Review: Titanic 3D

MANILA, Philippines - Seeing “Titanic” for the first time in 1997, the only image that got stuck in my mind was that of a 270-meter ship breaking in half and eventually sinking into the bottom of the North Atlantic Ocean. As a high school student, it was amazing to me how James Cameron was able to replicate the tragedy that people believed was not possible. And for a young and impressionable mind, “Titanic” for some time had me believing that in a history book somewhere, inscribed there is the love story of Jack Dawson (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Rose DeWitt Bukater (Kate Winslet).

Fifteen years later, “Titanic” is re-imagined in 3D and with a story that we now know by heart, is it worth revisiting? Yes. Yes. Yes.

For three simple reasons, “Titanic 3D” is the perfect example of how to use the technology right. Anyone who knows me knows that I am not a fan of the 3D gimmick but Cameron’s decision to turn his classic into one gave me enough reason to be hopeful once more.

From the first scenes of the film, I knew I wouldn’t be getting that in-your-face 3D effect that other filmmakers mistakenly think to be enough to make viewers disregard how crappy the story is. 3D is kept at a minimum and it actually gave me time to discover things that I missed out on in 1997—minor things such as the name of the helicopter that brought old Rose aboard the expedition, “Cougar”—that add to the amusement of watching the film. Even the awkward way that young Rose ran towards the ship’s stern for her meet-cute with Jack became all the more endearing.

I also appreciated how clean the scenes appeared to be. It’s as if the film was made just recently with just the right amount of color and warmth added to it. Some 3D films tend to be dark and even become a tad darker once I have the glasses on. Even in the few underwater scenes, I am still able to make out the details and outlines of what I am looking at.

Lastly, “Titanic 3D” will probably be the measuring stick for future conversions of classic films. Cameron has stated in the past that he is very picky when it comes to shooting 3D scenes but obviously he was not able to do it in 1997 for “Titanic”. But the attention to detail that Cameron and his team of 300 computer artists did for “Titanic 3D” is what other filmmakers should consider if studios are to make viewers embrace 3D to be truly the future of cinema.

Before another one of Cameron’s creation, “Avatar”, the highest-grossing film of all time was “Titanic”. A lot of factors should be considered as the two are years apart in almost every aspect. But for the moviegoers who helped “Titanic” exceed $1 billion in 1997, what more is there for them to see?

If not for the amazing visuals right from the onset or the cheesy dialogue that works thanks to Winslet and DiCaprio's chemistry, then perhaps as a simple remembrance of things past, which is what “Titanic” was really meant to be.