Talk:A Night to Remember (1958 film)

Most Accurate
I removed the sentence saying this film was most accurate portrayal of the Titanic disaster. Don Lynch and Ken Marschall have spent their lives studying the Titanic and its disaster, and they are such authorities on the subject, they have done DVD commentary tracks for both this film and Cameron's "Titanic". They say it's not even close: Cameron's film is much more accurate. That's no disrespect to A Night to Remember; Titanic wasn't rediscovered then, and they didn't have the special effects or budget of the later film. There's also been more research done the last 50 years. Celedor15 03:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * May I ask you, where you've read or heard them claiming, that it's not even close? Because I belive, that they claimed the exact opposite on the Encyclopedia Titanica Message Board, which they're among the most valued members of, along with other historians and researchers, such as Dave Gittines, Parks Stephenson (he was part of the 2005 History Channel RMS Titanic Expedition, for example), and others. And they also agree, that this mvoie IS way more historically accurate, than "Titanic" (1997). This being the case, I'm restoring that deleted statement back into this article. ;) - OBrasilo 11:49, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Even though it IS tempting to get into another bitch-out regarding Titanic vs. A Night to Remember, I am just here to say that the "most accurate" quote SHOULD be deleted because it is a "weasel word." End of story.

I think 97 Titanic can beet ANTR in some parts such as a normal Lightoller, but Titanic can also leave out too many details thanks to it being fictional. Alot of it is just, "ooo look at that" from the pov of a fictional character (like the part where the boat is going over another one or the funnel).

In fact alot of time is missed thanks to Jack and Rose, for instance it gets right to where the well is being awashed really quickly, like 5-10 mins into the sinking (actually Ismay would be in C and being lowered when the well was awashed).

PS Wrong film, though I know it's not the 53 Titanic either as it had no part where a man sets a glass on the table and it glides to the left, plus a funnel falls also. Must be the 56 TV version, if it had a model too that is.--BobtheVila (talk) 14:43, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * James Cameron's film has one scene that is deliberate fiction. Jack and Rose, two fictional people, unintionally distract the real lookouts from seeing the iceberg, (by kissing on the main deck in sight of the crow's nest), until it is too late to warn the bridge.  Mr. Cameron put the scene in the movie to show how at the moment Rose chooses "to go with Jack when they arrive in NYC", the ship meets the iceberg,and Jack & Rose were partially responsible for the disaster. Go to Google.com.  Put in the search block: Jack Rose distract the lookouts.   You will get thousands of replies. A book on disaster movies metions that scene and so does Titanic-Titanic.com. A Night to Remember has fictional people in it, but, they don't have a significant impact in the movie.74.76.223.87 (talk) 23:32, 28 January 2009 (UTC)Bennett Turk


 * It doesn't really matter. A reliable source would have to say which of the films is more accurate. Stetsonharry (talk) 00:12, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Night to remember 1.jpg
Image:Night to remember 1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Even though it IS tempting to get into another bitch-out regarding Titanic vs. A Night to Remember, I am just here to say that the "most accurate" quote SHOULD be deleted because it is a "weasel word." End of story.

BetacommandBot 21:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Night to remember 2.jpg
Image:Night to remember 2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 21:03, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Plot summary
This is a fictionalized account of the Titanic sinking, even though it hews closely to the facts, but the plot summary reads like a factual account of the sinking. I've started trimming and also will begin rewriting this to adhere to the plot of the movie, not the actual sinking. For example, I see at the outset that the actual language used in the movie ("Iceburg dead ahead") is not used, and instead the officer on deck says "thank you", not in the movie, and "iceburg right ahead." Then we have the baker doing things that did not take place in real life. That has to be finessed.Stetsonharry (talk) 22:19, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I think it's important that the plot section recognize that the main character in the movie is the Kenny More character, Lightoller, who is the star and gets the largest amount of camera time. That's not present in the plot summary at present, so I think some kind of language needs to be adopted. Stetsonharry (talk) 14:52, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * That's fine, but include in in the normal course of describing the plot, not as a meta-level mention. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 20:01, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * That was actually what I was trying to do in this plot description, in fact, but I'll try to figure out a different way of wording it. If you have any suggestions, please let me know. Stetsonharry (talk) 18:58, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

accuracy
this film is not the most accurate, don't you guys know that james cameron recreated the ship both the exterier and interior faithfully, something a night to remember failed to do.even small details like the boy spinning the top on the boatdeck was recreated from an actual photo taken on the titanic. just watch the documentary : titanic breaking new ground. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.179.82.120 (talk) 00:59, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Did you know that this film tried to recreate the exterior and interior of the ship accurately as well as having 4th Officer Joseph Boxhall as a technical consultant?

Also many survivors and their families were involved in the making of this film - something Cameron could never have done. - MarsBarLover 21:14, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

New article on Titanic in popular culture
Editors here might be interested to have a look at a new article that I've contributed, RMS Titanic in popular culture, which will be linked from the Main Page on the centenary day. Please leave any feedback at Talk:RMS Titanic in popular culture. Prioryman (talk) 20:52, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Added links
Added 'See also' section with links to help tie-in with Titanic (upcoming centenary and featured article). Plus a couple of wikilinks.

Sean Connery
A poster on IMDB asserts:

"The seaman loading the boats is not Sean Connery. It's an actor called Larry Taylor, whose resemblance to Connery has resulted not only in that particular character being mis-identified but probably in a myth that Connery is in this film at all (the BFI research dept are of that opinion). Larry Taylor's son Rocky, indidentally, has confirmed to me personally that his father is the seaman often shown in ANTR screenshots said to be of Connery - including the screenshot referenced in the ANTR FAQ right here on the imdb website. And he should know as he was not only Larry's son but also Sean's stunt double in the early Bond films!"--http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0051994/board/flat/197967792

As recently as 2012, it has been asserted in print that Connery is in the movie, http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/apr/07/night-to-remember-titanic

On http://www.seanconnery.com/, in the filmography section, he is listed as being in the movie.

On the BFI website, it lists "Bearded Seaman" as Larry Taylor http://explore.bfi.org.uk/4ce2b6b18a694

In the article here on Wikipedia, it says Connery was a "Steerage Passenger". However, other than the scene grab of the bearded seaman (https://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/community/attachments/111-jpg.784/), who does remarkably resemble Connery, I can find no pictures purporting to be of Connery from the movie on the internet.--Nyctc7 (talk) 15:13, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Pronouns
do were really refer to ships as "she" and "her" anymore? it sounds too poetic/corny to me, especially for an encyclopedia.

i suggest changing them all to "it". 66.30.47.138 (talk) 12:54, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Professional seafarers still refer to their crafts as feminine. Even Navy women serving aboard ship do this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.102.146.203 (talk) 18:48, 8 October 2022 (UTC)