I don't mind movies changing history, or taking various different variations on a story but this movie is nothing more but a piece of Nazi propaganda, used to especially make the English look bad this time. The did the story in such a way that it seemed as if the greed and lust for money was the reason for the Titanic to sink.But of course this angle could had also been taken years later, in basically every other Titanic, so I'll judge this movie as a movie, rather than a propaganda piece.At this point, I have seen every relevant Titanic movie. As far as Titanic movies are concerned this version is not amongst the best ones. The movie feels rather rushed and in terms of its look and style, it also isn't the most impressive version around. It must had been far from the costly Titanic movie to make, which can be really seen in the movie. It doesn't ever use big establishing shots of the ship or its interiors. Also the actual sinking is done quite simply, as we get to see very little people actually dying or struggling to survive. Still I must say that they did a good job with its available resources and little money they had to spend. They used some creative solutions.Also its story, aside from its underlying main plot, is a quite well done one. The movie has many different characters in it and it decides not to have really one or two main characters. So what we have now are many different characters, with many different stories and backdrops. It ensures that the movie also remains interesting and the movie doesn't really ever have any slow moments it. It's also a quite short movie, so that also surely helps.It could had actually been a much better movie, had it not felt and looked that much rushed.6/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

this movie went along at a good clip... there were so many characters and stories that sometimes I got some of these English Frauleins confused with one another but they were all so lovely. One long suffering lovely reminded me of Margit Karstinsen.Movie reminded me of the George Kuchar's "La Verbotene Voyage" I wonder if he saw it too, but it's not likely he did, when he made his sudsy seafaring disaster film in the mid 80s. Lots of torrid goings on revolving around a central idea/ catastrophe/concept...The ending is so nice and dark I'm certainly not a Nazi but I didn't mind the moral that the capitalists are evil and above the law. it's capital that starves millions of people to death, irrespective of what the deal was with the titanic! I took it as the Marxist interpretation and not as so much anti English particularly. it was just kind of fun to see what a German movie about English speaking characters sounds like.I LIKED IT WAY BETTER THAN the 97 version with the ridiculous running around shooting while the ship is sinking over problems domestic and I loved when the cable channel introduced this film saying "nobody was king of the world in this version." at the same time this version delivered happy endings for some of the little lambs...instead of the drawn out tragedy of "my heart will go on and I will give the blue diamond (as in the almonds?) a dramatic trajectory..." cornball almond joy saccharine schmalz Hollywood poo.Well, I prefer, actually, being pandered to with a few people living happily ever after. Alright! Another plus size is that this film was made long before it was fashionable for hot actors to whisper all their lines with bedroom eyes 24/7.Anyway, the pacing was really great and it was quite involving so much was going on you really had no thought of the ship being doomed somehow even when the intrigue turns to the fact that icy cold disaster is in fact on the way.One day michael hinie should remake it and they can REWIND the sinking of the ship so we can feel COMPLICITOUS as we just dip in and dip out cathartically the water.

This last film by the Tobis Director Herbert Selpin had a long wait to be shown after the war... An extraordinary film which takes one of the biggest catastrophes of the 20th century in order to show human greatness and human weakness, chivalry, and cowardly failure. In part, the director uses historic persons, men and woman who take part in the first voyage of the boat that at the time, was the largest in the world. Every one(in the cast)even in the smallest roles, contributes their acting talent to at least give hint of character without exaggeration. Dialogue and camera work are polished. Convincing in its acting structure, this film not in the least gives proof of the achievement the German film once was capable.

Slowly some of the Nazi film industry's work product is becoming available by video and by DVD. Not everything (except if you deal with extreme - right wing groups) but some of their material. TITANIC is one of the few acceptable films.I think the reason it is acceptable is that we are aware of social inequalities in the disaster that were not officially noted in 1912. The treatment of steerage passengers for example (more first and second class men survived than third class women). The misappropriation of an entire lifeboat by Sir Cosmo and Lady Duff Gordon and their small party was another. So was the survival of the President of the White Star Line, J. Bruce Ismay (not Sir Bruce Ismay - he was never knighted before 1912, and he was a social pariah after 1912). But that's just it - Ismay and the Duff Gordons were socially ruined by their survival and the attending circumstances. The British Inquiry of Lord Mersey was not too harsh on them, but the American Inquiry of Senator William Alden Smith certainly was. Ismay was all too happy to leave New York City after Smith got through with him.So, yes, the story is truthfully full of social unfairness and bigotry and selfishness. But there is also heroism and self sacrifice, and the Goebbels' "Ministry of Information and Propaganda" overlooked that part. Molly Brown, Isidor and Ida Strauss, Benjamin Guggenheim, Thomas Andrews, Lightoller, Philips and Bride, are not mentioned - why should they be. Goebbels wanted to use the disaster as a weapon to poison German and Axis audiences against Britain, America, and Jews. Why honor Americans like Brown, Britains like Andrews, Lightoller, Philips and Bride, and Jews like the Strausses and Guggenheim? So he jettisoned them.From a technical standpoint TITANIC was an amazing film for 1943 - in fact the British film A NIGHT TO REMEMBER supposedly used some of the scenes of the sinking liner from TITANIC. But the propaganda is always there.Curiously, the British and Americans did not think of using the war to make a film called LUSITANIA. It might have been a sufficiently more honest answer to Goebbels lies and half-truths. The closest I have seen to that (aside from brief mentions of the Lusitania in FOR ME AND MY GAL, 'TIL THE CLOUDS ROLL BY, and NIGHT AND DAY) was a sequence in the Mitchel Leisin film ARISE MY LOVE about the sinking of the steamer Athenia in September 1939 (when it was sunk by a U-boat without warning - Goebbels and Hitler caused an information freeze on that incident). Now, perhaps, we can do films about the Lancastria disaster (bombing and strafing fleeing refugees from Dunkirk with glee - and costing 3,000 - 4,000 lives) or the Cap Ancona massacre of concentration camp victims (about 6,000 lives or more). They show, in my opinion, the selfishness, greed, and class distinctions practiced by Nazis.