I would have issued this film a 7 rating but for one scene: When the Russian captain came aboard the Titanic and informed the Americans that the byzanium (sp?) was Soviet property. I was appalled that the American commander felt compelled to resort to a show of one-upsmanship as a threat to keep the radioactive mineral.What should have happened was that in a spirit of international peace, the American captain should have offered half of the byzanium to the Soviets. That way, both countries could feel safe without the other having a major strategical,military advantage.The greed and ignorance that is "the American way" really makes me sick: It is as though we have some kind of right and imperative that no one else is entitled to, and that all other countries are evil and the "enemy".If I were the Russian captain, I would have stayed on the Titanic past the eight-minute limit, just so that the ship was torpedoed. The American sub (and aircraft) could not have stopped that.The scenes in the movie were very well filmed and the Titanic was re-created to an astounding level. The water would not have been as clear at 12,000 feet, but I can forgive that, because the clarity of the water allowed us to see everything.Another element of the movie that is perhaps unrealistic but forgivable is the mechanics involved in raising the Titanic: Balloons and "foam" would not have been enough, and the concept of "foam" that was supposed to be injected by tubing or hoses is frankly ridiculous at that depth and considering the complexity of the ship's chambers.One final, small item is that I wish that the submersible had indicated its depth (and maximum depth capacity) as it entered the trough in which the Titanic was ultimately found: It would have added to the suspense.Nevertheless, the acting, direction and replication of the actual ship are excellent in this film. It is just unfortunate that the producer felt as though he needed to resort to cold war rhetoric and sabre rattling to make a compelling picture. Certainly, all the elements to captivate an audience were already and otherwise inherent.

Strictly speaking, I found this to be acceptable entertainment. Its many detractors maintain that it's a poor, poor adaptation of the Clive Cussler novel. In fact, Cussler himself hated it so much that there would be no more adaptations of his work until "Sahara" in 2005. Does the execution of the movie fail to match the awesomeness of the concept? Sure. Could it have used a more accomplished director at the helm? It wouldn't have hurt. But it sustains interest for close to two hours. This viewer was caught up enough in the story that any flaws didn't detract from the experience.The U.S. government is in an intense search for an obscure mineral (for national defense purposes, of course) and believes that the only place it could be found is on board the wreckage of the Titanic. Since at this point in time, divers couldn't travel that deep into the ocean, people working on the project come up with this offbeat solution of using explosive devices to bring the massive ship to the surface.Political intrigue adds to the plot, as the Russians believe that by rights they should be allowed to retrieve the mineral. They do everything that they can to undermine the operation.The actors deliver decent performances, although there are precious few characters that really engage the viewer. One exception is the Titanic survivor John Bigalow, played by Sir Alec Guinness. There's a lot of familiar faces here: Jason Robards, David Selby, Richard Jordan, and Anne Archer as the stars, and a steady array of top notch character actors. The romantic subplot with Selby and Archer never really goes anywhere, but fortunately it doesn't take up TOO much of the running time.The special effects are adequate, and the actual event of the title is reasonably impressive.The most worthy component is really the rousing, emotionally rich music score by John Barry.Seven out of 10.

There definitely are some dead spots. Too much time is spent looking for the ship. The three sided romance goes nowhere and could have been deleted. The entire operation of simply pumping foam, attaching gas bags, and exploding the Titanic off the bottom throws credibility out the window. Nevertheless, Richard Jordan and Jason Robards give it their best, despite minimal character development. The real star however is the Titanic model, which of course doesn't appear until past the half way point of the film. If you persevere until then, your imagination will be rewarded. Definitely watchable if you have enough patience. - MERK

I've been a big fan of the Clive Cussler novels over the years, so was excited to check Raise The Titanic out. However, besides fulfilling my desire to see Dirk Pitt on the big screen, the film is an absolute bust. It seems like 75% of the movie are scenes showing submersables underwater searching for the Titanic as the main characters on the ship above monitor them with varying expressions. The movie is just rather flat. There is no substance to it.To make matters worse, Richard Jordan was not a good choice as Dirk Pitt. His portrayal of Pitt makes the character pretty unlikable; perhaps he was attempting to play Clive Cussler himself rather than Pitt (Cussler, a rotten curmodgeon of a man, admittedly has based Pitt on himself or who he wishes he could be--Cussler is not nearly as cool as Pitt). Robards was excellent as Sandecker, but even his strong performance couldn't add much to a pretty lame script. Anne Archer and M. Emmitt Walsh also are in the film, but don't do anything exciting. If you are a fan of the Dirk Pitt novels, go ahead and give this movie a look. If not, avoid it at all costs. I rate this 5 0f 10 stars simply because I'm a fan of the novels. If I were not a fan, I'd rate it a 2 of 10. Sahara starring Matthew McCaugnehey is a better film, but Cussler killed the chance for a sequel with that cast--too bad.