Hollywood rarely allows mere facts to spoil a money-spinning plot but the makers of Titanic, the costliest film ever made, stand accused of being rather too economical with the truth even by Tinseltown standards.
A scene in the #125m epic has angered Scottish relatives of the liner's first officer and the film is set to cause controversy when it opens in Britain on Friday.
William Murdoch - watch commander when the ship hit an iceberg on April 10, 1912 - is seen shooting himself shortly before the ship sinks.
The implication that he blamed himself for the disaster which claimed 1522 lives was condemned by his nephew, Scott Murdoch.
Yesterday, retired engineer Mr Murdoch, 80, said: ''I am furious that this scene has been included.
''When I was in Sweden a year ago, a friend in the film business showed me the script for Titanic. I wrote to director James Cameron telling him there was no evidence my uncle shot himself and asking him to put the record straight. But I got no reply.''
Mr Murdoch, from Kippford, near Dalbeattie, Kirkcudbrightshire, said his uncle was still considered a hero in his native Dalbeattie where he is commemorated by a plaque.
He added: ''This scene is a distortion of the facts. There is evidence from survivors that my uncle went down with the ship after showing great heroism.''
Titanic expert Ernie Robinson, 70, of Portling, near Dalbeattie, who spoke to survivor Harold Bride, Titanic's second radio officer, confirmed: ''There is no doubt Murdoch died a hero. He went down with the ship after doing everything possible to save the passengers.''
After the warning ''Iceberg ahead!'' went up, Mr Murdoch immediately ordered the helmsman to steer ''hard a-starboard'', telegraphed the engine room to go fast astern and then activated a lever to close the watertight doors.
Mr Robinson said Mr Murdoch had fired a pistol at least once to stop a rush to one of the lifeboats, but added: ''But there is no way he shot himself. This version probably originated from an unscrupulous survivor who sold the story to the newspapers in America after the disaster.''
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article