this. That tells me he couldn't produce good feature-length film. As to the writers ... as per usual, they were "TV-people" and obviously this was an attempt that proved they should have stuck to TV.
Is it a good film? No, unless you just want to watch a massive ship sink
Should you watch this once? Yes. You will see a potentially good film ruined by its stewards.
Rating: 4.0.