I have and didn't say ALL 3D movies have flat bits, though I can see why you might have read it that way.

I can easily picture every new release DVD cover feature "Jaw dropping!" - Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun Times.

I'm going to hell.

You know, I think Ebert may be right. The first time I noticed it wasn't 3D was right about the time . Everything else was freaking fantastic 3D!

There was truly a sense of depth throughout the film. My favorite 3D shot was when Rose was stepping over the railing to kill herself. It actually felt like she was 10 stories high!

I may have become a true 3D fan last night. I can see the fantastic potential if film makers do it right.

Saw it last night...the vast majority of the film was in 3D, however, there were scenes during the frenzy of the boat sinking (when Kate and Leo are scrambling to get to the back of the ship) that weren't...I took my glasses off a couple different times when I didn't notice any depth and the picture was crystal clear...so either 3D wasn't used for certain scenes there (mostly close-ups), or Cameron pulled it way back so people would focus on the emotion of the moment rather than any 3D.

So Ebert was right, although he's wrong about 3D not adding anything to the experience...it added a lot!

Also, I'm pretty sure the star field that got changed (if one got changed at all) isn't from when Kate is floating on the door at the end of the film, but rather when Leo is lying on a deck bench much earlier in the film (right before he notices Kate about to jump ship). By the way, the 3D when Kate was leaning over the boat was fantastic...a real sense of depth there that it's hard to believe that scene wasn't natively shot in 3D.

I haven't seen TITANIC since the 10th anniversary DVD release, but damn does this movie hold up. It deserved every Oscar it got. It's a true classic. It made me wish Cameron would make more movies like this one, instead of putting all his talent into an Avatar sequel.

Since people are saying the 3D was very good, now I'm wondering whether they went to the actual special effects for the green screen elements and rendered certain images of the ship/etc from two camera angles? Is that how post conversion works usually (similar to Toy Story, etc), or do they just manipulate the final product somehow?

Post-conversion in terms of CGI animated films, like the Pixar flicks, go back to the original source elements and re-render everything. That's why it took nearly two years to complete the Toy Story double feature and Pixar renders all their films in 2D and 3D now (mostly due to Disney's demand as Pixar has been against 3D in the past).

With Titanic those source materials either no longer exist or not in the quality (they were probably rendered under 2K) they need them to be. Two years ago, Cameron went back to restore the film before Fox and Paramount gave him the A-OK to finance the 3D conversion. If you watch the featurette, every single shot was "re-rendered" by hand into 3D whereas most live-action post-converts are done by computers in the matter of six-to-eight weeks. Titanic, on the other hand, took nearly 18 months to get right as Cameron approved everything.

Also, most 3D post-conversions cost a studio anywhere from four-to-eight million. That's why we had such an onslaught of shitty conversions in 2010 with Clash of the Titans, The Last Airbender, and My Soul to Take amongst others. The thought process was a studio can recoup the cost of a post-convert usually within the opening weekend and reap the benefits due to the higher cost per ticket. Titanic cost $18 million.

If anything, Titanic is an example of how 3D post-conversions should be done. However, it will not be the trend due to the cost and time involved that most studios will not be looking to spend.

well yes, for close up shots that's usually the case - you won't see the double image if you take off your glasses.

oh and here's another cynical snobby article from Washington Post's Ann Hornaday regarding the 3D craze:

The Demise of 3-D: Are We Having Fun Yet?

The problem is TITANIC is a good example of how to use 3D to enchance a film. I don't buy those who say it was just a "money grab"...that's Lucas, not Cameron.

While I've seen bits and pieces of Titanic as it showed up on cable TV here and there, and having seen it in its theatrical release 15 years ago once or twice, and on my dts LD (also in bits and pieces), with fond memories of the basic story, the acting performances, and the sheer spectacle of tragedy at hand, I was not prepared for this 3D presentation (non-IMAX, unfortunately, as my nearest IMAX theater is wasting its IMAX showings on some Titans movie) to continue to move me to tears in the appropriate spots after all these years. The power of Titanic lies in its humanity, showing us the best and worst of it in the face of overwhelming fear and disaster. The film not only entertains, but enthralls, it places you on the Titanic in 1912, and the 3D presentation helps with immersing you in that world just a little bit better, you simply slip on into the galley doors, and become part of it all. Not only is the 3D presentation a welcomed element, it very much augments the atmosphere from scene to scene without calling attention to itself. My viewing was nice and bright (i.e. not hazy in sunlit scenes), and I didn't experience any eye strain while viewing through the RealD glasses. It's 3D-conversion done right. But I'd expect no less coming from James Cameron and his team. Well done.

I think it's great that a younger audience is getting a chance to experience Titanic on the big screen (with 3D being a nice bonus this time around), as it is nearly a timeless film going forward (except for older Rose's age dating the film), which can be enjoyed for decades to come.

I give it 4 stars or a grade of A.

Just got to ask. Anyone here snicker when the film showed the proper way to 'Pull a Murdock'?

I have to admit, every time they mentioned Murdoch's name or showed him on screen I smirked and thought of DVDTalk.

This place has currupted me...

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Yf68fFIehEo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I love seeing Cameron talk about filmmaking.

did you catch Titanic: The Final Word this past weekend? it was fantastic...

^ That was a fantastic documentary. It had some pretty interesting new theories. They now think the Titanic only made it about 23 degrees out of the water before it split rather than 90 degrees like they portrayed in the movie. Cameron even sarcastically states he'll have to go back and reshoot scenes for his movie.

I also enjoyed their speculation about what they could have done to save everyone on board. Lowering all the ship's mattresses over the side of the ship to "patch" the holes, unloading everyone onto the iceberg itself, and driving the ship backwards to safety were just a few ideas thrown around.

It's clear James Cameron has a passion for the Titanic and in this documentary he states that this is his final word on the subject and he will be moving on to other ventures from now on.

I couldn't stop thinking of that thread while watching it. Also i wanted to see Rose chop Jacks hand off with the Axe

I hope that documentary appears on the eventual Blu-ray release. It was indeed a fantastic, informative piece. Cameron is a fascinating speaker on these subjects.

nooooooo....fuck

Here on the Canadian version of the channel it aired Monday instead of Sunday, and aired about 4 times throughout the day.

Titanic: The Final Word is airing again over the weekend - Solid don't fret! (Sunday 4pm EST)

oh and I saw the movie again today, this time in it's OAR (2.35) ...

came home and watched some of the Pod featurettes featured on the DVD.

will it be online? Cuz...I don't have access to Cable.

oh I'm not sure... sorry.

Seeing this on my birthday this Sunday, the actual anniversary of the sinking. I got to see that last word documentary this past weekend and it was indeed fantastic. I especially liked the part towards the end when Cameron asks outright what he got wrong in the movie. But then says afterwards that he wasn't going to change anything because once you start, where do you end? I thought that was a nice jab at Lucas.

Yeah, I thought the one thing Cameron might have changed in the movie was Jack's line about fishing on Lake Wissota - which would have been impossible in 1912, since it's a man-made lake that wasn't there until 1917. But nope, it's still in the movie.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/vD4OnHCRd_4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>