I think "snob" implies that you judge other people for seeing (and/or enjoying) Titanic.

I hated the movie, but I loved Victor Garber.

I am Plei. Only good moment of the movie was VG staring at the painting of the ship as she was going down.

The SFX were good, but I'm a character/plot person for movies and astounding effects will never make up for bad character/plot.

I saw Titanic on TV, and thank heavens, because I could watch something else for the entire first half (it was split up over two nights) and then tune in for the disaster-porn.

Which, I mean, I have seen a lot of disaster-porn. I know there are better reasons to show what is happening at the water line than "they handcuffed my hero to a sinking boat!" Where is the Fred Astaire-level guest star? Where the random O J Simpson sighting? The subplots were not nearly ludicrous enough, and not enough famous people got to die, and anyway a death any less OTT than flames and/or a 100-story drop (thank you Richard Chamberlain) hardly counts toward the entertaining body count.

Really, a historical disaster movie is stuck either way. If it's meant to be Reverently Historical, then it can't get away with idiotic invented love stories. (Like Titanic wasn't interesting enough without teh sex??) But if it's not meant to be Reverently Historical, then there's no reason not to go OTT and have Loni Anderson on board, and have her hair act as a flotation device.

I think "snob" implies that you judge other people for seeing (and/or enjoying) Titanic.

Well, I did (sniff). What do I have to do, an (eyeroll)?

Where do I fit in, if I both saw AND enjoyed Titanic, but was embarassed about both of those facts, even at the time?

an (eyeroll)?

= @@

I think you win.

Xpost, but it still works.

But if it's not meant to be Reverently Historical, then there's no reason not to go OTT and have Loni Anderson on board, and have her hair act as a flotation device.

Is there really any chance of Loni Anderson's hair getting wet if she's dunked in water? As I recall, she has other flotation devices that would stabilize her at the water's surface first.

I hated the movie, but I loved Victor Garber.

I loved Victor Garber, I loved the art direction and cinematography and costumes, and, really, I just loved all the actors. Including (extremely grudgingly) Leonardo DiCaprio, who struck me as much, much better than he had any right to be given what a vulgar little asshole he appeared to be from all his interviews (and still is, for all I know). The script sucked lumpy desiccated diseased donkey dick just about as hard as any sucky script ever, oh dear God how it sucked, but that just made the movie perversely even more interesting to me. I can't think of anything else I've seen that was so wretchedly written and so very nearly saved by having all the wretchedness acted out by so many intelligent, thoughtful actors attending and responding to each other so beautifully.

Plus, the part of me that would later be utterly smitten with Buffy responded and still responds with a visceral thrill of pure raw joy to the power shot of Kate Winslet, all sturdy and womanly and ferocious, axe in hand, marching down a flooded hallway to rescue the boy-damsel in distress.

Still the shittiest fuckin' script in all of film history, just about.

He's saying people who don't see it are being needlessly snobbish.

Is that more defensible?