Computer-generated imagery and other visualization techniques reveal how it would look if all the water was removed from RMS Titanic's final resting place.Computer-generated imagery and other visualization techniques reveal how it would look if all the water was removed from RMS Titanic's final resting place.Computer-generated imagery and other visualization techniques reveal how it would look if all the water was removed from RMS Titanic's final resting place.
Russell Boulter
- Narrator
- (voice)
Brad Cartner
- Narrator
- (voice)
Paul-Henri Nargeolet
- Self - Co-Director, Titanic Mapping Project
- (as Paul-Henry Nargeolet)
Thomas Brown
- Self - Hoteller
- (as Thomas William Solomon Brown)
Featured reviews
So much time is devoted to whether the ship broke apart at the surface or further down, and the show teases you it might be answered or given info to suggest a possible break up, but then all you get is some mysterious model about debris fields that never really is explained, video of stoic men looking at computers, some fancy graphics and no answer or data to back up an answer or model of the sinking. Then a blurb about what it might look like in the future and some stuff about preservation. Waste of time.
I really liked it. They didn't actually drain the sea. I don't remember much but it was just cool. I watched it for school. I liked seeing under the ocean. It looked really real. And the computer graphics were cool, too. --Cameron, age 8
As others here note, the repetition and faux "drama" blunts the pleasure and value of seeing this, even to someone interested in the topic.
Instead of a calm and sane review of what was accomplished, and time to look over the new model, we get an incessantly ominous junk-music soundtrack, constantly tense narration, and camera work that cuts away from every remark as if to mark it as profound or revelatory.
Pretty soon, I too cut away.
Who's minding the store at National Geographic? Who sets the goals, the story-line, and the style guidelines?
Who thinks that "if some drama is good, then more is better, and too much is just enough"?
Instead of a calm and sane review of what was accomplished, and time to look over the new model, we get an incessantly ominous junk-music soundtrack, constantly tense narration, and camera work that cuts away from every remark as if to mark it as profound or revelatory.
Pretty soon, I too cut away.
Who's minding the store at National Geographic? Who sets the goals, the story-line, and the style guidelines?
Who thinks that "if some drama is good, then more is better, and too much is just enough"?
I love most things on the Titanic. This is a cool doco, but stretched out to 45 minutes by repeating the same "now, as never seen before, the ocean drained away" and lots of slow dramatic statements like "and on that deadly night, when disaster struck, an iceberg, it tore a hole" like, it's really not new info. Very repetitive, lots of seen before footage, with a few cool views of CGI ship with the water drained. Kinda background TV while you're playing on your phone :/
There is some fascinating information in this documentary, but in about 45 minutes of documentary, there are only maybe 10-15 minutes of actual content. The information is heavily punctuated by repeated panning over the model of the wreck and the animation of "draining the sea floor", which of course, doesn't really happen. The narrator breaks from his narrative every few minutes to remind us how amazing it is that we are seeing the Titanic like never before. This is hyped up with dramatic music and sweeping views of the digital model . It extremely repetitive and left me waiting anxiously for more through the entire length of the film, but "more" was never delivered. So much filler, so little true content.
Did you know
- ConnectionsEdited into Drain the Oceans: Ghost Ships of the Atlantic (2018)
Details
- Runtime
- 46m
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.78 : 1 / (high definition)
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content