For a fairly low budget TV movie, "Titanic" is better than I would have expected. The plot follows three different sets of characters, amid a very large background cast. Some of the main characters will survive the disaster, some will not.The first half sets up the interrelationships among the passengers; the second half shows the action after the ship hits the iceberg. There are obvious breaks where TV commercials are to be inserted.With a runtime of 173 minutes, this is a very long film, but it's justified, given the epic nature of the disaster, and given that the focus is on character development. You will need to get interested in one or more of the diverse characters; otherwise, that first half will be slow and boring.Fortunately, the acting is credible, especially with a quality cast of Peter Gallagher, Catherine Zeta-Jones, and George C. Scott. On the other hand, Tim Curry overacts, in a subplot I found unnecessary and distracting. The film puts a lot of emphasis on production design and period piece costumes, which gives texture to the story.The plot could have been more suspenseful just prior to, and at the time of, the ship's collision. Yet, overall, there's a foreboding sense of destiny, a hint of impending doom, the minimal requirement I place on any Titanic film.The true-life story of the Titanic is one of the most dramatic events in modern history. Most, though not all, Titanic films convey this sense of drama. This 1996 TV movie does a good job of setting up the story and fostering the right tone. As such, it's worth watching if one has the time to invest in it.

It is 1912 and Titanic went from Southampton to New York, but the voyage being a nightmare for the passengers and the crew.This Titanic-film with George C. Scott and Catherine Zeta-Jones is very good. The hole film look very realistic.It is a relationship between a man and a woman and they fall in in love. They have fun on aboard the ship. Between them it will being a struggle with life or death.This Titanic-movie show more than James Camerons Titanic-film was happening around the ship.For Example: The crew aboard California talk to each other how they can contact Titanic and how they see Titanic call back with a Morse Code. This detail didn't James Cameron show in his Titanic-film.

Hilarious TV miniseries that perhaps uses borrowed sets from the UK 1979 version ... maybe reused in the Meaning Of Life 'Titanic sequence" .....(SOS TITANIC of 1979 starred with Jerry Hauser and Cloris Leachman.... yes....) and adds glamourpuss Catherine Zeta Jones and George C Scott with what is clearly Tim Currie's most berserk characterization of any rocky horror he has ever played....in fact he plays it for laughs... and at such a 'Snidley Whiplash' level that must have just collapsed with laughter after ever 'take' . Wait till you see him 'disguise himself as a woman... even though he has a mustache and beard....!) Handsome JOHN DOYLE... (who...?) in a Jimmy Cagney role and various other TV and faded movie stalwarts add feathers and good haircuts to the luster of the doomed liner... but really this is no more than cheap tabloid TV 'clarrssy' movie watching for uneducated farm workers... in fact I do not believe it was made for anyone whose first language was English... even though it is in English. Capish? Bleached back projection, rabble hordes, religious fanatics, flimsy locked gates and bewildered potato head farmers and wives round out a really low budget 'oooh waaah' level of production. The best bit? The fantastic Gothic ceiling of the dining room. This is a version of TITANIC that actually dares to skimp on the actual sinking of the ship... that happens during a montage...!!!!! yep, during a montage......... urgggghh. a montage... huh??? the whole thing runs 170 minutes and the ship sinks in a montage..!!!!!!

Who the hell decided that this was a good idea? The very fact that TV producers have to invent bogus love stories to make the greatest and most famous maritime disaster in history more interesting is insulting - to introduce a fictional rape is positively impertinent.Had anyone involved in this crap ever heard of the Titanic before? It didn't seem like it, as others have noted before me the inaccuracies in construction of the ship itself along with the events portrayed is simply laughable.As for the performances, George C. Scott - one of my all time favourite actors - must have been really hard up to stoop to this clunking mess, and Catherine Zeta Jones, well...the Oscars really don't mean anything if talentless pouting hacks like this wooden woman can win one, or perhaps her husband helped buy her it, and as mentioned Marilu Henner gave possibly the least-like Margaret Brown performance ever.Add to this mix of wooden performances, some hammy ones too - most notably Tim Curry, who was hamming it up something rotten - if only he had twiddly bits on his moustache and said "curses!" every 5 minutes, he would be ideal for the local am-dram group's pantomime villain this year.With all the wood and ham on display, everyone could have been saved from this Titanic disaster, sailing on a sea of wooden performances and eating ham sandwich soliloquies till they reached New York.Avoid this rubbish at all costs!