When I learned that Titanic was being released for the centenary of its sinking I actually gasped. That’s how much I love this film.
To put it in context, I was 12 when it was released the first time, and the perfect age to lap up all the romance; the action; the tragedy; Leonardo DiCaprio.
Of course, there was the concern that my adult self would not appreciate it as much, but when such an iconic film is presented in 3D, you really have to give it a go.
Everyone knows the story. Poor boy meets uptown girl, she’s with a rich boy but falls for the poor boy and they go off into the sunset - sort of, and it all happens on ‘ the unsinkable ship’ while its predictably slipping further and further into the murky depths. Let’s face it, it was never going to be the story which drew people to see this epic again. Instead, it was how different it would be in 3D.
As it began I waited expectantly for icebergs popping out all over the place or the bow of the ship looming into the audience – or at least water seemingly splashing around, but none of these were to be.
Instead, the 3D effect seems to add depth to the film, which, to be honest, it doesn’t really need. It was used well, I thought, but a little unnecessarily. The most noticeable change the 3D brought to the film was with ropes and edges of the boat which are close to the front of the scene which were made to stand out. People in the foreground also had more depth.
However, I thought that the parts of the film which could have benefited most from the effect, i.e. the sinking, were lacking.
I’m not sure if it was because the 3D was layered over the original 2D film, but I came out of the cinema with a headache and thinking that, although I had enjoyed it as much as the first time around, that enjoyment simply wasn’t enhanced by the added dimension.
Review by reporter Laura Hammond