History Headscratchers / TheLegendOfTheTitanic

[[WMG: If the ''Titanic'' and all its passengers arrived well and safely in New York City, where did the "misunderstanding" that it sunk and many people died come from?]]

* How did both movies end up in different areas than they were supposed to be? Seriously. They had the simple task of creating a movie about the ''Titanic'' sinking and yet, they went off-course somehow. The sequel is more mind-boggling than the first because it features '''Atlantis''' when the main characters were trying to find the remains of the ''Titanic''.

* I'm not sure what your point is. That because most people would rather finish the voyage, Maltravers should too? Why are you judging what the villain wants to do by what other people want to do? Cal clearly cared more about breaking Jack and Rose up than he did about enjoying the voyage, so why can't Maltravers be more concerned about getting his whaling concession than about enjoying the voyage? And as for Cal not wanting to sink the ship to accomplish any of his goals, so what? Maltravers isn't Cal. If he sees sinking the ''Titanic'' as necessary to cover up the fact the Duke's signature was obtained at gunpoint, then he's gonna sink the ''Titanic''. I admit that it's like trying to swat a fly using a bazooka, but people doing over the top things is par for the course in this movie, so if nothing else Maltravers' plan is internally consistent.

* I'm not sure what your point is. That because most people would rather finish the voyage, Maltravers wouldn't? Why are you judging what the villain wants to do by what other people want to do? Cal clearly cared more about breaking Jack and Rose up than he did about enjoying the voyage, so why can't Maltravers be more concerned about getting his whaling concession than about enjoying the voyage? And as for Cal not wanting to sink the ship to accomplish any of his goals, so what? Maltravers isn't Cal. If he sees sinking the ''Titanic'' as necessary to cover up the fact the Duke's signature was obtained at gunpoint, then he's gonna sink the ''Titanic''. I admit that it's like trying to swat a fly using a bazooka, but people doing over the top things is par for the course in this movie, so if nothing else Maltravers' plan is internally consistent.

[[WMG: Why was this film even made?]]
* To cash in on the success of Creator/JamesCameron's ''Titanic'', probably. As to ''why'' this was made the way it was... three guesses come to mind: A) The writers and directors were poorly educated on history and didn't realize this was a ''real'' tragic event where hundreds of people died, or B) they ''were'' aware of this but thought that the truth would be too scary and sad for young children to handle, or C) they cared less about making a historical movie for children and more about shoving their save-the-whales agenda down their throats.
** ''Independently'' from the inaccurate historicity of the thing, why is it so ''bad'' ? They could've at least made a decent movie out of their premise. And yet it's not barely giving a crap; there's enough good concepts and character designs to see that at least some of the crew was paying attention. Was there ExecutiveMeddling or rush-to-release-it-at-a-critic-moment or short budget involved ? Anything ?
* This, plus the other animated ''Titanic'' movie, demonstrate fairly clearly that there apparently is a large percentage of people who do not understand ''Titanic'' actually happened. Probably dismissing everything they saw in a movie as, well, fiction -- not just historical fiction but pure fiction, as in fantasy -- they assumed, wrongly, that the ''Titanic'' film by James Cameron was nothing but a fairy tale of some kind. Like the way Creator/{{Disney}} makes movies about Indian princesses who have magical ecomancy powers, or how Anastasia was apparently a MagicalGirl chased by a [[HistoricalVillainUpgrade demonic]] [[UsefulNotes/RasputinTheMadMonk Rasputin]]. They just saw the ''Titanic'' movie and assumed it shared the same or less historical validity as ''WesternAnimation/{{Anastasia}}'' and ''Disney/{{Pocahontas}}'' so they decided to make their own -- it never occurred to them to see if ''Titanic'' was a real ship that actually sank, or how serious it really was, because they likely assumed it was either complete fantasy or some quasi-mythical footnote. Hell in ''Tentacolino'' they directly say that ''Titanic'' was just a myth, and compare it to the story of Atlantis. So yeah, they're that ignorant. But then again, as they say, when you assume you make an ass... etc., etc.

* This, plus the other animated ''Titanic'' movie, demonstrate fairly clearly that there apparently is a large percentage of people who do not understand ''Titanic'' actually happened. Probably dismissing everything they saw in a movie as, well, fiction -- not just historical fiction but pure fiction, as in fantasy -- they assumed, wrongly, that the ''Titanic'' film by James Cameron was nothing but a fairy tale of some kind. Like the way Creator/{{Disney]] makes movies about Indian princesses who have magical ecomancy powers, or how Anastasia was apparently a MagicalGirl chased by a [[HistoricalVillainUpgrade demonic]] [[UsefulNotes/RasputinTheMadMonk Rasputin]]. They just saw the ''Titanic'' movie and assumed it shared the same or less historical validity as ''WesternAnimation/{{Anastasia}}'' and ''Disney/{{Pocahontas}}'' so they decided to make their own -- it never occurred to them to see if ''Titanic'' was a real ship that actually sank, or how serious it really was, because they likely assumed it was either complete fantasy or some quasi-mythical footnote. Hell in ''Tentacolino'' they directly say that ''Titanic'' was just a myth, and compare it to the story of Atlantis. So yeah, they're that ignorant. But then again, as they say, when you assume you make an ass... etc., etc.

* To cash in on the success of James Cameron's ''Titanic'', probably. As to ''why'' this was made the way it was... three guesses come to mind: A) The writers and directors were poorly educated on history and didn't realize this was a ''real'' tragic event where hundreds of people died, or B) they ''were'' aware of this but thought that the truth would be too scary and sad for young children to handle, or C) they cared less about making a historical movie for children and more about shoving their save-the-whales agenda down their throats.

* This, plus the other animated ''Titanic'' movie, demonstrate fairly clearly that there apparently is a large percentage of people who do not understand ''Titanic'' actually happened. Probably dismissing everything they saw in a movie as, well, fiction -- not just historical fiction but pure fiction, as in fantasy -- they assumed, wrongly, that the ''Titanic'' film by James Cameron was nothing but a fairy tale of some kind. Like the way Disney makes movies about Indian princesses who have magical ecomancy powers, or how Anastasia was apparently a MagicalGirl chased by a demonic Rasputin. They just saw the ''Titanic'' movie and assumed it shared the same or less historical validity as ''Anastasia'' and ''Pocahontas'' so they decided to make their own -- it never occurred to them to see if ''Titanic'' was a real ship that actually sank, or how serious it really was, because they likely assumed it was either complete fantasy or some quasi-mythical footnote. Hell in ''Tentacolino'' they directly say that ''Titanic'' was just a myth, and compare it to the story of Atlantis. So yeah, they're that ignorant. But then again, as they say, when you assume you make an ass... etc., etc.

** ''Independently'' from the inaccurate historicity of the thing, why is it so ''bad'' ? They could've at least made a decent movie out of their premise. And yet it's not an example of They Just Didn't Care; there's enough good concepts and character designs to see that at least some of the crew was paying attention. Was there ExecutiveMeddling or rush-to-release-it-at-a-critic-moment or short budget involved ? Anything ?

* Why was this film even made?
** To cash in on the success of James Cameron's ''Titanic'', probably. As to ''why'' this was made the way it was... three guesses come to mind: A) The writers and directors were poorly educated on history and didn't realize this was a ''real'' tragic event where hundreds of people died, or B) they ''were'' aware of this but thought that the truth would be too scary and sad for young children to handle, or C) they cared less about making a historical movie for children and more about shoving their save-the-whales agenda down their throats.
*** ''Independently'' from the inaccurate historicity of the thing, why is it so ''bad'' ? They could've at least made a decent movie out of their premise. And yet it's not an example of They Just Didn't Care; there's enough good concepts and character designs to see that at least some of the crew was paying attention. Was there ExecutiveMeddling or rush-to-release-it-at-a-critic-moment or short budget involved ? Anything ?
** This, plus the other animated ''Titanic'' movie, demonstrate fairly clearly that there apparently is a large percentage of people who do not understand ''Titanic'' actually happened. Probably dismissing everything they saw in a movie as, well, fiction -- not just historical fiction but pure fiction, as in fantasy -- they assumed, wrongly, that the ''Titanic'' film by James Cameron was nothing but a fairy tale of some kind. Like the way Disney makes movies about Indian princesses who have magical ecomancy powers, or how Anastasia was apparently a MagicalGirl chased by a demonic Rasputin. They just saw the ''Titanic'' movie and assumed it shared the same or less historical validity as ''Anastasia'' and ''Pocahontas'' so they decided to make their own -- it never occurred to them to see if ''Titanic'' was a real ship that actually sank, or how serious it really was, because they likely assumed it was either complete fantasy or some quasi-mythical footnote. Hell in ''Tentacolino'' they directly say that ''Titanic'' was just a myth, and compare it to the story of Atlantis. So yeah, they're that ignorant. But then again, as they say, when you assume you make an ass... etc., etc.
* Why sink the ''Titanic'' to cover your tracks? This is the Titanic, the Ship of Dreams! People would rather finish the maiden voyage of the most luxurious ocean liner than worry about whaling. Sure Hockley wants to break Jack and Rose apart, but it never crossed his mind to sink the ''Titanic''.
* Why did they place so much emphasis on the fact that Elizabeth could talk to dolphins because of her tears, but the villains were already talking to sharks and ''everyone'' was talking to mice?
* This was brought up by WebVideo/TheNostalgiaCritic, but he did make a good point. When Tentacles found out that the sharks had tricked him into throwing the iceberg into the ''Titanic's'' path, why didn't he just move it out of the way? There was time; he could have moved it out of the way before the ship hit it.
* The entire second movie is a headscratcher. Seriously, I cannot make sense of the plot.

* If the ''Titanic'' and all its passengers arrived well and safely in New York City, where did the "misunderstanding" that it sunk and many people died come from?
** The closest thing I can think of to an explanation is that it was an early printing error. When the ship actually sank, several newspapers printed headlines that got facts wrong, such as saying that the ship sank in four hours or that many more people were saved.
* Why exactly did Re force Elizabeth, Don Juan and their friends to stay in Atlantis? They did nothing wrong and they were victims of a shark attack. Seriously, if he wanted to avoid people knowing about Atlantis, all he had to do was send them back to the surface.
** Speaking of which, why were Elizabeth and Don Juan alright with being immortal and stuck underwater for the rest of eternity? Some people think that they had a case of StockholmSyndrome, but even that doesn't make any sense. Not to mention that they had no regard for the people they left behind (i.e. parents, spouses, children, friends, etc.).