See this poll on: https://poll.fm/9939022/embed
Give others the chance to vote.
Share this poll, because the more votes the better.
Create your own.
Opinions! We all have them. Find out what people really think with polls and surveys from Crowdsignal.
closed
I'm voting Titanic for the females who made this the biggest movie of the 90s and were derided for their love of this film. Titanic is yet another example of why only guys can be fanboys. Once something is overly popular with teenage girls, it is usually found to be sub-par.
Though Titanic was more engaging than I would have expected once I finally caved in and watched it about ten years ago, Jurassic Park had everything my plastic dinosaur playing inner child could want in a movie.
it's criminal that these are in a play-in round and not guaranteed entrants. Were there two blockbusters of the 90s with more cultural impact than Jurassic Park and Titanic?
Oh, please. This one couldn't be more obvious. Not only is "Jurassic Park" smarter, funnier, and scarier than "Titanic" (not to mention shorter), but its special effects hold up better. No competition.
My son was a week old with colic when my wife and I, holding on to the notion that we might be able to watch movies as we used to, took him to see Jurassic Park. The enormous sounds kept him asleep for the entire showing, and for that Spielberg has my undying gratitude. While my now-grown son might choose Titanic, the Park will always be a favorite of mine.
C'mon, it's gotta be Jurassic Park! First off I'd like to assure Adam that there are millennials out there such as myself that love both Jaws and Jurassic Park and know full well what the order of those films should be. Jaws is ALWAYS number 1. Maybe if Robert Shaw had lived long enough to give an incredible speech about going into the water with a bunch of raptors things would be different. But they aren't. But back to the matter at hand. I realize and appreciate that Titanic is a very watchable film and a great film-making achievement. I also understand that it is beloved to many people. But JURASSIC PARK! They built a life size t-rex and then made it RUN. Jurassic Park is about a billion hours shorter, creates a true sense of awe and wonder, and doesn't involve any endless debates about door sizes and buoyancy. While Cameron's early films like Aliens, True Lies, Terminator and T-2 are incredible, his later films have left me cold. While they're visual masterpieces, overall, they're just missing some kind of storytelling spark. I think Titanic is really where Cameron started to put the world building, the technology, and the visuals before everything else. Spielberg on the other hand is often like best bedtime story teller you could ever have, weaving a tale, sprinkling some of his magic over it, and making it come to life right before your very eyes. There's just something about Spielberg's work that will always make it superior to me. It's gotta be Jurassic Park.
Jurassic Park is the clear winner for me. One of the most magical cinematic moments of my childhood was that very first encounter with the "live" brontosaurus. The reaction of the audience was the same reaction as Dr. Grant--utterly astounded. I still get goosebumps thinking about it!
Titanic alternate title: Two Lucky Swedes
Jurassic Park was one of my first experiences that I can remember in a movie theater without my parents. It is absolutely formative. I adored the book and I think Spielberg's film does the best parts of the book justice. Laura Dern blew me away as a capable scientist with a deadpan sense of humor who could handle the pressure of these extreme situations. She never ever disappoints. I'm not on the "It's better than Jaws" bandwagon, but Jurassic Park left a mark for a lot of reasons and it's still a film I totally love.
Titanic, on the other hand . . . I occasionally feel like I am on an island with Titanic, given the recent re-appreciation of the film because I absolutely hated it when I saw it. I have come to appreciate bright, broad emotional strokes of melodrama (Pretty Little Liars is one of my favorite TV shows), but I don't think Cameron does melodrama very well in Titanic. He offers up stock characters who never do anything that isn't completely expected of them, they are typical rather than archetypal, or so it felt to me. Cameron only seems interested, focused, and engaged as a director in the technical spectacle, especially the "present day" Robert Ballard inspired underwater searches for the Titanic's physical remains. I devoured Ballard's National Geographic special, I had it on VHS and so there are moments when the film fulfills its promise and all, but . . . I just didn't connect with the movie on an emotional level.
I'm super interested in what y'all's revisit turns up, but Titanic has been a hard hard pass for me since it landed in theaters, so it was super easy to vote for Jurassic Park here.
While both Jurassic Park and Titanic are beloved movies and deliver the goods as visual spectacles, Jurassic Park is the winner here for two reasons: Jurassic Park has a better-than-average plot involving multiple story lines that maintain the film’s velocity between the scares and set pieces. More importantly, the stakes feel higher for all of the characters, especially the cute kids.
By contrast, after Titanic’s captain agrees to speed up the boat in order to secure a surprise early arrival in the U.S., there’s not much story to tell while we wait for iceberg time. Even the stolen jewel subplot is simply a device to put Jack in handcuffs at the worst possible time.
While the stakes in Titanic are unfairly diluted because we know how the movie ends (for the boat and for Rose), the screenplay doesn’t do much to improve things.
Jurassic Park just feels like a more complete story beyond the visual artistry, making it a very re-watchable film that needs to make the cut. Jim Pallini
A hard round, because these are both carefully constructed masterworks from crowd-pleasing directors at the top of their game. Part of me is tempted to pick Titanic, just to be contrarian--the blockbuster landscape is filled with movies about scientists running in horror from things they've created, and almost completely devoid of sweeping love stories, at least any made after the sixties. But my gut says Jurassic Park, despite this reasoning, or even because of it. For better or worse, Jurassic defined our modern-day movie landscape, and I'm more fascinated by the eternally influential than the lightning in a bottle anomaly.
Neither film is very good. Jurassic Park is Spielberg so there are a some thrilling sequences, but do we really care about these characters? And I can't believe anyone would rank this film anywhere close to Jaws or Raiders. Same complaint about the characters is Titanic. The script is awful at times. Neither film would make my top 500 of the nineties, but I went with Titanic because it tries to say something about class, and it has Winslet rescue DiCaprio from drowning on ship in a nice reversal of the usual gender dynamic in these types of scenes. A Night to Remember (1958), is a much better movie about the Titanic Speaking of Winslet, where is Heavenly Creatures on this list?
@Tom Morris - Yeah, I'm wondering if there could be somewhat of a male vs female split on the voting here...
Dinosaurs or a boat? Dinosaurs.
(although Paxton.... then again, Newman... Jurassic Park)
To everyone voting for Titanic: you were so preoccupied with whether or not you could that you never stopped to think if you should.
Did my homework: Rewatched both of those on two consecutive nights in order to be able to make an informed decision here. ... Wouldn't have been necessary though, since seeing the two movies back to back only confirmed what I already knew to be true: JURASSIC PARK is maybe the last truly great action-adventure(-horror) blockbuster Hollywood ever produced, and TITANIC... well, I'm sad to say it, because I had very fond memories of this movie (memories of first love and such), but TITANIC is really not much more than an overlong soap-opera style schmaltz-fest centered around a bunch of paper-thin cardboard-cutout characters who only become bearable once that ship starts going under and they're all forced to quit exchanging hollow, wooden, hackneyed platitudes for a while (that last hour-and-a-half is still pretty spectacular though, if only the first 90 to 100 minutes [!] of the movie were on the same level...).
This was the one that caught me off guard the most as to how hard a pick it was but it quickly turned into a no-brainer. Jurassic Park director extraordinaire Steven Speilberg is to Blockbuster Spectacle Play-In what legend Bette Davis famously said about fellow legend Lillian Gish and her connection to film close-ups; Steven and Lillian both respectively created both. Plus let's face it, Jurassic Park is sooo much more consistently fun, and at times terrifying in that awesome blockbuster sort of way, than James Cameron's epic.
JURASSIC PARK! THAT WAS A GOOD ONE!
(To be read in Dave Chappelle’s Samual Jackson voice)
I would vote for Jurassic Park, but my wife has watched Titanic more than 50 times. So because I love my wife. Titanic!