SVT Play: All Systems Operational Normally

Watch Online Titanic

(1006738) 7.8 194 min 1997

Titanic is a movie starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet, and Billy Zane. A seventeen-year-old aristocrat falls in love with a kind but poor artist aboard the luxurious, ill-fated R.M.S. Titanic.

Leonardo DiCaprio, Kathy Bates, Kate Winslet, Billy Zane
Drama, Romance
James Cameron

Disclaimer: This site does not store any files.

Product details

Audio English  Deutsch  Italiano  Español  Français  Gaeilge  Svenska  Nederlands
Subtitles 日本語  Čeština  Português  Australia  한국어  Filipino  Tiếng Việt  हिन्दी 
Quality 480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres Drama, Romance
Director James Cameron
Writer James Cameron
Stars Leonardo DiCaprio, Kathy Bates, Kate Winslet, Billy Zane
Country USA
Also Known As Planet Ice, Titanikas, Titanic in 3D, Titanik, タイタニック(1997), Τιτανικός, Titaniku, Titanikas, 3D, The Ship of Dreams, Tit Daat Nei Hou, Titanic: The IMAX Experience, Titāniks, 鐵達尼號, Tai tan ni ke hao, Tie da nhi hau, Титаник, Titanikos
Runtime 3H 14M
Description A seventeen-year-old aristocrat falls in love with a kind but poor artist aboard the luxurious, ill-fated R.M.S. Titanic.

Top reviews

Saturday, 02 Jan 2021 20:58

What's the worst thing that can happen to you? You're at a cocktail party and a guy says "I have to go now. I'll see you in the morning." Is that the worst thing that can happen? If you're like me, you probably thought so. You know, "That's it? That's all I can take?" Well, that's pretty much what it feels like. I'll be honest, it did take a lot to set me off on a trip down memory lane and make me want to vomit. This is the worst movie I've ever seen. What a bore. I can't even describe how unbelievably terrible it is. The plot is horrendous. I have no idea how the director, producers, writers, etc. got to where they did. They just should have stuck to movies like Babe and Yentl. Those were just brilliant. The acting is horrid. I think I've seen enough decent acting to know that this film will probably be totally unmemorable. Even the special effects are pretty bad. The film is over-long, and the characters are all incredibly uninteresting. I'd rather watch a silent movie with my mom than sit through this again. And I mean LOUD. The music is horrible. In fact, the whole soundtrack is terrible. But there's something I always thought was brilliant about this movie. It was also absolutely great in its simplicity. It was an example of good writing and directing at its finest. I wish I could say that this was a good movie, but I can't. I was, as usual, caught up in my own feelings of "What the hell am I doing here?" The only good thing I can say about this movie is that it's entertaining to watch if you're either a huge Titanic fan, or if you're interested in the movie business. Otherwise, don't bother. You'll be disappointed.
Wednesday, 23 Dec 2020 00:19

I've always been a fan of H.G. Wells' "The Time Machine," and I was thrilled when I learned that George C. Scott would be the director for a future "Time Machine" film. But the promise of "Time Machine" (which I knew nothing about at the time) seemed to be ruined by a lot of hokey special effects and poor acting. But then I saw the first "Time Machine" film in the theater, and I realized that those effects were the point of the film. They were not the whole point. They were only a necessary element of the story. And I think that the effect they created was very effective. In the film, it's "the Time Machine," which is a time machine. It looks like a pair of goggles, and is powered by a little oil-tank. It goes back to the 1940s, and gets sucked into the 20th century. The film's setting is the London of 1940. And the characters of the film are all British. And the story revolves around the time travel device. The film is a time machine, and time travel is the whole idea. I found the story interesting, and the cast of characters in the film was outstanding. Cameron Diaz and Tom Hanks do a good job as the two time traveling brothers. In addition to that, the original cast members who were killed in the film (Barry Corbin, Jamie Bell, Kevin Conway, and Emily Watson) were all very well done. They added to the story. And as for the special effects, they were the point of the film. The special effects were great, and that's what made it a time machine. I think that "Time Machine" was a wonderful movie, and I recommend it to all who enjoy movies about time travel. It's also a good movie for children. It is a very effective story about a time traveling brother and his cousin who go back in time to save the world. I think that it's very well done, and it is well worth seeing.
Saturday, 05 Dec 2020 11:24

For once in the film world, there's no relationship between the main character and the people she runs into on the way to the film's climax. We've already established the main character is so powerful, that she would have to be there for the most of the movie to be believable, but this is her story, and her story alone. In a time when Hollywood churns out increasingly dull, plodding, and uninteresting films, I was excited to see this one. I was so wrong. I sat down expecting a train wreck, and instead got a visually beautiful and well-acted film that I can say I enjoyed. There's a very important difference between the two films that one might not be able to pick up on, and that's the following: Titanic has a completely different script to James Cameron's film. The story is completely different, the characters are completely different, and the world is completely different. For one, there's no Christian Bale, so he's not the main character. In Titanic, there's not a single human being who is going to die, because the story is set on a ship that's not sinking. But that's a minor point. In Titanic, there are characters who are going to die in a few scenes, and that makes the film much more interesting. If I go back and watch Titanic and see that I've not cried at all, I don't think I would have, because I was just there for the boat to roll to the end of the movie. The other thing I thought was cool was that the movie has a sense of adventure, something that James Cameron would never get from his films. In Titanic, the boat travels to the island, and then we see the full of action of the island. James Cameron would never have that. In Titanic, the ship encounters the unknown, the monsters, and people who seem to be going to die. The ship is obviously very dangerous. People are thrown out of the boat and they are sent to sea. People are killed by the ship's gigantic propeller. People are ripped apart by the powerful engine. People are flung off the ship and onto the surface of the ocean. And there's nothing you can do about it. The same thing happens to the ship. People are thrown off and sent to sea, and the ship gets stuck. This is exactly what happens to the ship in the end of Titanic. The characters are lost in the ocean. The captain is lost in the ocean. The ship sinks. But it's just the beginning. The ship will be lost in the ocean until it meets up with another ship. It is only then that they will be rescued, and the entire movie will end. This is what I'm trying to say is a story of a ship that sinks, but it ends in a very different way. Titanic has characters that die, but they're never about to die. If you've seen the film, you know the story already. It's not a spoiler, and you've seen it in the trailer. There's nothing really new in the end of Titanic. It's the same ending. You know what's going to happen. I think Titanic is one of the best movies of all time. I love the film. I loved the film. I would have loved the film if I hadn't seen Titanic. But that's because I love James Cameron. He's an amazing director, and he knows how to tell a story, and he knows how to make a movie. When I think of movies, I always think of James Cameron. And I think about Titanic about 10 times a day. I'm going to see it again tonight, and I think I'll get something out of it. If you've seen it, I recommend you see it again. Because I know I will. It's so hard to come up with a good movie without seeing it, and I do think I'm going to see it again.
Sunday, 22 Nov 2020 21:56

Although this movie is a mess, the script really is not. It is a failure as a romantic comedy. It is an American movie. The American audience might not understand the British equivalent. They would see it as a story of an American girl who goes to France, falls in love with a French actor, and it is the American actor's revenge. But the French audience would see the movie as a story of a French boy who meets an American girl and they fall in love. In the beginning they think the boy is English, and then they realize that he is French. So it is a very complex film, with a lot of action and great costumes. It is also a very romantic movie, which makes it very confusing. I could not understand the reason of the French characters to have this horrible relationship with the American. Why would they be so terrible? And why is it such a wonderful thing to be sad and not sad? The American is so happy to be happy, when he met the French boy, he was sad when the American girl died, but then he is happy when he met her again. But the French character is a beautiful French boy who is not good with the English. And the English is so well connected with the French people. So it is not clear. It is not a romantic comedy. The only redeeming value of this movie is that it was shot in France, and they are such a beautiful country. There are so many beautiful scenes, so many beautiful people. And it is a beautiful story. If you want to see a film that is a failure, then you should see "The American."
Tuesday, 03 Nov 2020 16:13

Titanic, once the poster child of the British movie industry, has lost it's way. The star, the awards, the crew, the models, the opening ceremony, the amount of press coverage. Titanic, like so many other films, is a rehash of previous disasters. The same script, the same actors, the same directors, the same premise. But the bad part about this film is the lack of imagination. Titanic is a rehash of the first film. We follow the doomed liner from start to finish, and only at the end, do we get a glimpse of the ship itself. And, in my opinion, this would have been a better approach for the first film, which was a bit more dark. This second film could have had a different ending, if they had gone for the more traditional ending. The other problem is the fact that the film is way too long. Titanic clocks in at an incredible two and a half hours, which is on the right side of the time line. At times, it felt like the film was more of a documentary, than an epic movie. With its rich detail of the history of the Titanic, there is a ton of information, but it just feels like it was put there, and not to make a complete story. There are many brilliant things about the film. The acting, is just outstanding. There is no one that should not be commended for their role in this film. The cast is especially strong. Ralph Fiennes, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Kate Winslet are just fantastic. And the ending of the film is one of the most emotional endings ever in a film. I don't know why, but I am very impressed with the ending. But, all of this does not come without it's problems. The special effects are great, and they make the film look like it was shot in a real studio. However, there are too many jumpy shots that makes it hard to follow. In my opinion, the film is much too long, and it does not feel like it is supposed to be an epic. However, with all the great things I have said about the film, I still think that Titanic is a good movie. It is not the best film of all time, but it is a good movie, and I give it a 7 out of 10. It is far from perfect, but Titanic is not the worst film of all time. It is a good film, and I would recommend it to anyone, regardless of what you think about the film. I give Titanic a 7 out of 10.
Friday, 23 Oct 2020 19:34

To see this movie, you must have an appreciation for history and an interest in the characters involved. It is a special kind of movie, an adventure story. It is not at all like the classic "Saving Private Ryan" or the "Godfather" trilogy, but it does have similarities to some of those movies. I have never been to a theatre of this scale and I have never been to a cinema in an American city. This was the only movie that I saw so far. I have watched it in some form or another every year since 2001. Some years ago, when I was living in Japan, I was lucky enough to see it on the big screen. I saw it at a time when my interest in movies had not yet moved on to a very advanced level. I still enjoyed the movie, but I was never as interested in it as I am now. It is not that there was not a lot of action and the characters had not much depth, it was just that the characters were not all that interesting. I found the performances of Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet, Billy Zane, and Matt Damon to be fine. I think the characters of Jack and Rose were much more interesting than the others. The story is quite good and the performances of all the characters are excellent. I really liked the way the film ended, but it was a little difficult to explain how it was that this movie happened. All I can say is that you have to see it to appreciate it. There were some scenes that were not necessary, but these were not the worst scenes in the movie. I still believe that it is a good movie, but I think that you have to be familiar with the history of the characters involved to truly appreciate the movie.

Write a review