Top 10 Fims I Hate the Most

6: Titanic

     What can you say about this film. It's a classic story of two teenagers from the 90s who time travel back to 1912 and hop aboard the ill-fated ocean liner.
      I'm totally serious. That's the story. And it enchanted countless masses back in 1997 and became the top-grossing film of all time until Avatar topped it in 2009.
      How could I hate this movie? It's actually pretty simple. Once you get beneath all the emotion hype, what is there to this film? Since this one is probably more controversial, you'll have to indulge me longer while I explain. I will break this one up into categories so this review has some structure to it.

NITPICKS:
--While I don't know much about the job, the treasure hunters in this film didn't seem like real scientists as much as they seemed like frat-boys. But that's just me.
--The story breaks structure a few times. The film is Rose recounting her memory of the event in flashback. Since she's the one telling the story, the story is therefore from her point of view. So it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for there to be scenes where she is not present. How could she recount these events (like Jack's early scenes) if she wasn't there? Again, sort of a nitpick, but people notice, and that distracts from the movie.
--For being at the bottom of a ocean for 50+ years, Rose's picture is in remarkable shape. What, steel doesn't rust through with over 50 years of being submerged?

BIG PROBLEMS:
     This will take up much of the review as most of the films core issues are in the first two hours. My first issue is with the characters themselves. To start off, I will mention Cal Hockley. He is a total jerk. Why is he such a jerk? Simple, if he were a nice guy, Rose would look like a witch for cheating on him. That's "love triangle 101." Especially if it's an arranged relationship. The man who is the third corner of the triangle must be a one-dimensional jerk so we feel no pity when the girl ditches him. I simply found Cal far too conveniently unlikable and cartoonish. Same with most of the rich people in this movie.
     Now for the main characters. Rose and Jack. The two lovebirds. First off, I didn't care much for Jack and I really didn't like Rose. To talk about Jack:
     Overall, not a terrible character. The kind of free-spirited, supportive guy most girls dream about. But with the exception of being a porno-peddler. No, seriously, he's poor. What do you think he does with those nude pictures he draws? The movie doesn't treat this as a big deal, and that's what bothered me. In real life, women are incredibly abused in the porno industry. The fact the film tries to make this element "romantic" really bothers me.
Rose:
     She really annoyed me to death. Whiny and a total drama queen, I actually didn't care if she died or not. I also found her to be totally air-headed, doing everything stupid that a girl could possibly do. While she so effortlessly throws off years of social training, she smokes, drinks, disobeys her mother, poses nude for a guy she's known only for two days and then sleeps with him. But that's okay, Jack is the creation of a Hollywood script, he won't ditch her when the going gets tough. Then she does something that would easily get top spot on a "dumbest moments" list: when the ship starts to sink, Rose is actually put on a lifeboat. She looks dreamily up and Jack as the boat is lowered.
     And then she jumps back on the ship so she can go be with here lover.
     And I started beating my head on the wall.
     What is wrong with her?! How is this supposed to be romantic? If we actually think about it, if she had stayed on the lifeboat, Jack could have worked to save himself and would have had the door all to himself when he was in the water. So, technically, it was her fault Jack died.   
     What is it with this love story, if you can even call it that. Since when does love equate to stupid, reckless behavior? Since when is love so devoid of any rational faculty people would act like Rose? Ask any married couple if their love is only emotion-based.

FACTUAL ERRORS:
     This film presents the problem with modern film making and especially with James Cameron. Let's look at production of this film. Cameron was absolutely fanatical about getting every detail right. He studied the blueprints for the Titanic so he could make an exact replica. Even down to the carpets, plates and ornaments, he made replicas so they would be like those on the ship. The clothing was actually worn and in fashion in 1912. That's how detailed oriented he was for the technical side of this film.
     But he forgot about the characters.
--The ideas and actions Jack and Rose are from the 90s. 1912 had a completely different culture so no one acted like they did, like flipping Cal the finger.
Heck, people didn't even kiss in public back then even if they were married because it was "indecent." Card games weren't played on Sunday, and the ideas of rebelling against authority wasn't even around until the 50s and 60s. If fact, the teenager wasn't invented until the 50s, so Jack and Rose's behavior is completely out of place.
--Other errors are committed when the ship starts sinking. Due to the culture back then, it would be unthinkable for a man to not give his place on a lifeboat to women and children. Cameron drastically underplays this. The rich did not lock the poor below deck so they could save themselves (the real Titanic didn't even have gates separating classes). In reality, the steerage classes were fetched from below deck immediately so their women and children could be saved. The reason 2/3s of them died was because most of them didn't speak English so they couldn't understand the instructions.
     But this is just a movie, right? Movies bend reality for drama's sake. Yes, but they shouldn't always do it. This was a real event and I think this film slanders the sacrifice of the rich men who died saving washerwomen and of the ships officials (who weren't maniacs in reality). It would be like making a conspiracy film about 9/11 where the first responders shoot people as they try to escape the building. Another example of this is after the ship sank and the lifeboats hover away from the survivors so they won't be swarmed. In the film, one of the women named Molly Brown asks the official if they can help the people. He says no, because they will swarm the boat. (Ladies, listen up. You'll like this.) In reality, Molly Brown rallied the other women in the boat to row in and help. She even threatened to chuck the official overboard when he complained about the boat being swarmed. Why didn't Cameron put this in the film. Well, because rich people are evil and only care about themselves.
     The last problem with the film is it's message. The movie proclaims, "Don't live by societies boring rules, but live life to the fullest." While not a terrible thing to advocate, look at how it's lived out in the film. Rose lives life to the fullest by:
     1: Disobeying her parent
     2: Smoking
     3: Drinking alcohol
     4: Having sex with a guy she barely knows
     5: And last, but not least, prostituting herself.
     6: She tosses the jewel overboard at the end of the movie. (I'm sorry, here I was thinking she could have put her grand kids through college with that thing.)
     Yeah, smart.
     To quote another blog, they mentioned how girls often can want to be like the leading lady in romantic movies. Is Rose a good person to identify with? Should girls want to be her? That's up to them, but it's pretty dumb.
     Overall, the film had an exciting climax, but the completely offensive way the film equated stupidity with "romantic" bothered me. While I will admit there probably are good love stories out there and I'm just too callous to watch them, Titanic is not a good love story because all everyone does is act stupid in the name of love.

Final Thoughts:

Titanic sank long before the ship did.