A Night to Remember (1958) Reviews

A Night to Remember (1958)
Member Rating:  
This meticulous re-creation of the sinking of the Titanic was adapted by Eric Ambler from the best-selling book by Walter Lord, and it preceded the blockbuster Titanic by almost 40 years. The film covers the life and death of the huge vessel from its launching celebration to that fateful night of April 14, 1912, when the "unsinkable" ship struck an iceberg in the North Atlantic. Of the 2224 passengers on board, 1513 were drowned as a result of the bad planning of lifeboats and escape routes. Kenneth More heads a huge and stellar cast, with 200 speaking parts, as second officer Herbert Lightoller, from whose point-of-view the story unfolds. Also in the cast are Laurence Naismith as the ill-fated Captain Smith; Michael Goodliffe as conscience-stricken ship's designer Thomas Andrews; Tucker McGuire as feisty American millionaire Molly Brown, whose courage and tenacity saved many lives; and Anthony Bushell as the captain of the Carpathia, who launched a noble but vain rescue mission once he was apprised of the disaster. Also appearing are two future TV favorites: The Avengers' Honor Blackman as a woman who believes that she has nothing to live for, and The Man From UNCLE's David McCallum as a wireless operator. The climactic sinking of the vessel is re-created with painstaking accuracy; filmed in "real time," it is a mere 37 minutes shorter than the actual tragedy. Two years before the film's release, an American TV adaptation of A Night to Remember set a precedent as the most elaborate and technically complex "live" broadcast of its time. Some viewers will find this movie a more accurate and gripping representation of this sea disaster than the romance-heavy Titanic. ~ Hal Erickson, Rovi

 Read More


Starring:
Kenneth MoreHonor Blackman, (more)
Director(s):
Roy Ward Baker
Format(s):
DVD
View All Versions to rent and buy
 
 
 
 

Average Ratings

(7 member reviews)  


Member Reviews


Nina G.

Most Titantic buffs consider this the definitive movie on the Titantic. I don't necessarily agree with that statement, but it is a good movie. It is a movie that is based on the actual facts so if you are looking for accuracy this is the movie for you. However, as a movie I thought they could have done more to introduce the characters to the viewers so that there would have been more of an emotional reaction when the ship began to sink. I also thought it was awkward how it went from showing the ship setting off on its voyage to showing them receiving ice warnings. Another reviewer mentions it didn't show the ship splitting in half. It wasn't known until the 80's that it split in two while it sank so this film was accurate for what was known at the time.

Yes   |   No


Jared F.

It was a very good movie that begins with the cutting of the ribbon from dry dock to let Titanic slide into the water. It makes it where people act just like the cameras aren't there. Nobody is introduced through the commentator or movie. You have to work your way through that but it is a good movie. The only thing is it didn't split in half it just sunk at about a 45 degree angle. But I didn't think it would have being filmed in the 50's. But even being black and white it is still a really good movie.

Yes   |   No


Michele R.

We felt this movie was very good for our family. Our children were familiar with the story of the Titanic, but in our opinion, too young (10 & 12) for the latest Titanic movie which had nudity and a lot more character development. This was the perfect blend of facts and storyline for the whole family which got the point across without being too emotionally difficult for our kids to handle.

Yes   |   No


James S.

Good counterweight to the Cameron film, which was long on glitz and romance and cardboard villains. This one seems more factual and includes the mystery of the Californian, a ship alleged to have been close to the Titantic when it sank and which failed to answer Titantic's distress calls. At less than half the length of Cameron's film, this is also more much more tightly focused. A great deal more has been learned about what happened aboard the ship since the wreckage was discovered. But you'll be surprised at how many sequences in the Cameron film run parallel to those in earlier film.

Yes   |   No


Keith G.

A far more definitive, if slightly less emotional re-telling of the sinking of the Titanic than the huge James Cameron version. Obviously the special effects are a universe behind the newer film, and there is very little character development, focusing instead on an almost documentary like overview. But that makes the film both more telling and more real. Also, some of the most dramatic and tragic twists of the real story are included here and not in the recent version. It has really stuck with me.

Yes   |   No


Robert D.

This was a extremely well done film in every aspect..the reproductions were superb and the cast of literally thousands was something to behold..this was certainly the best attempt in portraying this night of horrors among other attempts and the lead actors sere excellent among them the noted Kenneth More...4 stars!

Yes   |   No


Diane P.

All the facts.

Yes   |   No


 
 
 

IN-STORE

 

What's Your Take?

Add to FavoritesIn Favorites  |  Share:     Email to a friendShare on FacebookShare on Twitter
    YOUR REVIEW
    WRITE A REVIEW
     
    1000 
     
    Member Reviews
     
    Nina G.

    Most Titantic buffs consider this the definitive movie on the Titantic. I don't necessarily agree with that statement, but it is a good movie. It is a movie that is based on the actual facts so if you are looking for accuracy this is the movie for you. However, as a movie I thought they could have done more to introduce the characters to the viewers so that there would have been more of an emotional reaction when the ship began to sink. I also thought it was awkward how it went from showing the ship setting off on its voyage to showing them receiving ice warnings. Another reviewer mentions it didn't show the ship splitting in half. It wasn't known until the 80's that it split in two while it sank so this film was accurate for what was known at the time.

    Yes   |   No

     
    Jared F.

    It was a very good movie that begins with the cutting of the ribbon from dry dock to let Titanic slide into the water. It makes it where people act just like the cameras aren't there. Nobody is introduced through the commentator or movie. You have to work your way through that but it is a good movie. The only thing is it didn't split in half it just sunk at about a 45 degree angle. But I didn't think it would have being filmed in the 50's. But even being black and white it is still a really good movie.

    Yes   |   No

     
    Michele R.

    We felt this movie was very good for our family. Our children were familiar with the story of the Titanic, but in our opinion, too young (10 & 12) for the latest Titanic movie which had nudity and a lot more character development. This was the perfect blend of facts and storyline for the whole family which got the point across without being too emotionally difficult for our kids to handle.

    Yes   |   No

     
    Read All 7 Reviews