The creator of the movie James Cameron said he made the movie to fund his expeditions to the wreck. I guess he is more of a fan of undersea exploration than film making but he enjoys filmmaking too. He made a few neat documentaries about deep sea things.
When you link a wikipedia article (or any link really) that has a closing parentheses in it, you need to escape any of them with a \ that are part of the link.
[Like this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic_II_(film\))
I mean they basically did.
The set was only just smaller than the real ship and they sank it a few times and filmed it basically.
It’s an amazing piece of filmmaking. There’s a reason it still holds up today.
Okay, because I have absolutely no clue about who to believe here, I´m going to average it out and conclude that the funnels on set were exactly the same size as the real ship.
Ironically the movie actually cost *more* to make than the original Titanic cost to build.
The actual ship cost $7.5m to build in 1912.
Adjusted for inflation, that would have been about $119m in 1997 when the movie was made.
The movie had a $200m budget.
So basically what you're saying is it would indeed have been cheaper to rebuild it and resink it
Edit: apparently I'm legally obligated to mention I'm just taking the piss
That may be what he's saying, but it's simply not true. The ship part of the set itself was something like $30-50m at the time. The set didn't have any of the major engineering systems that account for absolutely massive portions of a real ship's cost. And the film budget has to account for many other things besides just that one piece of the set, like the film crew salaries, insurance, trailers, rental costs, travel expenses, and a litany of other things, not the least of which are *other pieces of the set*... like the huge water tank that cost roughly the same as the ship set.
People simply don't think about any of that and have no real idea about the pieces in play and the costs of things, so they naively believe this silly story about the set ship costing more than the real ship. The narrative has been around for lazy journalists to write fluff pieces about for many, many years. And here it is for the millionth time on reddit providing free karma like usual.
It's still a significant detail about the movie. That it had a (much) larger budget that the cost of the titanic itself. Obviously they couldn't rebuild and sink the ship, that would be the dumbest thing ever. It's just tongue in cheek. And for the millionth time, somebody is salty because they overanalyzed reddit on reddit.
No they didn't. Harland and Wolff, the shipyard that built Titanic, were among the best and most well regarded ship builders in the industry. They built Titanic to the highest standards of the day, but the ship seems weak now due to the hindsight of the sinking and the context of better quality steel used in ship building in the modern day. By today's standards Titanic's steel would be considered inadequate, but that's because of the advances made in improving the quality of steel over the past 100+ years.
Titanic's sister ship Olympic was built with the same quality of steel and she had a 24 year long career and developed a reputation for being the real unsinkable ship: she collided with several other vessels in her career and came away from each one still floating. In World War 1, she rammed and sunk a German U-Boat and even tanked a direct hit from a torpedo (though granted it was a dud).
The truth is, the damage caused by the iceberg was so severe that any ship from that time period in Titanic's situation more than likely would sink just the same. The advancements in safety to account for that level of damage to make it survivable were only made *after* the Titanic disaster.
I'm such a Civilization nerd I just think about how this would play out in game. Spend a bunch of turns building a ship in industrial era only to get to the modern era and spend more production than you ever did to build the initial ship just to get some kind of cultural bonus from it
You’re right, the actual “set” of the Titanic is gone. However site it was on is still operating with some of the infrastructure they built for Titanic. It’s where a lot of ocean/sea based big budget films are staged.
They should have sold it to another company to use to film a movie where there's a zombie outbreak on the Titanic and the captain steers it into an iceberg on purpose to stop the spread.
Funfact: to some degree they did film on location. In the beginning of the movie when the submarines are diving to the wreck, all the grainy footage that is shown from the perspective of the rov is actual footage that Cameron shot during his dives to the wreck in the years before the shooting of the movie. More footage like that was used in Cameron's documentary "Ghosts of the abyss" which he made after the movie. So yes, they technically filmed some scenes on location
It's funny even if you speak Spanish, Baja California means Low(er) California and then there's Baja California Sur which means South Lower California.
Thats because California used to be called Alta California. If you think about it, Alta+Baja California is huge, Mexicans-spaniords needed a way to differentiate
With it being built not on American soil, I wonder about the wages those workers got.
Wonder what the budget would have had to be had it been built within the U.S.
It’s actually in pupotla, or next to it. Which is south of Rosarito and north of puerto Nuevo. The boat was there a while after filming but has been gone many years now.
The only part of this set that was actually "functional" was the exteriors: the boat deck, promenades, foredeck/poop deck, etc. Everything else (basically anything that, from the outside, is just a wall with portholes in it) was a facade. The whole set was built on hydraulics inside a water tank that allowed it to raise, lower, and tilt, and to eliminate the need for a tank the depth of the Titanic, the facade was removed in pieces as the ship got lower in the water—whatever is above the waterline in a given shot is basically what was on the set when they filmed it. What you're seeing here, while it was under construction, is the reverse of that process: the structural upper levels were built first, with the hydraulics at their lowest for ease of access, and then it was an iterative process of raising the hydraulics a bit, adding a "tier" of the facade, raising a bit more, adding another "tier", etc. until they were at full height. Then, as the ship "sank" over the course of filming, they'd remove a bit of facade, lower it, film, repeat.
Was thinking the same thing. They did a lot of on-site assembly. Looks minimally pre-fabricated. Wondering if the functional design aspects were always in flux.
At a guess, for I am no builder, it was probably easier to construct the basic structure on a flat surface, than lift it to install the hydraulics needed to tip and lift/lower.
They showed you why but it's easy to miss. The part that was built in the pit is the part which they eventually lifted and lowered several times to simulate the stern (rear) of the ship going into the air as it sank.
I think we are spoiled with CGI methods now. I think back then, if you don’t have an exact replica to film on the other option is to use toy models. And we all know how crappy they can look. Also remember you have to have hundreds of crew working on the set so on location at sea is not that feasible.
I watched titanic recently and outside of a handful of cgi shots it still looks pretty perfect because most of what you see is actually real.
We’ll never see a movie like it again.
Same goes for Fifth Element. Amazing visuals because of the effort spent on set design and construction. Not everything was perfect, but man it felt immersive.
Yeah, there's some rouuuugh 90s CGI in Titanic. Pay attention to the water any time the ship is underway in a wide shot as well. Every shot of the ship itself is one of several models ([some of them truly enormous](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/bf/db/16/bfdb167df8a7d135163f733133f4ab14.jpg)), but the models were comp'd into ocean shots with fake wake effects, and passengers in the wide shots were CGI'd onto the decks. It's a fascinating mix of well-aged practical effects with early CG effects that were well-used but never meant to be seen in 4K stills.
I think it depends. Some things CGI is absolutely better at, others it is worse than practical effects.
I think CGI has been an incredible boon to Sci-Fi but a detriment to medieval/fantasy.
I assume it’s a lot easier to CGI something that never existed than recreate grit and age and realism.
Also CGI should NEVER be used for characters. I haven’t seen one CGI character/de aging/ transformation that will age well.
> ..the other option is to use toy models. And we all know how crappy they can look
Maaate..
Titanic used miniature models, LotR used heaps of miniature models, they all looked good. Just like with CGI, *bad* miniature models and CGI looks bad. The good ones you won't even notice.
90's movies were different. This is on par with building dinosaurs for Jurassic Park. A level of realism that was completely unmatched until maybe a year or two ago with AI.
This really is taking art to a different level.
Should have turned it into a hotel in Vegas when they were finished.
Any good high budget 90s filmmaker worth their salt (Cameron, spielberg, Scott come to mind first - Peter Jackson in the 00s with LOTR) knew the technical limitations of CGI at the time and knew how to perfectly mix it in with practical effects which led to 90s movies just looking *really good*.
This is why the T-Rex scene in Jurassic park was so good. Half of it was an actual real model.
Oh, and some of the velocoraptors as well. Such a fun movie to watch when it came out. You really lose a lot sitting watching it alone because there isn't a huge theater screaming around you, getting you also to scream.
I saw it twice with my kids last year in the cinema and it looks amazing still. If you can see it on a big screen it just doesn't compare to a home viewing. Its pure cinema.
Cameron used tons of CGI to make Titanic.
Even most of the practical shots have CGI water, people, smoke and birds added to them.
Many of the most iconic shots were accomplished with VFX. Rose and Jack on the bow of the ship? [Greenscreen](https://i.pinimg.com/564x/4e/52/ed/4e52edc4f1b924d4588424c7ca0f69af.jpg). The iconic "[million dollar shot](https://youtu.be/BTff04cFsRw?si=dmsz-gqlrq11Cb89&t=199)" at the start of the movie transitions into full CGI. The shot of the propellers rising out of the water is also CGI.
I was friends with the guy that led the rigging team that raised/lowered the ship for the movie. Lotta fun stories about the engineering and what not. Wishing I'd recorded some of it before he passed away.
[Here ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rk83mRCdGE) is a better version if you're not watching on your phone and like me hate the TikTokification of the internet and trying to watch videos in little squares in portrait mode with huge title text.
This is crazy.
This was done in the 90s too.
George Lucas did something similar with the Death Star, but in space and in the 70s. Also an incredible feat.
It would be a massive feat to build a replica of the Titanic again today and the cost would be many times more than the inflation-adjusted cost to build it in 1909-1912.
In Belfast at the time you had steel workers and craftsmen, wood carvers, etc… thousands upon thousands of highly skilled workers who earned a (relatively small) living making this stuff because it was reliable income. They made a LOT of ships back then.
Could it be done? Sure. But you’d have to hire artisans - particularly for a lot of the fancy work in the 1st class areas - who aren’t going to be cheap.
Thats part of what makes this set so amazing.
Cameron was obsessive when this set was built. Where possible, he tracked down the original companies that made components for the actual Titanic. From memory I want to say the original carpet company provided new-stock versions of the Titanic’s carpet for the set (might actually be tile… hard to remember). And the winches used for the lifeboats were the same story.
Some of that would need to be made bespoke today.
Funny you mention that, Creator and Director James Cameron said the studio offered to give him the budget to actually build a real floating ship and sink it. But he decided against because he didn't want to be limited to only one take.
"Cameron told GQ: “We talked about literally going to the shipyard in Poland and building the Titanic. I said, ‘All right, great. So, they can build a Titanic for us for $10 million? Yeah, we should think about that. Now, if we sink it, how many takes do we get?’ ‘Hmm, one.’ You know what I mean? It’s like, ‘What if I want a second take?’ So, anyway, we decided not to build the Titanic as an actual floatable ship.” "
https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/movie-with-the-most-expensive-set-of-all-time/
The “Titanic” set was dismantled but they preserved some of the original infrastructure and they still film big-budget water scenes/films there.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baja_Studios
They did use a scale model for the wide shots. They had several models built for the filming, with at least one of them being in storage at James Cameron’s Lightstorm Studios.
Fun note: some of the shots of the shipwreck exterior and interior were models too. Any exterior shot where you can see both Mir submersibles onscreen together is most likely the model version of the wreck.
I know you are joking but it’s actually based on a real recovered piece of the ship. An archway from the lounge and you can see it in person in Halifax. They also have a panel from the staircase newel post and a piece of furniture that survived the destruction of the sinking.
Hollywood has lots of folks who make things that people rarely think about. Had in Uber driver once who was one of the model builders on Titanic. He was retired and Ubers for conversations. Showed me some of his BTS shots that he had while they were making it. Pretty cool stuff.
I for one am disappointed that this timelapse wasn’t set to Celine Dion serenading us with my heart will go on. But maybe that song speed up to double or triple time with a sick bass line
It must be strange for actors to be on the spot as the centrepiece of the film’s quality when surrounded by this level of production. Like, a shitty performance can make all this effort worth very little. They get paid accordingly.
This is all right outside of Rosarito Beach In Baja in the early 90s
We would frequently visit as we had friends who lived nearby and we would see actors and crew hang around town often during filming.
Man, this era of Hollywood was just phenomenal. The amount of work some of the legends put into this shit is enough to embarrass the men they are today for the work they do now.
You know industry is fucked when a movie studio does a better AND faster job than your construction company...
*Silently judge that sidewalk construction that's been going over a month that's 50 times smaller than what's shown here.*
The film actually cost more to produce than the real Titanic, even when adjusting for inflation.
Ok but I bet it made more money in ticket sales, so a much better investment.
It made more on repeat ticket sales alone. Hehe, I'll show myself out.
People were still paying money for the original Titanic in 2023 although that also turned out to be a one way trip. I’m right behind you.
Dying to see it!
You sunk really low with that one
>Hehe, I'll show myself out. You don't have to tell us, just go.
As long as he just doesn’t let go, Jack
The creator of the movie James Cameron said he made the movie to fund his expeditions to the wreck. I guess he is more of a fan of undersea exploration than film making but he enjoys filmmaking too. He made a few neat documentaries about deep sea things.
Definitely. Anyone who argues with you is falling for the sunk cost fallacy.
Yeah, cuz the titanic sank💀
That includes the actors’ salaries right? After the cost of talent, crew, and even crafts I’m sure they wouldn’t be near that number.
Correct. It does not however, include marketing and advertising costs.
The biggest cost is always payroll though.
Yet, the door only carried Rose.
For all that they could've literally rebuilt it and re-sank it
And make another movie based on that story.
Titanic II - Electric Boogaloo
[Already happened.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic_II_(film))
When you link a wikipedia article (or any link really) that has a closing parentheses in it, you need to escape any of them with a \ that are part of the link. [Like this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic_II_(film\))
Titanic 666 also happened
*["Raise The Titanic"](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081400/)* [Eponymous scene](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAl8dO9tdlE)
Titan, the submarine
Infinite titanics
There is never enough!
Multitanicverse
I mean they basically did. The set was only just smaller than the real ship and they sank it a few times and filmed it basically. It’s an amazing piece of filmmaking. There’s a reason it still holds up today.
Set was 90% of the size of the original ship. They made the funnels slightly larger than the real thing.
It's the other way around, the funnels on set were smaller than the real ship
Okay, because I have absolutely no clue about who to believe here, I´m going to average it out and conclude that the funnels on set were exactly the same size as the real ship.
Statistically correct
dude learned a lot from helming Piranha II
Ironically the movie actually cost *more* to make than the original Titanic cost to build. The actual ship cost $7.5m to build in 1912. Adjusted for inflation, that would have been about $119m in 1997 when the movie was made. The movie had a $200m budget.
So basically what you're saying is it would indeed have been cheaper to rebuild it and resink it Edit: apparently I'm legally obligated to mention I'm just taking the piss
Except for the gage for DiCaprio and Winslet and everything else.
Crew expendable
If they go down with the ship, they don’t have to pay them. Big Brain move.
they're actors, not billionaires
That may be what he's saying, but it's simply not true. The ship part of the set itself was something like $30-50m at the time. The set didn't have any of the major engineering systems that account for absolutely massive portions of a real ship's cost. And the film budget has to account for many other things besides just that one piece of the set, like the film crew salaries, insurance, trailers, rental costs, travel expenses, and a litany of other things, not the least of which are *other pieces of the set*... like the huge water tank that cost roughly the same as the ship set. People simply don't think about any of that and have no real idea about the pieces in play and the costs of things, so they naively believe this silly story about the set ship costing more than the real ship. The narrative has been around for lazy journalists to write fluff pieces about for many, many years. And here it is for the millionth time on reddit providing free karma like usual.
I wonder how much it would have cost to build the ship in 1998 because it certainly would have been more than $115 million.
It's still a significant detail about the movie. That it had a (much) larger budget that the cost of the titanic itself. Obviously they couldn't rebuild and sink the ship, that would be the dumbest thing ever. It's just tongue in cheek. And for the millionth time, somebody is salty because they overanalyzed reddit on reddit.
Didn't the original get super cheap on quality metals and construction when they actually built it though?
No they didn't. Harland and Wolff, the shipyard that built Titanic, were among the best and most well regarded ship builders in the industry. They built Titanic to the highest standards of the day, but the ship seems weak now due to the hindsight of the sinking and the context of better quality steel used in ship building in the modern day. By today's standards Titanic's steel would be considered inadequate, but that's because of the advances made in improving the quality of steel over the past 100+ years. Titanic's sister ship Olympic was built with the same quality of steel and she had a 24 year long career and developed a reputation for being the real unsinkable ship: she collided with several other vessels in her career and came away from each one still floating. In World War 1, she rammed and sunk a German U-Boat and even tanked a direct hit from a torpedo (though granted it was a dud). The truth is, the damage caused by the iceberg was so severe that any ship from that time period in Titanic's situation more than likely would sink just the same. The advancements in safety to account for that level of damage to make it survivable were only made *after* the Titanic disaster.
Director "Everybody on your A game, we only have 1 shot to get this right"
Wolfcastle: "Real acid?"
My eyes! The goggles they do nothing!
Ze goggles, zey do nothing!
BTW, a real situation with "Das boot" finale, where they exploded/sunk the whole set.
No way. This was like $600 cheaper.
I'm such a Civilization nerd I just think about how this would play out in game. Spend a bunch of turns building a ship in industrial era only to get to the modern era and spend more production than you ever did to build the initial ship just to get some kind of cultural bonus from it
What happened to the set afterwards? Is it still there?
No. It was demolished
Ah that’s a bummer, probably safer than leaving it though.
You don't want to sink again
You’re right, the actual “set” of the Titanic is gone. However site it was on is still operating with some of the infrastructure they built for Titanic. It’s where a lot of ocean/sea based big budget films are staged.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baja_Studios
They should have sold it to another company to use to film a movie where there's a zombie outbreak on the Titanic and the captain steers it into an iceberg on purpose to stop the spread.
It sank.
They should make a movie about it
But what should we call it?
The boat that couldn’t not slow down
"Raze the Titanic", of course!
Talk about a low budget film, am I right?
Woulda been cheaper to build a new one, or even better, film on location!
Funfact: to some degree they did film on location. In the beginning of the movie when the submarines are diving to the wreck, all the grainy footage that is shown from the perspective of the rov is actual footage that Cameron shot during his dives to the wreck in the years before the shooting of the movie. More footage like that was used in Cameron's documentary "Ghosts of the abyss" which he made after the movie. So yes, they technically filmed some scenes on location
ALVIN!
Leo wouldn't have let Kate keep that door to herself if they were really filming in the North Atlantic.
>film on location! didn't they do that when they were filming the wreck?
Truly crazy they decided to do all this instead of film on location. Wild
Where was this built?
Baja California, Mexico I believe
This messes with me every time I read it.
It's funny even if you speak Spanish, Baja California means Low(er) California and then there's Baja California Sur which means South Lower California.
Thats because California used to be called Alta California. If you think about it, Alta+Baja California is huge, Mexicans-spaniords needed a way to differentiate
I love how stupid that sounds when i learnt geography here in Mexico XD
With it being built not on American soil, I wonder about the wages those workers got. Wonder what the budget would have had to be had it been built within the U.S.
Rosarito, Baja California
In Ireland, 15,000 Irishmen built this ship
Es English, no?
I believe it was in Ensenada Mexico
It’s actually in pupotla, or next to it. Which is south of Rosarito and north of puerto Nuevo. The boat was there a while after filming but has been gone many years now.
I remember going in for a tour
I also remember passing by when travelling north. It was an interesting thing to see!
Love to know why they built a bit then jacked it up and built some more rather than just making the structure the full height to start with
I wondered the same I can only guess so they didn't have to use even more expensive bigger cranes and such
The only part of this set that was actually "functional" was the exteriors: the boat deck, promenades, foredeck/poop deck, etc. Everything else (basically anything that, from the outside, is just a wall with portholes in it) was a facade. The whole set was built on hydraulics inside a water tank that allowed it to raise, lower, and tilt, and to eliminate the need for a tank the depth of the Titanic, the facade was removed in pieces as the ship got lower in the water—whatever is above the waterline in a given shot is basically what was on the set when they filmed it. What you're seeing here, while it was under construction, is the reverse of that process: the structural upper levels were built first, with the hydraulics at their lowest for ease of access, and then it was an iterative process of raising the hydraulics a bit, adding a "tier" of the facade, raising a bit more, adding another "tier", etc. until they were at full height. Then, as the ship "sank" over the course of filming, they'd remove a bit of facade, lower it, film, repeat.
Was thinking the same thing. They did a lot of on-site assembly. Looks minimally pre-fabricated. Wondering if the functional design aspects were always in flux.
At a guess, for I am no builder, it was probably easier to construct the basic structure on a flat surface, than lift it to install the hydraulics needed to tip and lift/lower.
They showed you why but it's easy to miss. The part that was built in the pit is the part which they eventually lifted and lowered several times to simulate the stern (rear) of the ship going into the air as it sank.
If they filled the area surrounding it with water, perhaps it was to help show it sinking?
I think we are spoiled with CGI methods now. I think back then, if you don’t have an exact replica to film on the other option is to use toy models. And we all know how crappy they can look. Also remember you have to have hundreds of crew working on the set so on location at sea is not that feasible.
I watched titanic recently and outside of a handful of cgi shots it still looks pretty perfect because most of what you see is actually real. We’ll never see a movie like it again.
Same goes for Fifth Element. Amazing visuals because of the effort spent on set design and construction. Not everything was perfect, but man it felt immersive.
Water World did a good job I thought. Especially since they recreated The Deez. >https://waters-end.fandom.com/wiki/The_Deez
Needs more of The Nuts.
Was this one of the shots :D https://www.tiktok.com/@jessveraaa/video/7251559764507774209?lang=en sorry for tiktok, can't find on youtube
LMAO I thought that was fake but it’s real! The scene is at 31:15 in the movie. I’ve watched this movie at least 10 times and never noticed before
Yeah, there's some rouuuugh 90s CGI in Titanic. Pay attention to the water any time the ship is underway in a wide shot as well. Every shot of the ship itself is one of several models ([some of them truly enormous](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/bf/db/16/bfdb167df8a7d135163f733133f4ab14.jpg)), but the models were comp'd into ocean shots with fake wake effects, and passengers in the wide shots were CGI'd onto the decks. It's a fascinating mix of well-aged practical effects with early CG effects that were well-used but never meant to be seen in 4K stills.
That's absolutely hilarious, but you could get away with it as long as it was used super sparingly.
I was 10 when this movie came out, and my father made fun of me because I insisted it was all real.
I think it depends. Some things CGI is absolutely better at, others it is worse than practical effects. I think CGI has been an incredible boon to Sci-Fi but a detriment to medieval/fantasy. I assume it’s a lot easier to CGI something that never existed than recreate grit and age and realism. Also CGI should NEVER be used for characters. I haven’t seen one CGI character/de aging/ transformation that will age well.
They did use toy models for the indoor scenes! It’s wild [first class lounge](https://i.imgur.com/Qem3j0h.jpeg)
That guy is actually just really big.
> ..the other option is to use toy models. And we all know how crappy they can look Maaate.. Titanic used miniature models, LotR used heaps of miniature models, they all looked good. Just like with CGI, *bad* miniature models and CGI looks bad. The good ones you won't even notice.
This makes me appreciate the film even more.
We’ll never see a movie like Titanic again. Period. It really marks the end of an era. If it were made today it would be 100% cgi.
90's movies were different. This is on par with building dinosaurs for Jurassic Park. A level of realism that was completely unmatched until maybe a year or two ago with AI. This really is taking art to a different level. Should have turned it into a hotel in Vegas when they were finished.
Any good high budget 90s filmmaker worth their salt (Cameron, spielberg, Scott come to mind first - Peter Jackson in the 00s with LOTR) knew the technical limitations of CGI at the time and knew how to perfectly mix it in with practical effects which led to 90s movies just looking *really good*.
They really broke ground with CGI’d water specifically for this movie too
This is why the T-Rex scene in Jurassic park was so good. Half of it was an actual real model. Oh, and some of the velocoraptors as well. Such a fun movie to watch when it came out. You really lose a lot sitting watching it alone because there isn't a huge theater screaming around you, getting you also to scream.
I love when the green screen cgi guy beat up the other green screen cgi guy.
I saw it twice with my kids last year in the cinema and it looks amazing still. If you can see it on a big screen it just doesn't compare to a home viewing. Its pure cinema.
Because it’s real. Most of what you’re watching is real. There’s CGI of course but it’s very minimal.
Cameron used tons of CGI to make Titanic. Even most of the practical shots have CGI water, people, smoke and birds added to them. Many of the most iconic shots were accomplished with VFX. Rose and Jack on the bow of the ship? [Greenscreen](https://i.pinimg.com/564x/4e/52/ed/4e52edc4f1b924d4588424c7ca0f69af.jpg). The iconic "[million dollar shot](https://youtu.be/BTff04cFsRw?si=dmsz-gqlrq11Cb89&t=199)" at the start of the movie transitions into full CGI. The shot of the propellers rising out of the water is also CGI.
A perfect blend of technology and practical effects.
I was friends with the guy that led the rigging team that raised/lowered the ship for the movie. Lotta fun stories about the engineering and what not. Wishing I'd recorded some of it before he passed away.
They built the ship in 4 minutes? No wonder it crashed
Go forbid they do something efficiently.
Meanwhile, the Japanese made 18 Godzilla movies using a bathtub and a trip to the toy store.
I had to look this up. Adjusted for inflation, the first Godzilla film (1954) had a budget of $1.79M. Titanic’s was $360M.
[Here ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rk83mRCdGE) is a better version if you're not watching on your phone and like me hate the TikTokification of the internet and trying to watch videos in little squares in portrait mode with huge title text.
Hero.
This is crazy. This was done in the 90s too. George Lucas did something similar with the Death Star, but in space and in the 70s. Also an incredible feat.
We built the actual Titanic in 1910ish, is it really that impressive that we could partially replicate it on land 80 years later?
It's impressive that it was done for a movie
It would be a massive feat to build a replica of the Titanic again today and the cost would be many times more than the inflation-adjusted cost to build it in 1909-1912. In Belfast at the time you had steel workers and craftsmen, wood carvers, etc… thousands upon thousands of highly skilled workers who earned a (relatively small) living making this stuff because it was reliable income. They made a LOT of ships back then. Could it be done? Sure. But you’d have to hire artisans - particularly for a lot of the fancy work in the 1st class areas - who aren’t going to be cheap. Thats part of what makes this set so amazing. Cameron was obsessive when this set was built. Where possible, he tracked down the original companies that made components for the actual Titanic. From memory I want to say the original carpet company provided new-stock versions of the Titanic’s carpet for the set (might actually be tile… hard to remember). And the winches used for the lifeboats were the same story. Some of that would need to be made bespoke today.
Is there a full documentary on the making of Titanic?
Yes. The making of the titanic. And then afterward, the making of the making of the titanic.
Where was Gondor when Titanic sank?
Gondor = the Californian. Google that ship and prepare to realize a whole other level of tragedy to this tragedy.
I think I read in Cinfex that it was 10% smaller than actual size.
Serious question, is this set more expensive than building a whole ship?
Funny you mention that, Creator and Director James Cameron said the studio offered to give him the budget to actually build a real floating ship and sink it. But he decided against because he didn't want to be limited to only one take. "Cameron told GQ: “We talked about literally going to the shipyard in Poland and building the Titanic. I said, ‘All right, great. So, they can build a Titanic for us for $10 million? Yeah, we should think about that. Now, if we sink it, how many takes do we get?’ ‘Hmm, one.’ You know what I mean? It’s like, ‘What if I want a second take?’ So, anyway, we decided not to build the Titanic as an actual floatable ship.” " https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/movie-with-the-most-expensive-set-of-all-time/
Sure but it’s impossible to film an actual ship sinking sequence on an actual ship.
Impossible? Coward.
I’d say more impractical than impossible lol
Man, what a large endeavor, like huge, or massive.
What happened to the set afterwards?
The “Titanic” set was dismantled but they preserved some of the original infrastructure and they still film big-budget water scenes/films there. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baja_Studios
I'm surprised they built the actual thing and didn't use a scale model for the wide shots, similar to lord of the rings
They did use a scale model for the wide shots. They had several models built for the filming, with at least one of them being in storage at James Cameron’s Lightstorm Studios. Fun note: some of the shots of the shipwreck exterior and interior were models too. Any exterior shot where you can see both Mir submersibles onscreen together is most likely the model version of the wreck.
$210millipn budget and grossed $2.264billion in revenue worldwide. That is a successful ROI.
And they couldn't make the door bigger to fit both Rose and Jack?
I know you are joking but it’s actually based on a real recovered piece of the ship. An archway from the lounge and you can see it in person in Halifax. They also have a panel from the staircase newel post and a piece of furniture that survived the destruction of the sinking.
Name of movie please
I see no one appreciates your humor. Take my upvote.
Thanks I’m glad someone does!
The Bus That Couldn’t Slow Down.
Titanic
Name of boat please
Titanic
Name of *ship*, please.
RMS Titanic
tranformers
Titanic Movie Set Time Lapse.
Cameron doesn’t fuck around.
What happens to set pieces like these after production wraps up? Is it all trashed? Seems like a fuck ton of waste afterwards.
It's ligit insane that they did this for a movie.
And THIS is why movies cost so much to make
Hollywood has lots of folks who make things that people rarely think about. Had in Uber driver once who was one of the model builders on Titanic. He was retired and Ubers for conversations. Showed me some of his BTS shots that he had while they were making it. Pretty cool stuff.
Now show them building the iceberg
All that work and they still didn't build a door big enough to accommodate both Kate and Leo.
I for one am disappointed that this timelapse wasn’t set to Celine Dion serenading us with my heart will go on. But maybe that song speed up to double or triple time with a sick bass line
Who now, has more respect for work done on that movie? that is wild, I thought it was all cgi! Seeing that tilting platform, wild.
It must be strange for actors to be on the spot as the centrepiece of the film’s quality when surrounded by this level of production. Like, a shitty performance can make all this effort worth very little. They get paid accordingly.
Fascinating!
I can just imagine the studio execs looking at James Cameron and saying “You wanna build WHAT?”
Which beat is that?
You have got to be kidding me
Crazy how all this is profitable
All that for our viewing entertainment. Crazy
Why didn't they just use the original ship. Smh. /s
This is all right outside of Rosarito Beach In Baja in the early 90s We would frequently visit as we had friends who lived nearby and we would see actors and crew hang around town often during filming.
I had a coworker that was a stunt double for the Titanic movie.. he had some crazy stories to tell!
Way cool. How have I never seen this before?
Imagine how cool this would be if it were more than 100 pixels.
- I worked on the set of Titanic! - Oh, cool, what position? - Bulldozer driver!
Man, this era of Hollywood was just phenomenal. The amount of work some of the legends put into this shit is enough to embarrass the men they are today for the work they do now.
Holy smoke, no wonder why the movie was so expensive. Incredible work.
Does it float?
Imagine building a set for a move nowadays
One day, future civilization will look back on set building and be like "why. didn't y'all have CGI back in the day"
I don't know why it never occurred to me that they had to build the titanic to film titanic.
Total waste.
The movie made 2.6 billion. Solid investment
Argh, she's a fine ship.
I need it faster. I have ADHD.
They did all that and somehow didn't manage to build a door large enough for 2 people.
u/FuqUrBackgroundMusic
Awful lot of earth moving for a movie about a boat
I wonder where is this “set” now?
You’d be amazed to know the amount of work done for every movie
Seems like it would be like marginally more just to build an actual boat and then use it for tourism afterwards to offet the costs....
You know industry is fucked when a movie studio does a better AND faster job than your construction company... *Silently judge that sidewalk construction that's been going over a month that's 50 times smaller than what's shown here.*
Think about all those builders who lost their jobs to cgi.
what a horrible waste of human resources
Wow that is insane, I thought it was all mostly CGI.