There are films that you can say, they're so bad, they're good, like some of those silly locust/piranha/snake/shark/pick a creature of your choice infestation movies.
"Raise The Titanic" is merely bad. It is well chronicled that Clive Cussler, author of the book upon which this garbage is allegedly based, was so horrified with the end result that he refused to allow another of his books to be filmed. He eventually relented more than 20 years later, when "Sahara" arrived. By the sounds of things it may be a freezing day in hell before Cussler gives his blessing for a third time.
That is a pity because he writes those wonderfully absurd and over-the-top stories that are just begging to be turned into popcorn blockbusters, but who can blame the man. "Raise The Titanic" may be the worst big screen adaptation of a novel ever, although the "Da Vinci Code" isn't far behind.
We'll forgive some of the technical absurdities in the story line. The film was made some years before the wreck of the Titanic was discovered and nobody could have known that it is so thoroughly mangled, even if the beautifully whole and well preserved specimen the movie offers was always going to be wildly unlikely. We need an intact Titanic for the story to work, so fine, we can live with it.
What we cannot stomach is the incredible hatchet job which the screenwriters did on Cussler's novel, changing place and people names for no reason. Historical research obviously meant squat to these people so in the film we end up with a man who played in the band on the Olympic for three years before joining Titanic. The fact that Olympic went into service only about one year before Titanic is calmly disregarded. It's a minor point to all but real ship buffs, but you won't find it in the book.
The story is set during the Cold War. Apparently some very rare and utterly fictitious metal called Byzanium will for some reason make nuclear war obsolete, or some such crap. Surprise surprise, the entire world's supply of Byzanium is...you guess it, lying on the bottom of the Atlantic, thanks to a dastardly iceberg. The Americans must have it, so Dirk Pitt and company accept the challenge of raising the Titanic from two-and-a-half-miles down as if they were being asked to wash the dishes.
The threatening hurricane which adds excitement to the book is totally missing here as our heroes plod through one of the most tedious and poorly filmed "blockbusters" ever to disgrace the cinema and eventually pop the Titanic to the surface. After endless and quite stunningly boring undersea shots of what a three-year-old child could see is a scale model, the Titanic unglues herself from her watery grave and, hey presto, there she is, ready to complete her interrupted journey to New York. Lovely stuff, but after taking forever to set the scene the raising itself is made to look about as tricky as lifting a toy submarine from the shallow end of a swimming pool.
And, guess what, folks!! The Byzanium ISN'T on the Titanic, after all. It's in an English cemetery, but of course opening graves isn't much of a story line when compared to raising sunken liners, is it? The final plot "twist" in said cemetery is so absurd it defies belief, and again it didn't come from the book.
Acting? Some talented actors do the best they can with a truly atrocious script. Anne Archer is left with the unenviable task of uttering the most stomach-churning line ever committed to celluloid - "I just can't get the wormie on the hookie,". which could have been enough all by itself to destroy her career. In fact her role is removed of all meaning by the screenwriters and Ms Archer seems to have nothing more to do but be the pretty female in the cast.
The late Richard Jordan is a passable Pitt, but Jason Robards is nothing like the feisty Sandecker of the Cussler novels. Even Alec Guiness as a surviving crew member of the Titanic can't do much in his cameo role to stop the pile of rubbish from sinking faster than the object of its storyline.
It is no great surprise that "Raise The Titanic" quickly gained notoriety as one of the, if not THE, biggest bomb in Hollywood history. The special effects are awful even by the standards of the time (1972's "The Poseidon Adventure" is even older but fares much better in this department). The acting is wooden, the film is disjointed, and it just doesn't gel. There are a desperately few moments to savour. The scene where the Titanic surfaces is moving, and the music which accompanies it is evocative, but that's about it.
With a budget of some $30 million - enormous for its time - they could hardly have done a worse job of it. Why on earth they hired a director whose experience was limited to TV serials is one of the greatest mysteries of all time. What is much clearer is what producer Lew (later Lord) Grade meant when he said "Raise The Titanic? It would have been cheaper to lower the Atlantic."
That is my favourite quote in showbiz,and is ultimately the movie's longest lasting legacy. Famous, for all (and I mean ALL) the wrong reasons.
"Raise The Titanic" is merely bad. It is well chronicled that Clive Cussler, author of the book upon which this garbage is allegedly based, was so horrified with the end result that he refused to allow another of his books to be filmed. He eventually relented more than 20 years later, when "Sahara" arrived. By the sounds of things it may be a freezing day in hell before Cussler gives his blessing for a third time.
That is a pity because he writes those wonderfully absurd and over-the-top stories that are just begging to be turned into popcorn blockbusters, but who can blame the man. "Raise The Titanic" may be the worst big screen adaptation of a novel ever, although the "Da Vinci Code" isn't far behind.
We'll forgive some of the technical absurdities in the story line. The film was made some years before the wreck of the Titanic was discovered and nobody could have known that it is so thoroughly mangled, even if the beautifully whole and well preserved specimen the movie offers was always going to be wildly unlikely. We need an intact Titanic for the story to work, so fine, we can live with it.
What we cannot stomach is the incredible hatchet job which the screenwriters did on Cussler's novel, changing place and people names for no reason. Historical research obviously meant squat to these people so in the film we end up with a man who played in the band on the Olympic for three years before joining Titanic. The fact that Olympic went into service only about one year before Titanic is calmly disregarded. It's a minor point to all but real ship buffs, but you won't find it in the book.
The story is set during the Cold War. Apparently some very rare and utterly fictitious metal called Byzanium will for some reason make nuclear war obsolete, or some such crap. Surprise surprise, the entire world's supply of Byzanium is...you guess it, lying on the bottom of the Atlantic, thanks to a dastardly iceberg. The Americans must have it, so Dirk Pitt and company accept the challenge of raising the Titanic from two-and-a-half-miles down as if they were being asked to wash the dishes.
The threatening hurricane which adds excitement to the book is totally missing here as our heroes plod through one of the most tedious and poorly filmed "blockbusters" ever to disgrace the cinema and eventually pop the Titanic to the surface. After endless and quite stunningly boring undersea shots of what a three-year-old child could see is a scale model, the Titanic unglues herself from her watery grave and, hey presto, there she is, ready to complete her interrupted journey to New York. Lovely stuff, but after taking forever to set the scene the raising itself is made to look about as tricky as lifting a toy submarine from the shallow end of a swimming pool.
And, guess what, folks!! The Byzanium ISN'T on the Titanic, after all. It's in an English cemetery, but of course opening graves isn't much of a story line when compared to raising sunken liners, is it? The final plot "twist" in said cemetery is so absurd it defies belief, and again it didn't come from the book.
Acting? Some talented actors do the best they can with a truly atrocious script. Anne Archer is left with the unenviable task of uttering the most stomach-churning line ever committed to celluloid - "I just can't get the wormie on the hookie,". which could have been enough all by itself to destroy her career. In fact her role is removed of all meaning by the screenwriters and Ms Archer seems to have nothing more to do but be the pretty female in the cast.
The late Richard Jordan is a passable Pitt, but Jason Robards is nothing like the feisty Sandecker of the Cussler novels. Even Alec Guiness as a surviving crew member of the Titanic can't do much in his cameo role to stop the pile of rubbish from sinking faster than the object of its storyline.
It is no great surprise that "Raise The Titanic" quickly gained notoriety as one of the, if not THE, biggest bomb in Hollywood history. The special effects are awful even by the standards of the time (1972's "The Poseidon Adventure" is even older but fares much better in this department). The acting is wooden, the film is disjointed, and it just doesn't gel. There are a desperately few moments to savour. The scene where the Titanic surfaces is moving, and the music which accompanies it is evocative, but that's about it.
With a budget of some $30 million - enormous for its time - they could hardly have done a worse job of it. Why on earth they hired a director whose experience was limited to TV serials is one of the greatest mysteries of all time. What is much clearer is what producer Lew (later Lord) Grade meant when he said "Raise The Titanic? It would have been cheaper to lower the Atlantic."
That is my favourite quote in showbiz,and is ultimately the movie's longest lasting legacy. Famous, for all (and I mean ALL) the wrong reasons.