Titanic (1943) User Reviews

Remarkable Similarities to Titanic (1997)

[rtmdoctrine · 7/10 · 10 September 2005]

Just saw this film on TCM. It is clearly a propaganda film, no one can debate that.

The fun of this film is seeing just how much of it is incorporated into the later Titanic Movies, namely "A Night to Remember" and James Cameron's "Titanic"

I reference this entry from Wikipedia.org:

"Several commentators have observed archly their conviction that James Cameron must have been very familiar with the 1943 Nazi propaganda film when writing and filming his own Titanic. Several story aspects are in both films but not in any other Titanic version: e.g., the salt of the earth non-British Hero orders his girlfriend into the lifeboat, she hesitantly complies and watches her love disappear behind the railing as the lifeboat is lowered (though she doesn't jump out in the 1943 film); a young, dashing man coaches the girl he loves that she should not marry the man she does not love just because her parents ordered her so; a stolen jewelry subplot; a man is accused of a jewel theft (including a blue diamond) he did not commit; a main character gets locked up in a flooding cabin as the other character (male in this version) rescues him with an axe; etc. Additionally many of the scene compositions and camera angles are uncannily similar." from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic_%281943_film%29

Despite the anti-wealth propaganda this is a good movie

[dbborroughs · 7/10 · 7 August 2004]

This is Titanic as you've probably never seen it before. One would think it was more a communist propaganda film than a Nazi one, since all of the villains of the piece are the rich while the poor workers are the heroes. Its a film that has a definite point of view, and right or wrong, is certainly one that keeps things interesting to watch.

Centering on the rich owners of the White Star Line and the rich passengers on the ship, this film is in large part about how the greed of the rich led to the destruction of "society". A large portion of the early part of this film has to do with manipulating stock before the Titanic breaks a speed record allowing the owners to get even richer. The plan seems to backfire and as the rich try to pick up the pieces the ship hits an iceberg. There are also several other story lines running through this film, including a healthy dose of romance, so don't think its all business.

While some of the interior model shots of the sinking are obviously models, the scenes of panic and the real human drama makes this a film to watch. Its understandable why the Nazi's banned this film as upsetting, these people are in panic mode. I read somewhere that this film showed the ship breaking in half. Kino's DVD doesn't appear to show that, although the final slide under the waves is really too dark to see.

While not a perfect film its a good one. Certainly its one with enough talking points that you could very well talk about the film on every level for many hours after its finished running. Frankly There is so much to discuss that I'm having a hard time keeping this entry brief.

If you love film, if you love Titanic stories, if you love seeing something different then see this movie.

7 out of 10, but you'll be talking about so much more than most other movies you've seen in years.

The Devil Mingles Truth And Lies!

[theowinthrop · 7/10 · 15 January 2007]

Slowly some of the Nazi film industry's work product is becoming available by video and by DVD. Not everything (except if you deal with extreme - right wing groups) but some of their material. TITANIC is one of the few acceptable films.

I think the reason it is acceptable is that we are aware of social inequalities in the disaster that were not officially noted in 1912. The treatment of steerage passengers for example (more first and second class men survived than third class women). The misappropriation of an entire lifeboat by Sir Cosmo and Lady Duff Gordon and their small party was another. So was the survival of the President of the White Star Line, J. Bruce Ismay (not Sir Bruce Ismay - he was never knighted before 1912, and he was a social pariah after 1912). But that's just it - Ismay and the Duff Gordons were socially ruined by their survival and the attending circumstances. The British Inquiry of Lord Mersey was not too harsh on them, but the American Inquiry of Senator William Alden Smith certainly was. Ismay was all too happy to leave New York City after Smith got through with him.

So, yes, the story is truthfully full of social unfairness and bigotry and selfishness. But there is also heroism and self sacrifice, and the Goebbels' "Ministry of Information and Propaganda" overlooked that part. Molly Brown, Isidor and Ida Strauss, Benjamin Guggenheim, Thomas Andrews, Lightoller, Philips and Bride, are not mentioned - why should they be. Goebbels wanted to use the disaster as a weapon to poison German and Axis audiences against Britain, America, and Jews. Why honor Americans like Brown, Britains like Andrews, Lightoller, Philips and Bride, and Jews like the Strausses and Guggenheim? So he jettisoned them.

From a technical standpoint TITANIC was an amazing film for 1943 - in fact the British film A NIGHT TO REMEMBER supposedly used some of the scenes of the sinking liner from TITANIC. But the propaganda is always there.

Curiously, the British and Americans did not think of using the war to make a film called LUSITANIA. It might have been a sufficiently more honest answer to Goebbels lies and half-truths. The closest I have seen to that (aside from brief mentions of the Lusitania in FOR ME AND MY GAL, 'TIL THE CLOUDS ROLL BY, and NIGHT AND DAY) was a sequence in the Mitchel Leisin film ARISE MY LOVE about the sinking of the steamer Athenia in September 1939 (when it was sunk by a U-boat without warning - Goebbels and Hitler caused an information freeze on that incident). Now, perhaps, we can do films about the Lancastria disaster (bombing and strafing fleeing refugees from Dunkirk with glee - and costing 3,000 - 4,000 lives) or the Cap Ancona massacre of concentration camp victims (about 6,000 lives or more). They show, in my opinion, the selfishness, greed, and class distinctions practiced by Nazis.

Gilding The Propaganda Lily

[bkoganbing · 15 January 2007]

Titanic must have been the great cause for discussion at the Propaganda Ministry in 1943. Ostensibly put out to show the kind of materialistic greedy people the Germans were fighting back then, it seems as though Joseph Goebbels felt the wrong message might still go out. The original director, Herbert Spelvin, was arrested mid production by the Gestapo and found hanging in his cell the next day. Of course suicide was the official reason given and ostensibly Goebbels was mighty put out about the scenes of panic shown on film. Yet there are certainly enough of them left in the product I saw.

What's showed here is nothing new. But that's the difference between a free society and Nazi Germany. The story has been told a whole lot in both British and American productions. What the Nazis did in this film was to create a wholly fictional second officer named Peterson who serves as the voice of conscience in the film. The villain of course is Ismay the head of the British White Star Line who is looking for the stock in White Star to go up if the much ballyhooed Titanic makes a record crossing in its maiden voyage. Peterson as portrayed by Hans Nielsson is as Aryan as they come, while Ismay looks vaguely like those people we're eliminating as played by E.F.Fuhwanger.

John Jacob Astor is here to represent American capitalism. Such folks as Captain Harry Guggenheim and Mr.&Mrs. Isidor Straus who died in the sinking are eliminated from the story. So is the plucky Denver millionairess Molly Brown.

For a movie that's supposed to show and criticize the British class distinction, very little time is spent on the huddled masses in steerage who were the bulk of the people killed. James Cameron in the recent Titanic with Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet spent more time with them than this production.

I do however wish that more films of the Nazi era would become available now to view and study. If this one is available on DVD and VHS than this must be mild as compared to others.

Not as bad as expected

[Hörnla · 7/10 · 18 March 1999]

Look out for the scene when Petersen forces his Ex to enter the lifeboat and then guess who watched this movie quite carefully...James Cameron maybe? To put it short, if you are able to substract the propaganda and the resulting errors, it is better than the 1953-US version, especially regarding the special effects. Could anyone check out which ship "doubled" the Titanic? If it really is the "Gustloff" then we have a case of very bitter irony here...

Decent Titanic flick, but stiff and pale. As German propaganda it's good for some laughs.

[secondtake · 6/10 · 5 April 2010]

Titanic (1943)

Goebbels takes on the Titanic. And loses. In fact, the movie languished in hiding or in bad t.v. versions until 2005.

This is the most expensive German film to date, and its technical competence pales next to American films of the same period. It uses the sinking of the Titanic as a vehicle to criticize the avarice of capitalist England, their enemy at the time. So along with the usual drama of love and chivalry and overconfidence, there is a story of stock trading and of racing the ship at top speed in order to break the record and raise the company's value per share.

All of which isn't totally improbable, and as a weird Nazi view of the world it's pretty fascinating. In truth, it's not a bad film. But in truth, it's not something you need to bother with unless the political propaganda aspects sound appealing. Or unless you are just curious about different film versions of the events. The effects here are vivid and often very realistic until they show the ship from the water. The interpersonal acting is uneven and a bit stiff going, usually, with some caricaturing used as a way to avoid character development.

If you want a classic older Titanic film for the pure drama of the disaster, I suggest the 1958 A Night to Remember (a British production) over the American 1953 Titanic which has star power but is boring by comparison. Of course, there is the 1997 version, in color, which has its own problems and dazzlements. But stop to at least imagine what the Nazi regime could possibly have been thinking, spending a ton of money on an unlikely movie just as the tide is turning against them in the war. And watch how terrific they paint the one German officer on the ship, telling the truth and saving lives like no one else. Propaganda, for sure, but not a horrible movie, as a movie, either.

Awfully well-done propaganda piece

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 13 May 2007]

Why the Nazis chose to spend a lot of money to make a film about the Titanic during the middle of WWII I'll never know. You can see that the real story of the ship is twisted into a propaganda piece that both extols German decency and decries the evils of a Capitalist society. It does this by creating some Germans and making them all nice folks--particularly the First Officer that tries very hard to do what is right even though Captain Smith and the nefarious forces of Capitalistic greed are risking the lives of everyone aboard! In the National Socialist Germany, the importance of individual profit and gain was publicly forbidden and America and Britain were seen as dominated by selfish self-interest. So the "nice Germans" are always mindful of the ultimate good and the rich Americans and Brits are the worse stereotypes of Capitalism. And so time and again, the First Officer is good and dutiful and tries his best to protect the ship and passengers while industrialists/speculators Ismay and Astor do everything purely for self-interest. All this was meant to convince Germans of the rightness of their political system, though the ugly truth was that many rich German industrialists became immensely wealthy thanks to German re-armament.

Despite the obvious propaganda in the film, the movie itself was surprisingly well-made. While the shot of the Titanic (using a model) was incredibly sloppily done (with VERY fuzzy camera-work to try to hide that it was a model), the rest of the film looks pretty opulent and the acting was very convincing considering it was made in 1943-- as things were turning VERY bad for the Germans. Sadly, although the film is watchable and VERY interesting, it was not shown in Germany and was only recently discovered--it deserved a wider audience despite its shortcomings.

Titanic as German Nazi-Propaganda

[roessi · 5/10 · 4 February 1999]

This film was planned by Josef Goebbels as Nazi-Propaganda. But because of the changing situation in Germany the film was obsolete until it was finished. Goebbels feared that it could wake the wrong emotions and kept it out of the cinemas. With this background it is quite interesting to see the methods of propaganda used for this film. You should watch Titanic as a kind of education or a time-document and not for (pure) entertainment.

A Dramatic, Effective Telling of the Titanic Story - From Nazi Germany

[lawprof · 8/10 · 20 July 2004]

It's not that common in movie history that a director angers the producer/distributor of his movie so much that the latter has the former murdered. That's what happened to co-director Herbert Selpin in 1942 before the release of Germany's film contribution to the Titanic saga. Dr. Josef Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda minister and self-anointed arbiter of culture in the Third Reich, had the Gestapo arrest Selpin who was reported dead in his cell the day after. Suicide? Ridiculous.

The Titanic story has been told many times on film, both as documentary and as drama. Interest currently appears to intensify with the same speed as the over-visited wreck rapidly succumbs to a final ballet of disintegration.

Years ago The Film Society of Lincoln Center ran a retrospective of movies produced during the Third Reich. For most attendees it was a revelation, and a disturbing one at that. Many are familiar with the late Leni Reifenstahl's documentary paean to the Olympics (propaganda aside, one of the greatest films of that genre) and the odious "Jude Suss" is the iconographic movie symbolism of Nazi antisemitism. Few were aware how much genuine creativity, free of obvious dogmatism, emerged from that twelve-year period of German darkness and depravity. The retrospective made many think about the complexity of life in 1933-1945 Germany.

One of the films I saw was the 1943 "Titanic" which had a small premiere followed by an order from Goebbels pulling the movie. Ostensibly, Germans were not to be exposed to seeing the panic on the great liner as it foundered (actually most Germans, especially those in urban areas, had more visible frequent reasons to panic by 1943.

Selpin (with co-director Werner Klingler) turned out a sumptuous, ornate and dramatically compelling movie. Largely using the known facts, "Titanic" tells the well worn tale of a ship driven to unreasonable and dangerous speeds in order to set a record. There are some significant deviations. Here, the English first officer - seized with some malady - is replaced by a German seaman named Petersen, a model of experience and rectitude. J. Bruce Ismay, whose social life was justifiably ruined because of his escaping the sinking behemoth, is unrealistically portrayed as a grasping cad whose crudity was not found in the self-absorbed, rich and supinely confident real shipping magnate. The vessel's master, Captain Smith, is overly subservient to Ismay but he responds well to the disaster.

This movie wasn't made on the cheap. Given the deteriorating wartime situation, a lot of marks were expended for terrific sets and fine attire.

There's no real Nazi propaganda. The movie ends with a comment that English greed occasioned the loss of so many lives but very many books and articles from Old Blighty and the U.S. echo that view.

Because of its anti-British utterances, the Allies banned the movie in their sectors in Germany at first while it was freely available in the Soviet zone. Hardly a surprise-that movie maven, Stalin, probably loved this capitalist-bashing film.

KINO VIDEO has performed a real service by releasing the film on DVD. There are two versions-this release is the shorter one without the trial scene in which survivor Petersen rails against the British in court. Actually the movie is stronger for that omission. After she goes down, what else is there really to say?

There are some interesting special features on the disc including an early commercial short made by the White Star Line showing the amenities of RMS Olympic, another luxury liner built before Titanic (technically, Olympic wasn't a sister ship of its more famous and briefly triumphant successor but the differences aren't important).

This is an important release for Titanic buffs but also for those interested in film-making in Nazi Germany. There were movies made that deserve current viewing for reasons apart from their historic association with a barbaric regime.

7/10

An eternal condemnation of the English quest for profit.

[brogmiller · 7/10 · 25 March 2020]

The premise that the loss of fifteen hundred lives aboard HMS Titanic was due to Bruce Ismay's bribing Captain Smith to maintain a speed of 26 knots in order to reach New York ahead of schedule is patently absurd but presumably Goebbels believed that the German public would lap anything up. The record had already been established by the Mauritania in 1909. The real tragedy was due to the lamentable lack of lifeboats, for which Ismay must be held accountable and the failure of Captain Lord of SS Californian to respond to radio messages and distress signals. The premiere was planned for 1943 but Goebbels pulled it, obviously realising that the film would be more likely to depress than entertain. A censored version was finally shown in Germany in 1955. Goebbels was apparently none too impressed with the acting but it looks okay to me. Some very classy females on display here. The tragic Sybille Schmitz, Kirsten Heilborg, regarded as a traitress by her fellow Norwegians, Charlotte Thiele who made a speedy exit to South America and the delightful Monika Burg who reinvented herself in France as Claude Farrell. Ernst Fritz Fuebringer is a reprehensible Ismay and Karl Schoenboek utilises his elegant aristocratic persona to great effect as the ruthless Astor. Hans Neilsen is excellent as Petersen although his character is rather self-righteous. The film itself certainly has merit especially the scenes following the collision. As is well documented director Herbert Selpin was bumped off by the Nazis and replaced by uncredited Werner Klinger. A previous reviewer has incorrectly noted the connection with the ill-fated ship Wilhelm Gustloff. In fact the exterior sequences were shot aboard the equally ill-fated Cap Arcona. Hardly any of Goebbel's overtly propogandist films achieved their original intentions but they nonetheless remain horribly fascinating. This is no exception.

Curious and Confusing

[wes-connors · 5/10 · 22 March 2008]

The "Titanic" disaster movie sails again; and, this time, it's a German World War II propaganda film. The responsibility for the sinking is explicitly revealed at the end; and, if you pay attention, it should come as no surprise. There are some nicely staged scenes in the film. Hans Nielsen (as Petersen) is the heroic German, who tries to warn the decadent British about the iceberg. Sybille Schmitz (as Sigrid) offers a striking, sympathetic characterization; she and Mr. Nielsen are the doomed "lovers"… well, potential lovers, anyway.

It is confusing to have strong German performers portraying wartime "enemy" (mostly British) people unsympathetically (most of the time). And, It is curious that the Germans produced their version of "Titanic" during World War II. The story of a British ship in peril isn't exactly what you'd expect Nazi Germany to consider strong story material. What were they expecting… audiences to cheer the sinking? Perhaps the film's thesis doesn't work because some of those involved had the humanity to realize their government was wrong.

***** Titanic (11/10/43) Herbert Selpin, Werner Klingler ~ Hans Nielsen, Sybille Schmitz, Otto Wernicke, Ernst Fritz Furbringer

PROPAGANDA-EFFECTIVE DRAMA

[J. Steed · 8/10 · 18 June 1999]

Most articles on this film tend to overlook the intrinsic qualities of the film as film, though of course these are connected with the propaganda aspect. The opening scenes (the board meeting and subsequent meeting) are strong and the key to the propaganda: in a very short time it is effectively made clear what the point of view of this film is and what follows is an entertaining and propaganda-effective film. From the moment we are on the ship until the collision the film is drama routine, but one of the better sort. Really exiting is the film from collision till sinking, i.e. when the real drama emerges and the splendid special effects do their jobs; not one aspect of the outlined drama is forgotten, it is fast-paced and very well directed.

Of the cast it is Sybille Schmitz who excels, while other members also do a very good job; they must have done so otherwise the whole propaganda aspect would not have come across. There is one exception here: it seems that Hans Neilsen (playing the German officer) is very good, but he is not. It is often said that he speaks his lines as a Wehrmacht officer on duty, but for me his machine gun like delivered lines sound more like the staccato of the regular commentator of the Deutsche Wochenschau (compare this, when you have the possibility).

Though this film is obviously anti-British, it is rather anti English capitalist establishment and their decadence than anti-British per se *; an anti-capitalism not so much based on (to generalize) theoretical arguments, but (as most of fascist ideas) on the petty bourgeois middle class mentality and jealousy towards others who are better off. The crux for this is in the strong opening: it is here when Ismay remarks that he cannot take into account the interests of the small investors, they must bend to his need and of course greed. As such the focus of the propaganda is established; on the ship we meet very wealthy people playing with money (e.g. the gamblers) and people preferring money above people (Lord Astor, well played by Schönbock), these being decorum for the propaganda and an elaboration of the already established focus. Money (large sums bidden for almost everything) plays the major part in this film (it should have received first credit). Lord Astor even worries about stolen jewelry while the ship is sinking: money makes decadent. Compare for instance the cynic way of life upper deck and the more natural and spontaneous life lower deck.

[* Noteworthy is that after its re-release in 1950 it was quickly banned again in the Western zones, while in the Soviet zone it was screened without a problem; the anti-capitalism might have done the trick.]

The pro-German aspect and the answer to everything is German officer Petersen. He not almost single handedly saves a part of the passengers, he also shows the right spirit when it comes to human feelings. Only when the Baltic countess says she has no money anymore, he gives room for his feelings towards her; what a fine chap, he is! And it is from that point on that she does her duty as a human being and starts helping out with the rescue: money makes cynic.

There is also a hint of Durchhaltefilm here. Take for instance that schematic and ideological German rural couple; not a couple of flesh and blood, they seem to have walked straight out of a Nazi rural painting. Men and women are separated for the rescue, but this couple stays together: in an almost religious shot they hold hands expressing that nothing can separate them. They are separated by force of the panic, but reconciled again in the end. No catastrophe can undermine the simple German life.

This Titanic has its influence on film history as well. It has been ripped off at least twice, first in 1958 for A Night to Remember (a story widely known) and recently by James Cameron who for his Titanic but boring endeavour stole quite some story ideas and complete scenes; check this when you have the opportunity.

It is often written that this film was not released in Germany cause of the death (suicide, murder?) of its first director Selpin. Wetzel & Hagemann in their survey of censorship in Nazi Germany (book, 1978) claim that this is not so. It had its unnoticed premiere in 1943 in unimportant cinemas, only to be banned in December 1944 for the well-known reason: the audience was not to be confronted with catastrophes.

Beware which version you see; as I understand it there are 2 versions. The longer one (the one I saw) includes a final scene in court; Petersen is the German J'accuse of Bruce Ismay, but there appears to be no British justice.

Extravagant flop

[Goingbegging · 7/10 · 6 May 2017]

The story of this film project is almost as interesting as the story of the Titanic itself.

At the height of the war, Goebbels started planning a massive movie spectacular that would present the Titanic story as a parable of Anglo-American capitalist greed, with a fictitious German officer heroically battling the cynical boardroom villains, out to secure the Blue Riband at any cost, to save their shipping line from bankruptcy. (This claim still pops-up from time to time, though there seem to have been other reasons for the undue haste to reach New York.)

A surprisingly large budget was provided, and director Herbert Selpin got to work. The film required hundreds of naval personnel as technical advisors - a dream posting, well away from their units, in a film-colony atmosphere, with access to drink and women, of which they took excessive advantage. Selpin told them that their conduct was unprofessional as well as unpatriotic. A so-called friend reported him to Goebbels, who ordered him to retract his statement. He refused, and was found hanged next day.

Now everything started to slide. Film people were disgusted at Selpin's fate, and morale never recovered. By the time the movie was finished, the Germans were losing the war, and Goebbels realised it would be a mistake to show scenes of drowning civilians, so no screenings were allowed. The film would only come to light many years later, as a historical curio.

As this version was pure propaganda, we get all the Titanic clichés we expect (before they became clichés), with heavy emphasis on fine dining in gorgeous evening dress with a grand orchestra, while the freezing water pours into the engine-room and then rises steadily into the cabins. None of the performances stand out, and none of the actors seem to have moved on to bigger things, though their postwar careers would be dogged anyway by their association with the regime. But it is a tribute to the production values that several scenes are believed to have been directly reproduced in the British film 'A Night to Remember'.

German Propaganda film

[sbibb1 · 4/10 · 12 November 2005]

This 1943 German version of the story of the sinking of the Titanic is pure German propaganda. While remarkable that a film such as this could be produced while Germany was at war, the film is full of historical inaccuracies, and many real life people had their roles in the sinking fictionalized.

In the film the British and the wealthy are the villains, not the iceberg. J. Bruce Ismay, the president of the White Star Line is shown as wanting to get the ship into NY a full day earlier then expected and he is shown as willing to do whatever in his power that he can do to achieve that goal. While this is probably historically accurate, the role of John Jacob Astor is not. In the film Astor is attempting to buy the majority of the stocks of the White Star Line so that by the time the ship reached NY he will own not just Titanic, but the entire shipping line.

The heroes of the film are, SURPRISE, all German. The fictional second officer in command Peterson who all along warned the owner and the captain that there was ice ahead, and a wealthy Baltic woman, one of the thought to be villains of the film, who comes around at the end and tries to save some people. While it is remarkable to see how Germany took a tragedy and altered all the facts to fit a propaganda need, it must also be remembered that many films made here in the U.S. were types of propaganda as well.

Be sure to watch for the scene in the film when the engines stop and all the steerage passengers leave the steerage part of the ship to ask the captain what happened, and the confrontation comes on the steps in the Grand Ballroom in the first class part of the ship.

The theater where the film was having it opening night showing was bombed and the film was taken out of circulation for decades.

Well-crafted with decent production values

[Sir_AmirSyarif · 7/10 · 7 June 2020]

Aside from its not so accurate, anti-British propaganda screenplay, 'Titanic' is well-crafted with decent production values, competent acting, and a relatively brisk pace. And it's easy to see James Cameron lifted a few plot points from this movie and incorporated them into his own 'Titanic' (1997).

Not as bad as you might expect.

[rmax304823 · 7/10 · 10 September 2005]

I mean, here it is, 1943, and the Nazis make a movie about a great disaster that befell their chief enemy, Great Britain.

So do you expect a movie loaded with stereotypical Colonel Blimps, English incompetence, and general disorder, or what? If you do, that's not exactly what you get. I'm surprised that in the midst of a war they were losing the German film industry could put together an expensive disaster flick. True, the model work is a little clumsy, but there are hundreds of extras and lavish sets.

It's not badly done. I tuned in for a travesty of historical events but stayed until the end, caught up in what is basically a compelling story. The acting is stiff, the direction unimaginative, and some of the drama is obviously fictional, but the narrative sweeps you up willy nilly.

Probably it isn't as well done as "A Night to Remember," a British retelling of the tale that appeared about ten years later and which closely resembles the 1943 version. At the same time it has to be admitted that it's a BIG improvement over the 1950s American version with Barbara Stanwyck and Clifton Webb, basically a soap opera with a tacked-on ship sinking.

Is there any propaganda value in the film? A little. A German officer aboard repeatedly clashes with Ismay, President of the White Star Lines, over the heedless speed at which the ship is traveling. Ismay is the major heavy and he looks vaguely Jewish. Some sympathy is shown towards the Astor family. And there was also a wealthy and prominent elderly Jewish couple aboard, whose name escapes me, but who aren't mentioned in the film at all. (Nor is Molly Brown, the usual fun figure.) The third class passengers are treated with respect but are not sentimentalized. At the inquiry, Ismay gets off and all of the blame falls on the hapless, now drowned Captain Smith, much to the German officer's disgust. An epilogue mentions something about the English greed for profit or something. I was so busy trying to translate the German crawls that I didn't realize there were subtitles.

It's still amazing, isn't it, after all these years that so many lives were so needlessly lost. The SS California was in sight but was unable to hear the Titanic's distress calls and misinterpreted her distress flares. There were thousands of people aboard and lifeboats enough for only a few hundred. As it was, some of the lifeboat took off half empty. Everyone knew there was dangerous ice around and yet the ship was kept traveling at speed, despite immediate warnings. Not enough planning and too much imprudent hoping that it wouldn't happen. As I write this, New Orleans, Louisiana, is being evacuated after 80 percent of the city was flooded by a thoroughly expected hurricane. Preparations were inadequate because manpower and supplies were not available and there was not just a lack of organization, but actual conflict over who was in charge. This is known as history repeating itself.

Well, not exactly repeating itself except in the most general terms, yet there are parallels. In both cases it was the poor who suffered the most, as is almost always the case, but the sinking of the Titanic exhibited the effect of not one variable, poverty, but two variables, poverty and gender/age. (A statistical analysis would probably call for analysis of variance.) What I mean is that aboard the Titanic, as everyone knows, the rule was "women and children first." But the rule was confounded by social class. Most of the women and children saved were first-class passengers. The next greatest percentage of women and children saved were from second class. And only a small percentage of third-class women and children were saved.

Well, enough rattling on. This is worth catching, not just because it is an historical curiosity, which it is, but because it's a gripping story as well.

Did Germany know it was at war with England and America?

[richard.fuller1 · 8 February 2004]

Right off the bat, no, I don't speak German, but I wanted to see this depiction of the Titanic. I am truly puzzled by why a German studio and German performers (okay, they were just enjoying the work) would portray what had been English and American characters in such a sensitive and thoughtful light.

I have heard the first officer is a fictional German character, but hey, they were ALL speaking German!

Did this thing do like the English comedy "Allo, Allo" and have the rest of the cast speak German but with American and English accents? That would have been fun to hear.

I got a copy of "Lady and the Tramp" in Spanish and it is delightful to hear the Italian butchers sing their priceless song in Spanish, but now with Italian accents! It actually worked!

But I digress.

I recognize the dropped names, Ismay and Astor, but it seems the majority of the rest of the cast have undergone name changes. Whatever. The captain seems more like der Burgermeister than he does the ted-dibly English Captain E.J. Smith actually was. I was amused by the crewman bringing the captain his jacket on deck and slipping it on him. I thought to myself, an actual English captain would not have appeared on deck unadorned like that.

Our man Ismay here doesn't look at all as he did in real life, which I thought was puzzling. Ismay in this film is slightly grey and no moustache.

I wondered if the nose was striving for some Jewish look, or was it shooting for the English look. About the last time we see Ismay in this thing, he is shrieking like Adolf, so any stereotype either way was done away with.

Wallace Hartley's band on the Titanic consisted of eight members. In this German version, it would be a large oompah oompah band. In the 1929-30 "Atlantic" film, we hear a Charlston band.

As I watched this film, I looked at the extravagance and thought "are they trying to mimick Hollywood?"

The fashion sense to 1912 didn't connect, it was more "buy war bonds" to me.

Everytime the film would be mucking up for me (that German couple) there would be a saving grace (the wireless operator setting the bird free, while not true, was intriguing to observe).

That the racy steerage woman would survive I found interesting. The tenderness extended in these directions, with what was going on in the world at that time, is bewildering and if this film wasn't released back then after completion, I think that was a terrible shame.

Still, this film just stands as one more film version of the Titanic that is perplexing to watch for historical reasons if nothing else.

Not as bad as the 1929 version, and possesses more dimension than the '53 one.

Quite impressive...

[paul_haakonsen · 6/10 · 3 July 2023]

I stumbled upon this 1943 German produced depiction of the Titanic events by random chance here in 2023. And seeing that it was made as German propaganda during World War II, I must admit that I was a bit hesitant about watching it.

However, I opted to give the movie the benefit of the doubt, and while the script and storyline, as written by Harald Bratt, Hansi Köck, Herbert Selpin and Walter Zerlett-Olfeniusm wasn't exactly fully historically accurate, then it was actually a surprisingly well-made movie.

Sure, the storyline is one that I am well-familiar with already, even way before 1997 and the James Cameron movie, since I have been historically interested in the events of Titanic since I was a child back in the mid-1980s. And while there were some twists to the historical events here in the movie, I will say that directors Herbert Selpin and Werner Klingler actually put together an entertaining movie. And with it being made in 1943 and in black and white, the movie actually still holds up today.

Needless to say that I wasn't familiar with the cast ensemble here, as I have very limited experience with the German cinema, much less the World War II era of German cinema. But the actors and actresses on the cast list put on good performances.

Visually then I was acturally impressed with this 1943 version of the Titanic story. The props and sets were quite amazing, and really looked impressive, even in black and white. It was clear that they had put a lot of effort and money into making the interior of the Titanic come to life.

Something that was a bit annoying about the movie was the German language. Not that I mind the language in itself, but it was just odd to have native English speaking characters in the storyline speak German. But if you can look past that, then this "Titanic" movie as quite good.

My rating of "Titanic" lands on a six out of ten stars.

technically well-made Nazi propaganda

[SnoopyStyle · 5/10 · 9 July 2015]

It's April 1912. Titanic has been a huge financial burden for White Star Line. The shares are falling. President Ismay pushes the shares even lower to buy them on the cheap. He intends to make a big splash on its maiden voyage and incentives Captain Smith a record crossing. Unbeknownst to them, John Jacob Astor is driving the shares down even further before he buys it back. While the British and American capitalists push the ship to its doom, German 1st Officer Peterson argue in vein to slow the ship down. Peterson and a few Germans in steerage are the heroes while the Anglo-Americans struggle for their own safety. Peterson saves Ismay for a reckoning in front of the Board of Inquiry where Ismay is acquitted of guilt.

This is a technically well-made Nazi propaganda. The marriage of miniature and real stage work is impressive. The battle between Astor and Ismay holds a little bit of interest but everything else is bland. The propaganda element is overly obvious and clunky. The story is tired but there are a few good sinking scenes.

A film that should be seen before it's judged.

[jef29bow · 8/10 · 8 May 2002]

Too many just dismiss this film outright as Nazi propaganda, and don't examine the film as a film. Certainly when compared to the 1953 Hollywood TITANIC it's a far better made and less sappy piece of drama. And if it has a lot to be desired as history -- well then so did the Hollywood film. The performances, direction, and special effects are all excellent for the time. In fact, it's very surprising that the German film industry was able to mount such a first class production as this in the midst of the war.

Which brings me around to the propaganda aspect of the film: to my mind it's been very much over stated in accounts on the film that I've read. Apparently, the most vicious part of the film's propaganda content, a trial scene and end title which condemned Britain as a country driven by greed, have been omitted from all current prints. Still, were it the "Hate the British" film it's often dismissed as, it's truly amazing to see the propaganda aspects in the film that are missed. The Third Class are never shown being locked below decks as the ship sinks (indeed, when the ship's engines stop, they march up to First Class to demand an explanation from the Captain), and the crew and officers to a man are shown being skilled, efficient, and brave. How could the Nazi's miss so many easy targets, and ones that have been included in almost every Titanic film to this day? And while it is true that Bruce Ismay is turned into a first class villain, driving his ship without regard for safety straight into the iceberg -- it's also been that way in every other Titanic film in which he's been portrayed (for example, the recent TV mini-series TITANIC -- which shows Ismay down in the boiler room screaming at the stokers to make the ship go faster -- like that really happened!). It's all just a question of degree. And if the film portrays the rich millionaires like John Jacob Astor as people who will use money, class, and power to achieve anything -- well, it's no worse than some of the stories -- printed amid all the bravery and self-sacrifice slop -- that appeared in 1912 newspapers. Remember, after the disaster Ismay and the White Star Line were acquitted, people were led to believe all the First Class men died bravely, Captain Smith was blamed for everything, and the poor souls who lost everything when the ship went down never got a penny in restitution. Thus, in the end, considering all the un-truths and legends that have sprung up around the Titanic story, I believe this film plays a lot less like a Nazi film and more like an anti-capitalist one. Little wonder it played in East Germany after the war with no problem. There's certainly enough "Hate the Rich" sentiment here to have warmed Stalin's heart.

So, to me anyway, it's almost refreshing to see a Titanic film that treats the whole affair as the monument to stupidity that it was. Since it has nothing to do with history, one must examine it as the first example of film makers trying to come to grips with the "Titanic Legend". (One could also award that place to the 1929 British film ATLANTIC -- but for some unknown reason that film tried to pretend it was fiction.) Looked at from that prospective, it's a fascinating piece of film making (and history) that deserves to be seen without the vicious "Nazi film" tag hanging over it. Certainly James Cameron must have seen a lot to admire in it; why else would he have copied shots and plot ideas un-masse. (He also coped shots and dialogue from every other Titanic film ever made.) Thankfully, he didn't copy the film's greatest (abet fictional) moment: wireless operator Phillips releasing his pet canary into the night as "Nearer My God to Thee" plays in the background. Did director Herbert Selpin crib this bit from von Stroheim's GREED? We'll never know, as it's said he was murdered by the Nazi's before the film was completed. So much for the benefits of creating a "Nazi film".

So, money sank the Titanic now?

[Boba_Fett1138 · 6/10 · 14 January 2010]

I don't mind movies changing history, or taking various different variations on a story but this movie is nothing more but a piece of Nazi propaganda, used to especially make the English look bad this time. The did the story in such a way that it seemed as if the greed and lust for money was the reason for the Titanic to sink.

But of course this angle could had also been taken years later, in basically every other Titanic, so I'll judge this movie as a movie, rather than a propaganda piece.

At this point, I have seen every relevant Titanic movie. As far as Titanic movies are concerned this version is not amongst the best ones. The movie feels rather rushed and in terms of its look and style, it also isn't the most impressive version around. It must had been far from the costly Titanic movie to make, which can be really seen in the movie. It doesn't ever use big establishing shots of the ship or its interiors. Also the actual sinking is done quite simply, as we get to see very little people actually dying or struggling to survive. Still I must say that they did a good job with its available resources and little money they had to spend. They used some creative solutions.

Also its story, aside from its underlying main plot, is a quite well done one. The movie has many different characters in it and it decides not to have really one or two main characters. So what we have now are many different characters, with many different stories and backdrops. It ensures that the movie also remains interesting and the movie doesn't really ever have any slow moments it. It's also a quite short movie, so that also surely helps.

It could had actually been a much better movie, had it not felt and looked that much rushed.

6/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Trashy curiosity.

[friar_schmuck · 2/10 · 2 December 2009]

Aside from the mind-boggling incongruity of it being made in war-time Nazi Germany, this movie is a jumble of gross caricatures tied together loosely with idiotic story lines.

The "English" (and John Jacob Astor)are money-grubbing financial types. This is hammered home repeatedly with zero nuance or elegance. The good guy is the German first officer. Aside from that, there are a couple dozen individuals whose are fleshed out minimally, only to be dropped or forgotten by the screenwriters and director.

The concluding scenes are (pardon me) waterlogged, bereft of drama or even common sense.

Worth seeing as evidence of how the Nazis poisoned German culture and art.

Here is the most vivid version!

[JohnHowardReid · 9/10 · 23 August 2017]

BACKGROUND: "Titanic" was a pet project of Nazi Germany's evil propaganda minister, Dr. Goebbels. In the true story of the 15 April 1912 tragedy in which 1,503 people lost their lives, Goebbels saw a grand opportunity to denounce British opportunism, stupidity and greed. Goebbels had the script written by a fanatical Nazi, Zerlett- Olfenius. Direction was entrusted to Herbert Selpin who had successfully handled movie versions of other maritime disasters, despite the fact that Goebbels was well aware that Selpin had little love for the Nazi regime. However, Zerlett-Olfenius was entrusted with shooting the second unit work on location in the port of Gdynia in Poland. In May 1942, whilst Selpin shot the interiors in Berlin, Zerlett-Olfenius was detailed to direct the matching exteriors in Gdynia. When no footage at all arrived from Gdynia, the frustrated Selpin journeyed to that port to investigate. He confronted Zerlett- Olfenius and the two men had a bitter quarrel during which Selpin made many insulting references to the German armed forces. Zerlett- Olfenius reported Selpin to the Gestapo. Selpin was arrested and thrown into jail on a charge of treason. Unwilling to delay shooting and bring the matter to trial, the evil Goebbels ordered the prison guards to murder Selpin in his cell on the night of 31 July 1942. The propaganda minister then gave out that the treasonable Selpin had admitted his guilt by committing suicide. Werner Klinger was contracted to complete the film.

However, Selpin had the last laugh after all. When Goebbels viewed the completed picture, he had enough wit to realize that its propaganda effects would be the exact opposite of what he and Zerlett-Olfenius had intended. Not only were the scenes of panic among the passengers uncomfortably akin to the contemporary reactions of German civilians under Allied bombing raids, but the instigator of the whole tragedy, Ismay, was shown to be a corrupt, self-seeking leader, reckless of people's lives in his own lust for power, money and "glory". A Hitler figure, in other words. "Titanic" was shown in Paris (in order to recoup at least part of its enormous cost), but in Germany it was not released at all until 1950.

COMMENT:There are a number of movies dealing with the Titanic tragedy, but for sheer entertainment zing and gusto, this version is hard to beat. Not only are special effects absolutely marvelous and the scenes of shipboard panic and mayhem absolutely riveting, but the sets are superb, the costumes startling, and the acting dazzlingly charismatic. Nielsen hugs audience sympathy as the harassed Petersen, Miss Schmitz (despite a long dark wig that is a trifle disconcerting) transforms realistically from riches-into- rescuer, while the stunningly-gowned Heiberg limns the most decorative of high-class vamps and the evil-visaged Wernicke makes a human figure of the luckless Captain Smith. And a special clap to Jolly Marée who performs the sexiest dance number by which all others will now be measured.

Selpin's driving, pacey direction, boosted by Behn-Grund's splendid camera-work nails home every hideously fascinating detail of this most terrible of maritime tragedies.

A great depiction of the Titanic disaster

[Lars-65 · 6/10 · 8 April 2001]

In this spectacular depiction of the TITANIC's disastrous voyage , the stories of many passengers are told, including the British shipowner Ismael, whose greed is responsible for the disaster, and the ship's first officer – a fictive upright German – who tries to forestall it.

Scenes of the sinking were used uncredited in the 1958 British film `A Night to Remember'. Directed by Herbert Selpin - who shortly after died in a Nazi prison – this film features a strong cast an some impressive visual effects.

After seeing this film, Propaganda Minister Goebbles thought the scenes of mass panic were not appropriate viewing for Germans who were then being subjected to British bombing. So he allowed only foreign release, with the film premiering in Paris in 1943. Beginning in late 1949 Germans could see the film, but the Allis forbade the film to be shown in West Germany in 1950 because of its anti-British propaganda.

Abysmal

[zetes · 3/10 · 20 September 2009]

A movie of the Titanic tragedy that is even worse than James Cameron's billion dollar turd. Who'da thunk it? At least this one comes in at under 90 minutes (probably thanks to Joseph Goebbels, who objected to the scenes of panic and destruction in the middle of the war). Yes, this is a film made in Nazi Germany when the film industry was under the command of Joseph Goebbels. And, yes, as you might expect it's pretty much a propaganda film. That aspect of it does provide some interest. The protagonist of the film is Hans Nielsen, a fictional (I assume) German first officer who insists to the head of the White Star Line company that the Titanic is not ready, as well as reminding him and his captain that they are moving too fast through iceberg-infested waters. If only the idiotic, slimy, capitalist Brits would listen to Hans! At least the Germans were avenging Hans' humiliation by bombing the bejesus out of England at the time the movie opened. Unfortunately, what little interest is provided by the propaganda element isn't enough to make the turgid melodrama worth sitting through. Not unlike Cameron's Titanic, romance abounds on the doomed ocean liner, including one between Hans and actress Sybille Schmitz. I knew Schmitz's name from the fact that Rainer Werner Fassbinder based the character of Veronika Voss on her. Schmitz doesn't look like Voss, though, and it took me a long while to figure out why she looked so much like some kind of ghoul. Ah! I did know here from somewhere: she co-starred in Carl Dreyer's Vampyr as the young woman who is possibly becoming a vampire. There are a couple of other romances, too, one between two workers on the ship and also a flirtation between some peasants on the lower deck. The film really doesn't care about any of these people, though. Most of the "action" in the film, like at least the first half, is taken up by long discussions of how much money various passengers have and what their social status might be. When the ship finally starts to sink, it improves slightly, but, since it's all but unwatchable up to that point, I just wanted it to end.