A lot of people harboured a sinking feeling about Titanic coming back to the big screen. I wasn't among them. The 100th anniversary of the real-life event was bound to be flooded with free media attention, and against all odds, the key players involved (James Cameron, Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet) have only continued to float higher and higher in popular acclaim. The only real question was how would the movie itself hold up--especially in 3D?
With your help, Matt, it held up just swimmingly, thank you very much.
First things first: can you back me up when I say 3D isn't synonymous with eye-popping spectacle? People have already forgotten why they were so enraptured by Avatar's 3D: it was the restraint, simplicity, and immersive quality of the effect, not a gimmick that pulls images off the screen and viewers out of the film. James Cameron's approach was almost counter-revolutionary; like Jack White stripping back rock-and-roll to make it feel new again. I'm glad to see he guided you and your team down the same path for the re-release of this unapologetically overboard - but nonetheless spectacular - crowning achievement.
From the underwater sequences in the first act to the thrilling climax, nothing suffered in the post-conversion. The low-lit nighttime sequences felt like they were given special attention, and I was able to appreciate the painstaking details of the production more than ever. These elements matter in a big sweeping epic. So I hope your meticulous efforts are able to draw in the haters and young-ins who missed the boat the first time around. After all, your new work on this film is really just the tip of the… okay okay, I'll stop.
But I'll never let go.