( Credit: photobucket.com)You’re probably asking the same question I was when I heard about this, “Wasn’t the first film about an actual boat that sunk? And didn’t nearly 95% of its passengers on board die?” Historical facts like that though haven’t got in the way of Asylum Productions creating their straight to DVD movie, released on the 24th August.
The story, if you can call it a story is this; on the 100th anniversary of the original voyage, a modern luxury liner christened 'Titanic 2' follows the path of its namesake. (As you can tell a lot of work went into the plot.) The new ship has iceberg detecting radars and a reinforced bow (someone has done their homework.) But it hasn’t accounted for an 800mph tsunami resulting from global warming that hurls an iceberg into the side of the new ship (which isn’t made from the same strong material the front is because that would be silly.) The passengers and crew try and fight to stay alive but really it ends the exact same way. (Sorry to spoil it but when you name a boat after ‘Titanic’ what do you think is going to happen?)
From the outset the film is never going to be successful. The director should be fined for the numerous factual errors alone, my favourite being just 30 minutes in. Allegedly following the same path as the original, ‘Titanic 2’ pulls out of the dock and sails nicely past the Statue of Liberty, I could have sworn the first ship set off from England and was heading for New York?
As well as that, the ship must have one of those new handbrakes where it stops the boat immediately as soon as the propellers are turned off. I’m no ship expert but I don't think boats are capable of that.
If that wasn’t enough the dialogue and acting is definitely something else. To name a few gems;
“It may look like its predecessor but underneath it’s anything but,” and “It seems like history is repeating itself,” shows the pure imagination of the script writers. Even the cover of the DVD gives away the ending, 'Lightening Strikes Twice.' But you can’t blame the actors either; if you got a script through that had the words ‘Titanic 2’ on the front you wouldn’t give it your all. In fact, if I was nibbling on my last tin of Spam and was sheltering from the winter weather in a cardboard box I wouldn’t even accept an offer to be an extra in this film.
The tragic love story of Rose and Jack, portrayed by Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio has been replaced by Brooke Burns, (she was in Baywatch but obviously not as famous as The Hoff or Pamela) as well as Bruce Davison and Shane Van Dyke. (What you haven’t heard of him either? Shane Van Dyke is the star in hit movies like ‘The Blair Nurse Project’ and ‘Murder 101: If wishes were horses.’ You can’t even make this stuff up!) And that’s not it. To try and complicate matters they’ve introduced sub-plots that have nothing to do with the story and don’t move the film on at all.
The special effects and CGI are left to be desired for and make the Atari look high tec. The constant jump from computer animation to real time just highlights how poor this film is and quite frankly I’ve seen better effects from the original Thunderbirds.
Asylum Productions are known for releasing ‘mockbusters’ like ‘Snakes on a train’ and ‘Transmorphers’ but they have definitely pushed the boat out here. If you’ve got an hour and a half of your life you don’t want back then STILL DON’T watch this film. Give 'Gigli' another try or maybe 'Anaconda' but NEVER watch this, it’s too late for me. Save yourselves.
From imitation special effects to the ridiculous amounts of silicon breasts, and even a toothless coast guard thrown in for good measure, this has to be the worst film I’ve ever seen and will ever see. I’m only hoping they’re not planning Titanic 3.
Rating:
1/10 (And that’s only because it had A LOT of silicon breasts)
No comments:
Post a Comment