Textual Analysis: Film Review 7

http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2000/12/19/titanic_1997_review.shtml

The film review for the hit film 'Titanic' featured on the BBC website really took me by surprise; being a lover of the film myself, reading about it through what appeared to be a more critical viewpoint seemed uncanny and almost implausable. However, after analysing the use of laguage and the structural placement/build-up of the argument itself, I found this review very effective and clever in its technique.

The review begins highly censorious of the romantic tradgedy, making comments on the film's budget and the choice of cast. "The critical knives were out long before James Cameron's "Titanic" was complete. Spiralling costs that led to it becoming the most expensive motion picture of the 20th Century, and a cast without any big stars seemed to doom the film before release." The metaphor 'critical knives' is in reference to negative speculation; this is reinforced by the term 'doom' as it appears very dramatic and condemning of the text. However, the term 'seemed' contradicts such a viewpoint and foreshadows an opposing argument/turning point in the opinion of the author (also known as a 'build it up, knock it down' structure).

The author also chooses to refer to both box office and audience appreciation which may appeal more to the reader as they will feel as it is addressing them more directly; as well as this, it is somewhat more relatable to the everyday reader as critic opinion is often based on technical features rather than entertainment value. "But box office and audience appreciation proved Cameron right and many critics wrong." The use of bold font emphasises the critical moment in which both the tone and direction of opinion appear to change.

A common technique used throughout the entirety of the review is the presence of a negative comment followed by an oppositional sentence opened with the conjunction 'but'; "It's reckoned that the rivets were a key structural element that failed the doomed liner. But you could hardly condemn the whole ship as shoddy, or question its magnificence. The script for the movie is rather like those rivets. It's weak and riddled with poor dialogue. But despite its failings it's hard not to become swept up in the sheer grandeur of "Titanic". The repetition of 'doomed' is reinforced by the term 'failed' which misleads the reader into believing that there is an undertone of dissatisfaction; however, this is heavily contrasted as the author states you cannot question its 'magnificence'. When reflecting upon the dialogue it is described as 'poor'; through this the reader is offered a genuine criticism from the authors perspective. By stating that 'it's hard not to become swept up in the sheer grandeur of 'Titanic' the language is both majestic and somewhat illusionary; much like the concept of the ship itself.

The author also refers to other epidemic films in comparison; "Previous disaster epics like "The Poseidon Adventure" or "The Towering Inferno", used a layered structure of introducing many characters with separate stories that would interact towards the inevitable calamity". Through doing so, the choice of narrative placement/structure is acknowledged and compared.

When the text refers to the characters/casting, the character of  'Cal' played by Billy Zane is described to appear 'wonderfully demonic'; this is an interesting choice of language as the oxymoron intrigues  the reader and provokes a sense of curiosity- "'Titanic' offers up only two central characters, with DiCaprio playing an impoverished artist, and Winslet the wealthy bride to be of the wonderfully demonic Billy Zane."

The conclusive viewpoint/opinion of the film is formatted in bold text as it is described as "a truly impressive feat of entertainment", therefore summarising both the pros and the cons into an overall positive response.