I realise there is thread relating to the PBS docu, but I found this (cameron) doc very interesting so was hoping for some specific discussion on the subject.
What did you guys think of it? For me, it seemed very much like Cameron was in charge and im unsure how much input the other guys had.
The model was unreal!!!
weequay
I think that was the one my friend was drooling over last night. She's burning up on demand for these documentaries. At least i know what to get her for holidays lol.
Ugh. Just the name alone puts me off. How big of an ego do you have to have to say "This is the FINAL word on Titanic - nobody else can ever provide relevant perspective or information."
There's only so much I can take of Cameron anyway, but he just drones on when he thinks he's am expert at something (same with Bill Paxton in that Titanica IMAX movie).
I want to hear from th ACTUAL experts.
Sorry, I know I'm a cranky old man.
I saw it the other night and I rather enjoyed it, it was a pretty interesting analysis of the Titanic's sinking and they covered things that I hadn't heard before. However, I do agree that Cameron does come across as a bit pompous and he seemed to make a number of assumptions in his analysis that he seemed to regard as absolute fact.
I felt that this was one of the best Titanic specials I've seen.
I particularly enjoyed them sharing their ideas about what actions could have been taken to save the ship/passengers after the iceberg was struck. I've brought up the idea of putting people on the iceberg to friends before so I was glad to finally hear someone else have that idea!
Interesting ideas with the mattresses over the side or all the lifejackets in one of the flooding compartments.
I saw an interview with Cameron promoting this special and he agreed that there really can never be "the final word."
I thought it was a great doc.
I like a lot of Cameron's movies, including Titanic, but I felt that he wasn't willing to listen to the opinion of the 'experts' he had gathered, rather he was determined to convince them that his opinion was the only opinion. That said, at least he is passionate about the subject, you have to give him that. Furthermore, the new insights and scientific analysis presented was fascinating.
The latest edition of National Geographic is a Titanic cover and features new photos, a good article and large fold-out diagram of the sinking proposed in this show, worth snagging if you have an interest in the subject.
How exactly do you put someone on an iceberg? What if the sides were just all vertical?
I didn't think it was a hard concept to grasp. What if the sides weren't sheer? Who knows? The thought is that there is a large, floating object in the obvious vicinity that may have been able to support people. It was an idea that I had that I was simply glad to hear someone else mention. The other experts didn't think it was a great idea.Laspector said:
Another thought that with reports of ice floes in the area, they may have been able to steam north, plow into the floe and put people out there.
To be fair to Cameron, He said at the end that it was really HIS last word on the titanic, and he would be moving on to other things.TheDoctor said:
I do agree though, whilst I like him, I doubt I could spent a whole load of time with the guy. He is very dominant, and again, it comes accross that pretty much it was all his idea of how the sinking went down. Some of the guys barely spoke!
Again, the huge model was a site to behold as was the huge model of the wreck. If anyone has any images of these models please let me know!!
I am experiencing a facination with Titanic at the moment (obviously we are being bombarded by it at the min). The wreck itself is most facinating.
What do you guys think?.... If it was possible to raise her, would you??????
weequay
Last edited by ob1al; Apr 12, 2012 at 1:57 PM.
Last edited by ob1al; Apr 12, 2012 at 1:57 PM.
Or steam towards the lights of the Californian for assistance. All the survivors report clearly seeing the lights of the nearby ship.R.P. McMurphy said:
No. I feel it would be disrespectful to raise the entire 'grave site' even after these 100 years. Also of course, the wreck is deteriorating at an alarming rate and my guess is, not much would survive the journey to the surface.If it was possible to raise her, would you??????
As far as salvaging items from the wreck, it's an ethical grey area to many. Personally, I am in favour of saving select pieces before nature takes it all, from an educational and historical perspective. But to quote a certain Doctor Jones, the salvage should not find it's way into the hands of private collectors, where it would become a commodity rather than a respectfully handled piece of history. It belongs in a museum.
I laughed when Cameron suggested they could go in reverse to keep the water from filling so fast. The giant ice fields to the north probably could have saved them.
I love this stuff.
That was brought up by one of the experts and the berg that the Titanic struck was pretty craggy so putting any number of the passenger and crew would have been difficult at best. In turn it was suggested that they could steam to the pack ice that they knew was just a few miles north of where they were and dropped the passengers and crew there since the pack ice would have been nice and flat. Then came the counter argument about steaming even a few miles wouldn't have worked because it would have just accelerated and/or exacerbated the flooding to which somebody suggested that they could have steamed backwards in reverse which would have (theoretically) kept the flooding at bay.Laspector said:
I haven't seen this documentary yet. Yeah, isn't hindsight a wonderful thing, you can tell everyone
what they SHOULDA/COULDA done.
You have to look at any other possible scenarios through 1912 eyes. America had barely entered
upon the world stage as a major player. European technologies and advancements were highly
esteemed. Many wealthy Americans spent a good deal of time in Europe both for business and for
pleasure.
That's why they were building so many of the big luxury oceanliners to ferry people back and
forth. People had been told the ship was unsinkable and they wholeheartedly believed that--back
when people had more faith in things, a nearly unshakable faith that can hardly even be understood
today after decades of incredible manufactured crap!
I think Cameron's movie, and modern documentaries do not emphasize this enough--well, Cal does
keep saying the ship can't be sinking because it's an unsinkable ship, and Mother does order the
servants to go back to the cabins and make sure the heat is on so they'll be warm when they return.
But the focus is put more on to the fact that there were not enough life boats, and of the few there
were many rowed away half or less full, and, probably unfair, admonishments that those half empty
life boats did not return and try to gather those in the water after the ship sank. Had they tried to
rescue those in the water after the sinking, there probably would have been no survivors at all.
From what I remember from history class, and from things written before the actual discovery of the
wreck, passengers would not get on the life boats, and that is why they were sent out half empty.
They wouldn't even put on their life vest, and panic didn't ensue until most of the lifeboats had been
launched away and it became glaringly obvious that the Titanic was indeed sinking.
I'm sure those early reports and writings and conjectures are as error ridden as anything speculated
today. But it was a different time, people were of a different mindset. The technicalities of the sinking
may be better understood in light of all our modern methods of analysis and all that, but the human
equation only becomes more baffling as we move further away from the mindset of that day and age.
We can't in 2012 "what-if" and second guess the decisions of the Captain, crew and passengers who in
1912 thought they were doing the right things, and were according to their own personal mores and
convictions as well as the social dictates of their time.
Shylaah
I agree, but we can engage in conjecture (and with the perfect 20/20 of hindsight) discuss what could have been done to lessen the scale of the disaster.
That's just the natural human process of learning from past mistakes and events, people are naturally drawn to analyse this stuff.
It can also be likened to watching a movie and shouting at the girl on the screen 'Don't go down to the basement!'. It's easy when you know what's gonna happen.
Actually, the reason they were building bigger and bigger ocean liners was NOT for 1st/2nd class business/leisure cruises, but for 3rd class immigrant traffic - THAT's where the money was. 1st and 2nd class wasn't even "sold out" for the maiden voyage (I think 1st class was half or 2/3rds full).Shylaah said:
Most people weren't astonished that the ship was going to sink because they were told it was "unsinkable", they were astonished because they believed in the technological superiority of man over nature (sound familiar?).
You're right, though, that many first and second class women refused to leave the ship. The Titanic, even as her bow was going under, felt solid and safe compared to the little lifeboats ("Damn those British and their regulations!"). Others didn't want to leave their husbands. a few even believed that someone of their stature shouldn't be inconvenienced with the sinking of the ship - that was White Star's problem.
You're completely right, highlight is 20/20 (though I'm not necessarily sure of that... I think we can be just as blind in hindsight as we are in foresight) and it's easy to bring our modern analysis of the disaster to bare - armed with tons of information. Yet, the funny thing is, of all the "prevent the Titanic from sinking" stories, theories, etc. I've ever heard, I'm not convinced any one of them would work.
My new favorite "Yeah Right" "Save the Titanic" is from "The Company of the Dead" where a passenger just hands Fleet (the lookout) a pair of binoculars and tells him to get back to work. Seriously? That's as bad as bursting onto the bridge and telling them to turn just before they would hit.
Honestly, glad they drowned then and freed up a space for someone on the lifeboats who had the sense of self preservation to try to save their own lives.TheDoctor said:
I dug it for what it was, especially like James last words at the end.
National Geographic has some great articles and photos on their website including an article from Cameron. I recommend the "interactive crash scene," and the "zoomable images: complete views of the wreck."
Unseen Titanic - Pictures, More From National Geographic Magazine
Watched it last night...
It was good but the end kind of irritated me. His attack on our Alberta Oilsands didn't have to be brought into this. Our goverment went above and beyond to give him a private tour at GREAT cost to the taxpayers to show him how oil sands are not the "dirty oil" the media likes to make it out to be. Not to get into a rant..but all his subs and ships he uses to make shows like this USE FOSSIL FUELS! Instead of slapping Alberta in the face again he could have shown footage of one of the oil leaks in the ocean. They have done a LOT more damage than refining oil that exists in the sands here. All the jobs created by the oil industry helped MANY people buy movie tickets, but his DVD's and financed his many expeditions. He's a hypocrite. If he cares so much about the environment why doesn't he recruit a group of experts to study refineries and look for cleaner methods....although there are MANY experts here doing that already.
Cameron didn't know if he had on his director or scientist hat. I saw him refuting the hydrologist specialist, just because he felt different. He wanted the 'cool' way.
There were some neat things. Crew didn't try to fill the boats because they were going to use them as taxis. But there was nowhere to go.
....And he didn't kiss their butts like they expected. And they were shocked! HE DIDN'T KISS OUR BUTTS!!! WE BROUGHT HIM HERE TO SAY WONDERFUL THINGS ABOUT US AND HE DIDN'T!!!!!hankey01 said:
The Tar Sands are filthy. I've been there. But, Mother Nature made them, not humans.
But Humans weren't helping either.
That's because the King of the world kicks *****, not kiss it!
terryr said:
[QUOTE=hankey01;2214426]All the jobs created by the oil industry helped MANY people buy movie tickets, but his DVD's and financed his many expeditions.QUOTE]
Not to play devil' advocate or anything, but I'm sure drug money, knocking over convenience stores, prop recasting, and on and on also provided people funds which were spent on going to the movies - that's not much of a blanket reason for him to give the oil sands a pass.
And in terms of environmental accountability, do we want to talk about tailing ponds and migrating flocks of birds? I'm not saying the oil sands projects are any worse than oceanic drilling, strip mining, or any other major resource extraction project, but let's not try to pretend this is a saintly, "harm none" operation.
Anyways, special was good, if Cameron does tend to try and dominate the discussion a bit much. He's enthusiastic, and clearly a bright guy capable of thinking about the problem from multiple angles at once which led to some really interesting insights on the abberant debris far from the stern. I especially liked seeing the simulation of the stern's last few moments; survivors reported seeing it rise out of the water, but the "bobbing like a cork" thing never made any sense to me given the small surface area of the leading face of that section, and just how tall it would have been.
Reply with Quote