XoWizIama Excellent adaptation.

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Roxie The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

davidtbateman-68096 I know Bruce Davison is generally a bit of a B movie bod but this serious is absolutely awful. I cannot begin to describe how appalling the story, dialogue and technicals aspects are. Not to mention only one person survives as far as I could see. One hour and 30mins of my life I have lost - TBH I would rather have smoked 100 cigarettes - let's face it probably would have been better for my blood pressure - absolutely awful!!!!!

stonedraim **** May contain strong spoilers ****This is a review made by StoneDraim... and that means that if you want to read a probably different kind of review, keep reading....This is my personal experience, my personal point of view/perspective and my personal opinion... and my opinion is just one of like 7 billions in this world.First off, I thought the whole concept and the movie itself of Titanic 2 was a joke. Like a "trailer joke". Then I heard that there really is a movie called Titanic 2. After that.... I heard some things about this movie and looked it up on IMDb... and....well.... 1.8 says a lot. Anyway; to get more understanding and appreciation of really good productions and a total quality of a motion picture, I went on and watched it.The ONLY thing that is of near approved quality in this one is Bruce Davison. How he accepted this production is a enormous enigma. Sad.Take the adult industry and how the production use to be. This is in many cases even worse. If you are a serious movie viewer, see this one as education. Otherwise; you have been warned.Over to the movie as a product: - The production : Awful balance of picture and music. Music itself low budget overall, and... well....bad. The animations and special effects; the concepts of animations and special effects should be ashamed to allow this kind of amateur work. Movie recording quality is similar from an 1980 poor example of an adult production. - The actors : Actors...? Where....? (Bruce Davison is maybe the exception.) Bad boy, Shane Van Dyke, bad boy! - The story : Did anyone give it a real reflection on how reprehensible the small adjustment from the storyline of "Titanic" this is...? Well...?! ....exactly....so I thought. - Entertainment : Entertainment. Yes. I want that too. - Age : 112,0 out of 10. (The final rate is based most on my own entertainment of the movie. Short elucidation of the rating: 4 Failed. Lacking in character. 3 Bad. Weak. Foul. 2 Amateur, small-time, bad... and misconduct. 1 Poor. Lousy. There should be proper laws against this. Press delete. 0 Ignoble... and jail time should be served.)

allen-70038 I"m watching it right now on TV (subtitled into Spanish no less) ... the real titanic movie cost $200 million, this one had a budget of 1/2 a million ... if you watch the movie with the frame of mind that it will be one of the cheesiest and most ridiculous movies you will ever see ... than you might actually get a kick out of watching it and laughing at the ridiculous scenes ... that way it won't be painful to watch. it reeks of low budget at pretty much every scene ... some of the computer graphics are really low quality ... you just can't take this movie seriously!

jbrady-89091 Words cannot even begin to describe how awful and boring this film was. Don't bother wasting your time watching it. Lazy casting, lazy filming, lazy editing and terrible actors.Firstly, it is not explored in any detail as to why exactly someone would build a replica of the Titanic. Who would do such a thing? Why would people get on it? Is the boat taking off from New York or California? Where is the boat going? These are just some of the many many unanswered questions that this tragic film poses.Secondly, there are endless factual errors. For example, its worth pointing out that if a boats engine gets cut out, it doesn't just stop. It carries on for a short while, it does not come to an immediate standstill like the Titanic 2 seems to have miraculously done. If any of the directors had paused for a moment they would've realised this, however, they obviously were much more interested in pushing out a lazy half-baked piece of trash aimed at riding on the extremely profitable tail-coat of it's much more successful predecessor (although I hesitate in linking the two in any way shape or form). The acting was also absolutely abysmal. I almost laughed at the cringe-inducing cry of 'NOOO' coming from Amy (played by Marie Westbrook) when her friend Kelly gets crushed by the closing door. Sadly though, it hit me like a wave when I realised that this was supposed to be a serious film, alluding to a very serious disaster. You'll notice though I said 'wave' there, not 'a wave thats carried an ice burg on the crest of itself all the way from the Arctic' because that would be ridiculous, not that that stopped the directors from making that a central feature of the entire film. Overall, an abysmal and tragic film. I could go on for hours pointing out every error, but that would require watching the film again, and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.