Touches You

hyped garbage

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

A good movie from the 80's, worth watching for the nostalgic. Great directing and good acting, make this flick a worth watch 80's movie. Plus, the picture is beautiful and the photography is a fine 80's one.Now of course, this movie sank at the box office because of the childish subject. But the technical aspect aside, this is one surprisingly well directed movie, I would even say some aspects are way above the average for a 80's movie. Surprising. Most special effects are clearly thoroughly detailed and impressive. Strangely, the most 'important' scene of the movie clearly didn't got the same budget, but it only lasts 5 minutes.The 'cold war' story is slim but acceptable, at at James Bond movie level.So a good movie despite the weird subject. And of course, we are not going to start here on the technical aspect of the matter, you have been already warned about it.

There definitely are some dead spots. Too much time is spent looking for the ship. The three sided romance goes nowhere and could have been deleted. The entire operation of simply pumping foam, attaching gas bags, and exploding the Titanic off the bottom throws credibility out the window. Nevertheless, Richard Jordan and Jason Robards give it their best, despite minimal character development. The real star however is the Titanic model, which of course doesn't appear until past the half way point of the film. If you persevere until then, your imagination will be rewarded. Definitely watchable if you have enough patience. - MERK

My view of this movie is colored by the fact that I read the book first. It was my second Clive Clussler novel, and I went on to read almost all of them. When I saw the ad for this movie, I was so excited.Then I watched it. What a huge, huge disappointment. Whoever wrote the script should be shot. Sorry, I shouldn't encourage violence like that. The writer of this script should be chained to a chair and forced to watch this movie in a continuous loop for a year.It is a god awful film, in a world of bad movies. The story made no sense, and they completely cut out the most exciting parts of the book. It makes me wonder, did the idiot who wrote this purposely leave these parts out? Did he have a beef with the studio and purposely do this to make the movie tank? I can't believe this movie actually made a little money. I haven't seen it on TV for many, many years. It's so bad that cable movie channels won't even run it at midnight.The highlight of the book was when the hero Dirk Pitt faces down a team of Soviet agents trying to take ownership of the newly raised Titanic, in the middle of a hurricane. For the movie, they reduced this entire conflict down to the Soviet showing up at the dock and trying to claim the ship as property of the USSR, and being told no.I came away believing that Cussler sold out on this movie, took the money and turned his back on it. I know if I could have stood by and watch them mutilate the book like this.For 31 years, anytime some asks what's the worse movie I've ever seen, this is always the first title that pops to mind. I might need to watch it again so I can laugh at how bad it is.

I've been a big fan of the Clive Cussler novels over the years, so was excited to check Raise The Titanic out. However, besides fulfilling my desire to see Dirk Pitt on the big screen, the film is an absolute bust. It seems like 75% of the movie are scenes showing submersables underwater searching for the Titanic as the main characters on the ship above monitor them with varying expressions. The movie is just rather flat. There is no substance to it.To make matters worse, Richard Jordan was not a good choice as Dirk Pitt. His portrayal of Pitt makes the character pretty unlikable; perhaps he was attempting to play Clive Cussler himself rather than Pitt (Cussler, a rotten curmodgeon of a man, admittedly has based Pitt on himself or who he wishes he could be--Cussler is not nearly as cool as Pitt). Robards was excellent as Sandecker, but even his strong performance couldn't add much to a pretty lame script. Anne Archer and M. Emmitt Walsh also are in the film, but don't do anything exciting. If you are a fan of the Dirk Pitt novels, go ahead and give this movie a look. If not, avoid it at all costs. I rate this 5 0f 10 stars simply because I'm a fan of the novels. If I were not a fan, I'd rate it a 2 of 10. Sahara starring Matthew McCaugnehey is a better film, but Cussler killed the chance for a sequel with that cast--too bad.