User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 503 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 59 out of 503

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. StephenB.
    Dec 26, 2008
    Mr. Cameron started his career by establishing himself as a great science-fiction writer/director, able to simultaneously be exciting and smart. He delievered on that promise with the two "Terminator" films and the completely awesome "Aliens". In fact, in some jurisdictions, not liking "Aliens" is considered a criminal act. However, having proved his talent at greatness, he decided to switch gears and try sucking for a change. And so we have... this... abomination. Gone are the great writing and pacing that anchored his previous sci-fi outings, instead replaced with a laughable script, incessant repetition and miscasting galore. There are no characters, just cardboard cutouts. The historic mistakes are mind-boggling. Even composer James Horner turns in a huge pile of cliched, faux-"romantic" gloop, all the more travesty if you remember he did the rousing score of "Aliens". Yes, the SFX is good and probably the only part of the film I will ever find anything positive to say. I have no idea why the director abandoned the niche he was most successful in for another where he fails. The final impression: "I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit". Expand
  2. CodyG.
    Oct 25, 2008
  3. KaitlynnH.
    Oct 20, 2008
  4. JakeL
    Sep 26, 2008
  5. Roy
    Sep 4, 2008
  6. Jaeq
    Jul 26, 2008
    There's Great, Good, Okay, Bad, and Terrible when it comes to movies, This one is somewhere between okay and bad, don't mean to be sexist, but many girls and women tend to see movies for other things than what they are, in this case, pretty boy leonardo decaprio in a 4 hour softcore porno, same idea with brokeback mountain , imagine a stupid chick flick that takes a 5/10, now put homsexual romance in it, goldmine. Expand
  7. JamsB.
    Jun 24, 2008
    I would have given it about a 5 as it is an average try-hard hollywood blockbuster but the fact that you see Kate Winslet's horrible naked body makes it a zero.
  8. JasonP.
    Apr 16, 2008
  9. Kims
    Jan 7, 2008
  10. conners
    Jan 4, 2008
  11. BonnieH.
    Dec 11, 2007
  12. ChrisB.
    Jul 5, 2007
    Worst movie ever made. Were it not for Kate Winslet being naked for a couple of minutes, I'd have gouged my eyes out. There probably would have been a class-action lawsuit against James Cameron because his movie caused blindness due to eye-gouging had Kate Winslet not been naked. It's a bullshit romance. Go watch Rambo or something if you want to see a real movie. You know, one where there's no character development and shit gets blown up because it's awesome. Expand
  13. ConorM.
    Apr 27, 2007
  14. CiaranG.
    Jan 4, 2007
  15. CorinnaW.
    Jan 3, 2007
  16. AmyM
    Dec 9, 2006
  17. JimmyP.
    Nov 18, 2006
  18. NathanT
    Oct 24, 2006
    The idea that this was a better film than "L.A. Confidential" or the nominated "Boogie Nights" or "The Sweet Hereafter" is plain silly. But watching "Titanic" again for the first time in a few years, I was struck by how much of it does work. Unfortunately what does work is hampered at every turn by what doesn't. James Cameron doesn't let the British shine (this is an American movie) and he can't resist the urge to do those cutesy references to the era of the film (and aren't we all so clever looking back knowing who Picasso is while the benighted fools aboard think he's doomed to be a starving artist?). Yet what works is the film's romance, as cornball and contrived as it may be. Far from Leonardo DiCaprio's best performance (that would be as Howard Hughes in the far, far superior "The Aviator"), Kate Winslet keeps the film afloat on her shoulders and provides a compelling reason to watch "Titanic" even as it sinks (literally). And remember how fashionable it was to say in 1997 that you only liked the last hour of it when all the 'cool' special effects take over? Regretfully there isn't enough heat in those dramatic closing scenes and the direction feels off for that material. But as the 1990s was the decade of the period piece winning the Best Picture prize ("American Beauty" and "Silence of the Lambs" notwithstanding), this predictably swept the Oscars that year. It's a decent, occasionally overwrought film that sold more tickets and ran for longer than it deserved to. But as a Best Picture winner, it's sandwiched in between one of the 1990s best films, "The English Patient" and the delightfully romantic "Shakespeare in Love". Those two are deserving of every second they ask of the viewer. Expand
  19. KeithH
    Oct 20, 2006
    The world
  20. FrederickS.
    Jun 10, 2006
    The wettest and most hyped movie of all time.
  21. chrissy
    Jan 5, 2006
    Saw it 7 times in theaters. enough said.
  22. miker.
    Jan 3, 2006
  23. Jake
    Dec 18, 2005
    Not all that bad, but definately not worth the 600 million at the box office and the 13 oscars. The film was very entertaining and visually stunning, but the romantic aspects of the film seemed both cliche and fabricated. It was pretty much Romeo and Juliet mixed with Lady and the Tramp. But the ending was amazing and gorgeous to look at. A lot like Pearl Harbor, i was disappointed that hollywood could take horrible disaster and turn it into a mediocre romance flick. Ultimately entertaining, but left a whole lot to be desired! Expand
  24. JimG.
    Nov 28, 2005
    Muzak for the eyes. Tedious, vacuous, schmaltz.
  25. TonyB.
    Nov 25, 2005
  26. [Anonymous]
    Nov 4, 2005
    T2 is more exciting, but Titanic is certainly worth a look. It certainly deserved Oscars, but maybe not eleven of them. It actually isn't boring...James Cameron proves himself versatile, as the movie flows along well...w/o fight sequences and battles in his action work. THe romance is actually well written...not too deep, but not phony or shallow, and for real, as it stands the test of disaster. In fact, this movie's charaters HATE phoniness, in a way both girls and guys can relate too and embrace. James Horner's score was great, too. Expand
  27. stephens.
    Jul 3, 2005
    Actually the rating should be a 2 or 3, but considering this won Oscars, a 1 or zero is appropriate. The absolute worst "best film" On a par with such other successful stinkers such as Forrest Gump and Deer Hunter.
  28. KellyE.
    Jun 1, 2005
    I found it too unbeliveable.
  29. BrunoM.
    May 19, 2005
    I don't like romance.
  30. NikkiK.
    Feb 28, 2005
  31. SinanR.
    Feb 22, 2005
    The best movie ever, excluding the nudity scene.
  32. Mike
    Feb 14, 2005
    Great movie, from start to the ending. I was afraid that this movie would be boring, but it actually was very good.
  33. sugamomma
    Jan 22, 2005
  34. AmandaH
    Jan 7, 2005
  35. MichelleL
    Jan 1, 2005
  36. IlzeS
    Dec 1, 2004
  37. AndrewM
    Nov 23, 2004
    I will admit, this film was already tainted in my eyes before I had seen it - before I had even seen the trailer. The reason: the whole premise of this film just rubs me the wrong way. It did when I first read about, it did when I watched it (the one and only time) and it continues to do so today. A fictional love story set aboard one of the greatest disasters the world has even seen... Am I the only one a little put off by this notion?! If so, I am wholly comfortable with my solitude. It just strikes me as either poor judgement by the filmmakers, or a distinct lack of confidence on their part that this story could not be pulled off without a vicarious angle. Now I appreciate that the story of the famous ship and its fate was a large part of film...but let's be honest, it's not what the film was really about. It was the love story. The characters. Their story. And that's fine - or would have been, anywhere else! On a side note, the fact that Di Caprio was involved certainly didn't help things - he is one of the most overrated actors around. Winslet on the other hand was an asset, as were most of the supporting cast. The writing was impressive, at times memorable. The direction was as resolute as humanly possible. The costumes, the set decorations, the art direction, it's all grand and completely pertinent to the setting - but I can't get past the thought that this film would have been so much more respectable, and could have worked every bit as well, on a less infamous and melodramatic stage as the Titanic. I know many will say I'm missing the whole point: that this is fantasy set against a historical backdrop. If so, again, it just leaves me cold. The bottom line is that I give this film 5/5 for execution, and 0/5 for foundation; when I watch a film about the Titanic, just gimme the facts! Expand
  38. Fantasy
    Jun 22, 2004
  39. DaveC.
    Jun 1, 2004
  40. EveningSun
    May 25, 2004
  41. RosaA.
    Apr 25, 2004
  42. ZackW.
    Mar 24, 2004
  43. RobertC.
    Feb 25, 2004
    I do give at least one credit to's the most mysterious commericially wise. Like how a film like this could win nearly twice as much awards as works of art like The Godfather or Apocalyse Now. Was it really that good, or was the entire year a mediocre joke in cinematic history. How could a overly-expensive film starring merely a pretty face cause a whole list of fangirls (whom are dead to me for making this successful) to make this an unbearable phenomenon. Bottom line is though it's an alright film, with great visuals and decent acting, there's no reason that is ever shouldn't been this large, for it honestly doesn't deserve a 10th of it's worldwide gross nor 11 Oscars. Expand
  44. GaborA.
    Feb 17, 2004
    Remains at the top of my refuse to see list.
  45. PatC.
    Jan 8, 2004
    The greatest button-pusher of all time. Gets away with being too long: Riveting storytelling and great editing. Who cares if it doesn't always ring true. Someone should. I do. It's not enough that so many drowned so long ago, now we're losing fine jewelry too. Will this tragedy ever end?
  46. KatieP.
    Dec 21, 2003
    How can you not love this movie?
  47. O.H.VictorRajK.
    Jun 12, 2003
  48. KonradR.
    May 2, 2003
  49. RickJ.G.
    Jan 15, 2003
    The only aspects of this vastly overrated movie I enjoyed was David Warner as the villain body guard and the special effects. Warner simply makes a good villain and the movie is a visual achievement. I finally gave in and saw the film immediately after it won all those academy awards and, unlike the herd that loves this movie, I wasn't falling over myself to get back to the theater and see it again and again. You don't need to spend $200 million to write a good screenplay. Instead we are subjected to a lame after-school romance special with lousy, contrived dialog. No wait, Jack tells Rose she's the most amazing person he has ever known! I hadn't heard that before. I was laughing at the silly proceedings by that point in the movie. I wish Rose had checked out on the deck at the beginning of the movie and not forced me to wait nearly three hours to finally see the ship sink sinking. Also, a little pipsqueak like DiCaprio does not make for a convincing street tough. Bad casting move. Romanticing life on the lower decks of the ship is a major blight on historical memory. Titanic is the best example in our time of wholesale bribery effectively used to buy a bunch of academy awards (None of them for the movie's acting, for obvious reasons). Collapse
  50. AaronS.
    Dec 31, 2002
  51. Robert
    Dec 26, 2002
    Quite possibly one of the most boring, overblown, overlong movies I have ever seen in my life. The movie simply was not interesting at all, and it ran far too long. 3 hour running times are fine if there is actually an interesting plot, but this was just horribly boring.
  52. Josh
    Oct 19, 2002
  53. RobertH.
    Aug 3, 2002
  54. Isabel
    Jul 1, 2002
    This was one of the few movies I ever walked out on. I never fail to be stupified by those who like this silly thing. With a horrendous script and lame acting, this movie commits the egregious sin of taking an actual heartwrenching event and turning it into sentimental Hollywood mush.
  55. AndraB.
    Jun 8, 2002
    ..and it's a generous grade, inspired by the fx (even if we've seen better in Matrix, Haunted, etc). The subject: another unhappy love story (plenty of them since Romeo & Juliet), but we accept it. The message: very uncertain (maybe 'fate is irevocable', maybe 'carpe diem', maybe 'life goes on', maybe 'love is blind' or 'love never dies') but we accept it. But the contradictions, the sense of incomplete, the horrid-acting of Leonardo something and the fat miss with red hair, the way action develops, those pathetic love scenes ... that's hard to accept from a film quoted .... 11 Academy Award nominees??? No more comments. Expand
  56. NicoleL.
    May 30, 2002
  57. JohnT.
    Apr 6, 2002
    Certainly there have been films more desserving of 12 acadamy awards (The Lord of the Rings, Gosford Park, Ghost) but Titanic is an enjoyable, if an overly long experience.
  58. DonP.
    Mar 22, 2002
  59. ConradR.
    Jul 9, 2001
    Visual masterpiece which is one of a few historical movies which actually gets the facts right. Unfortunately, the movie editing is bad, and a vital piece is cut out where Jack is helped up onto the first class deck - as portrayed in the movie: it is impossible for him to wander around the ship as he pleases.
  60. ChrisR.
    Jul 7, 2001
    Cameron takes one of the most dramatic stories in history and turns it into an hackneyed third-rate fictional soap opera. Poorly written, acted and directed it represents the worst of major Hollywood film making.
  61. SteveT.
    Jun 27, 2001
    Possibly the worst movie I have ever seen in my life. Visually, it's a masterpiece. But the screenplay/story is just horrible. The f-word was never said during that decade and I hate the way Rose was in cold water for over 30 minutes and somehow never had hypothermia. Another thing is that 1st class people would never even think of talking or be seen with lower class people. There wasn't even a way for the low class people to go the deck! Main point is watch the movie with the volume down and watch about 10 minutes and that's it. Expand

Generally favorable reviews - based on 34 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 25 out of 34
  2. Negative: 3 out of 34
  1. 100
    You don't just watch Titanic, you experience it.