What ever happened to the Titanic Movie Set?

Discussing what happened to the Titanic movie set after the 1997 film

[juslewissr]

"Titanic" was released two and a half decades ago and is still one of the most realistic (and brilliantly done) movies of all time; It is an absolute masterpiece.

[ScroatBagGarage]

Every time he says it’s “hollow on the inside” take a drink

[--]

- They destroyed the large, one sided, 1:1 model
- They kept some interior sets and donated to museums
- They sold off smaller set pieces, like furniture.

There saved you 8 minutes of rambling.

[sparkplug]

One set you can visit still is where they shot a lot of the footage for the engine room scenes. They filmed a lot of that on the SS Jeremiah O'Brien, which is a museum ship with very similar engines, so when you see them spinning them up in the movie, that wasn't CGI, they filmed that on an actual ship.

[anthonyhebisen]

I own two chairs from the first class dining saloon used in the Cameron film . I got them from the J peterman catalog back in 2000 . They’re carved wood with dark green leather studded with nail heads . Had them in storage for years and just recently bought my first home to give them a permanent location

[howardgreenman]

Cameron’s job was to make a movie on a fixed budget, not to make a Titanic replica for a museum. So he did his job and did it very well. What is this nonsense “he should have made an exact replica for a museum”? He was making a MOVIE!

[paulluce]

Fun fact.. Apparently the company that made all the carpets for Titanic ( and other ships for Harland and Woolfe) were still going in the 90s and made the carpets for this movie set replica..

[gregoryboyd]

I've been a Titanic Historical Society member and collector for over 40 years who's had the pleasure of meeting Dr. Robert Ballard, who discovered the famous wreck in 1985... a GREAT guy! My collection covers the walls of my home theater and includes a couple of Ballard's autographs, a full-sized silhouette of a lifeboat oar [all 14'6" of it], a nice chunk of Coal from the wreck, dozens of printed pieces, books/videos, and from James Cameron's 1997 film a complete set of screen-used first-class china/wine glasses displayed near a life jacket that was likewise used onscreen during the sinking scenes. And when guests visit, it's always hard to get them out of that room whether I'm running a movie, or not!

[kyleknapp]

God, your voice cuts right through me.

[davinp]

If a complete Titanic replica was to be build, they would need to follow the most current safety regulations and have modern technology aboard, so it won't be 100% exactly like the 1912 Titanic

[Dilligff]

A note on Raise the Titanic, it was actually based on a Clive Cussler novel published in 1976, and the movie was made in 1980, quite some time before the wreck was actually discovered. At that time there was a lot of speculation as to what condition it would be in with a lot of assumptions based on the preservation of wrecks in the icy waters of the Greater Lakes that the Titanic might very well have been perfectly preserved. It was also assumed, given how strong it was engineered that it would be intact. While the premise of lifting it from the depths via inflatable flotillas was still a bit ludicrous, it wasn't fully established yet as being impossible.

[cltransler]

The film was way too expensive to begin with: it took two studios to produce it and there was a debate on whether or not it would even be finished. It was scheduled for summer release, but James Cameron was able to convince them to hold off for a December/Christmas release to work on the f/x. No one thought it was going to be very good and industry insiders were betting it would bomb. Sets are built for a specific film and then destroyed. No one thinks a movie is going to be so epic that they would build to last--they're built to film and then forgotten.

[Zway]

How many times is bro gonna say "hollow whole side not built" I got it the first 5 times😂

[ajswideexplore]

Oh my ... Does the guy even take a breath? And why is he talking about the exact same thing all the time? And why is he shouting instead of talking?

[stevenranck]

The set was 1:1 scale, but there was a small cross section that wasn’t built. Also, although it was mostly hollow, it did have a few interior sections built. I was fortunate to have walked on the set during the filming of a scene.

[takengrace]

I worked in film for 10 years. Not only would the studio never approve a fully fleshed out set. There would be a boat load of safety issues holding all the film equipment, extras, cast and crew. Also the logistics of filming would be a absolute nightmare. When you build a set on a stage you're always thinking about wild walls to get cameras in and out easily, lighting and ease of filming in general.

[tred]

Okay, in a perfect world it would still be impractical to build a full size Titanic with all the sets inside for the purpose of filming one movie.
I’d say that considering the time period this movie was filmed in, the budget it had, the dedication to using practical effects, and how much detail they were putting into it, this movie is already far better than it could have been. They could have put a lot less effort into this but instead they went above and beyond by building this huge ship for their movie. It may not have been completely to scale and it may have only been “half a ship” and “completely hollow, ” but considering the constraints at the time it is remarkable that they even were able to have this level of detail.
But even if they could have built the full ship and to scale, I don’t think they would have. It would have been completely impractical to build a full ship model for one movie. Especially when the sets are going to be flooded, the ship is going to be broken apart and partly sunk, and they needed parts of the ship that could be moved independently from the other sections in order to get the shots they needed. Plus it’s just easier to have interior sets for the ship in more controlled conditions on a sound stage. Having all the interior sets built onboard the ship set would have greatly constrained on their ability to get interesting shots.
It’s hard to peel back the curtain and see what it, realistically, takes to make a movie sometimes. They might have been able to make a full sized Titanic with all the sets inside and film it like that, but it would have been far more difficult because they’d have less flexibility with the sets, they’d pretty much only have one shot at filming it (because it would have been a lot harder to raise the set again after sinking it, what with how much a full iron ship would weigh), and they would pretty much just be sinking another ship just to retell the story of a sinking ship.
Would it have been cool if they built a full working replica of the Titanic, and then turned it into a museum after filming? Most definitely.
But such a feat would have only constrained James Cameron and would have made it more difficult to make the film the way he wanted to, the way he needed to, in order to make the masterpiece that he did.
So, given how movies are actually made, I don’t think they would have ever made a full size, all sets included, Titanic, even in a perfect world.

[calvinreeves]

was the film ship hollow on the inside? 🤔

[italiano]

Why are you yelling through out the video just talk bro.

[rallypoint]

We would go to Rosarito Mexico often in the mid 90’s and we actually saw the ship while driving by. Didn’t realize what they were filming until the movie came out and then it clicked!!!