The Legend of the Titanic

Let me preface this review by saying: I have no words for this atrocity that some people dare to call a film. I can only use Roger Ebert's words when he reviewed Caligula (another travesty I have neither time nor patience to delve into right now): "(This movie) is sickening, utterly worthless, shameful trash. If it is not the worst film I have ever seen, that makes it all the more shameful."

How in the world could an Italian direction possibly have perceived the completely clichéd love story encompassed by possibly the greatest tragedy of the 20th century and associate it with a rapping dog?! Why was it ever started? Why didn't they just quit halfway and realize that it wasn't worth the trouble?

Unfortunately, they went through with its production, and ended up insulting the memory of all the poor souls who died on the Titanic. NO ONE DIED?! IT WAS ALL A FAKE?! THE TITANIC WAS COMPLETELY FABRICATED BY THAT LITTLE MOUSE FOR THE SAKE OF ENTERTAINING HIS GRANDCHILDREN?!?!

I would not recommend this movie to anyone, even my worst enemies. Fabricated as this story purportedly may have been, a disaster did occur in the end - this piece of unapologetic garbage.

"I hated this movie. Hated hated hated hated hated it." - Roger Ebert

100 years ago the RMS Titanic disembarked on its maiden voyage from Southampton to New York City. The ship was considered unsinkable and faster than any other ship by the crew and by the passengers. But the Titanic met her demise on the morning of April 15, 1912, costing over a thousand people their lives. Titanic to this day is considered one of the most devastating disasters in history.

Why am I going through all this? Because, what we didn't know was that the whole reason the ship sunk was because of a whaling scheme that involved sinking the Titanic by making talking sharks convince a talking giant octopus to unknowingly throw an iceberg in the direction of the ship just to cover their tracks. And there were talking mice on board and talking dolphins to try and help the ship. WHAT?!

Yes according to The Legend of the Titanic(released two years after the multi-billion dollar grossing blockbuster) that is the reason the Titanic went under. Perhaps I'd better go over the details.

Well an old mouse is telling his grand-kids his adventure aboard the Titanic(and no it's nothing like An American Tail)and explains that a rich girl named Elizabeth and her family were boarding the Titanic and the girl's father was a giant in the whaling business. She's engaged to a man named Maltravers who she clearly dislikes and passes by a group of gypsies. She meets eyes with one gypsy named Don Juan and the two instantly fall in love.

Somewhere along the line Elizabeth gets the power to talk to animals(long pointless explanation)and learns of Maltraver's true intent to force her father to give him some whaling rights. It turns out Maltraver's can communicate with a group of sharks and they get a giant octopus to move an iceberg in the direction of the Titanic.

From the there the film seems predictable; the ship sinks, people die, huge tragedy. But no, the octopus holds the ship together long enough to make sure every passenger gets in a lifeboat(despite the fact there weren't enough lifeboats) and even saves the captain who famously went down with the ship. In the end nobody dies. Let me say that again. NONE OF THE PASSENGERS ON THE TITANIC DIED! That's right kids, did you have a great granddad who boarded the Titanic? Oh he didn't die, he's just hiding.

From my summation of the movie it doesn't sound so ungodly awful. Let me assure you it is. It takes the tragedy of Titanic and sprinkles it with its anti-whaling message and talking animals and happy ending where no one dies. Don't get me wrong whaling is bad but what does it have to do with the hundreds of people who lost their lives in what could've been an easily avoided tragedy. And you know what? That's what this movie is, a potentially easily avoided travesty.

This film is so bad if it weren't for the fact that there is no 0 star rating I wouldn't even rate it with 1 star. It's an insult to the lost souls of Titanic and to the target audience the movie was going for and to audiences in general. If you can just avoid it.

One of the often-debated theories among film critics is whether artistry can make up for the most extreme of subject matter. The 'extreme' being the degree to which a film can be seemingly tasteless or have a potential left of moral offense. It's a good enough theory, but a movie like "The Legend of the Titanic" really forces one to reconsider their perception on it. This could very well be the worst movie of its kind. Production-wise, it's just mediocre and flat, but its immoral and mindless attitude toward one of the most infamous disasters in human history strikes like a hammer blow to the head. Again and again and again.

The movie was made in Italy just a year after James Cameron's mega-blockbuster "Titanic" hit big screen there. With a film with that mush fiscal success, it was not surprise that an array of rip-offs and cinematic plunderers would appear on the horizon. But who would have ever imagined that a picture like "The Legend of the Titanic" would ever work. The movie is not live-action like Mr. Cameron's film or the marvelous 1950s picture "A Night to Remember." It is animated, sometimes with a computer, othertimes with a hand-drawn feel. Now this picture is charting itself into an ocean full of cinematic icebergs, but it is the way that the screenplay is written and the horrifyingly amoral ideas are played out that much it such an unredeemed fiasco.

Not only does it borrow heavily from James Cameron's film, but practically every Disney production featuring a talking animal over the last five decades. The central characters are not people aboard the RMS Titanic, but talking mice. According to a grandfather mouse who survived the sinking of the ship, the stories of 1500 people drowning in the icy waters of the North Atlantic was all a cover-up; that not a life was lost at all in 1912. Most of it is told in flashback (where'd that come from, huh?) and this introductory plot-flipper is just the first of four or five of the dumbest twists in cinematic history.

The biggest sin of the picture is the rewriting of a tragic event. The only possible thing that I can imagine was running through the screenwriters' heads was not to make a depressing, sad movie for children to see. But that goes back to my point that an animated movie about the Titanic disaster was an iffy premise to begin with. But even if we can forgive it for trying to make children forget that more than a thousand people lost their lives in a single night so many years ago, surely we cannot when it tries to develop a plot using dopey methods such as mice being infatuated with human females, dolphins that learn to talk when a human tear touches their nose (with a healthy dose of "magic moon-beams" attached), a chaste love story where the two lovers discover they're meant to be together after dancing for half a minute, and the inclusion of sharks and a giant octopus propelling an iceberg into the path of the ship. And when, for a second, it tries to treat the disaster head-on, the picture chooses to laugh it away in the very next scene. And it is not very far along before one realizes that it's far more concerned about protection of whales than it is about honoring a historical tragedy.

However, even if the RMS Titanic story was just a fairytale as this movie would like us to believe, "The Legend of the Titanic" would still be a disaster. That theory of redeeming subject matter requires artistry and there is none to be found. The animation is flat, uninspired, and marred with an interruption of hand-drawn images with computer-generated sweep-overs of the ship which I am certain were pulled from a Titanic documentary. The dubbing for the English-language print is dreadful. Voice work is flimsy and oftentimes a vocal will be heard when an animated character's mouth is clearly buttoned up.

It's almost as if "The Legend of the Titanic" wanted to infuriate and offend its audience. What's more horrifying is that lots of people went to see the movie in its home country and that it was followed by a loose remake, also about talking animals and the sinking of the ship, called "Titanic: The Legend Goes On..." a slightly better film (in both of its versions) but still insulting to history and the intelligence of the viewer. One thing many of us would like to do would be to sit in on a meeting where a project like this gets greenlit. Because I can't imagine why anybody thought that an animated movie about the sinking of the RMS Titanic was a good idea.

I've only seen some bits of it on YouTube before I think. I thought I never saw any foreign animated films like that before in my entire life. It doesn't even make any sense to me at all like the octopus named Tentacles who has a black snout but octopuses don't have snouts. They can breathe underwater, can't they? Of course octopus aren't mammals at all! I don't know why the octopus has a black snout in this awful foreign animated film. I'm sure it is one of the worst foreign animated films of all time. The animation looks kinda very cheesy.

If you're reading this, don't waste your money on this rubbish on DVD. Go abf watch James Cameron's 1997 film Titanic or any classic Disney animated films instead.

Currently, this Italian animated film is #28 on IMDb's infamous Bottom 100 list. In some ways, I am very surprised since it's not a particularly famous bad film and there were a lot of animated films in the 1970s which had just as terrible animation! Still, I do concede that it's a bad film...and not one I'd let kids watch unless I hated them.

The film begins with a grandpa mouse telling his grandkids his story about the Titanic. Oddly, then the film switches to the perspective of all the humans! What follows is a bizarro story of evil sharks and a scheme to destroy the whales?! Huh...somehow I missed this when I've watched documentaries about this 1912 disaster!

Let's talk about what I really liked about the film... Okay, finished.

Okay, now let's talk about what I didn't like. The animation was very poor, with a very low cel count (making the characters move in a choppy fashion) and often only animated small portions of the characters in an effort to make the film less expensive. So, often the characters expressions were flat and a bit zombie-like. Also, to save money, bad CGI was sometimes used that looked so stunningly different from the other animation that I was a bit surprised. This sure ain't a Disney product! In many ways, it's akin to the cheaper Hanna-Barbera films of decades ago. The story was just bizarre and stupid...'nuff said about that. The voices used were occasionally not terrible. As for the music, it was odd to hear so much cheap electronic music (made using a keyboard) for a film set in 1912.

So my final verdict is that I did hate the film. But I still wonder how it made it to the Bottom 100 list. After all, there have been a lot of crappy cartoons (such as "Pinocchio in Outer Space")....so why did this one manage to achieve the notoriety of the Bottom 100 list? I'd like to understand this...as well as a studio's decision to make such a misguided cartoon!