I look at it like this. With 712 people as witnesses, you are ALWAYS going to get conflicting stories. Think of that cousin of yours who has a penchant for making things more grand than they are. Then think of your conservative aunt, who almost always saves the best details for herself when telling a story like this. I think that Cameron took the best of both of those types of person and combined them, along with a mojority of the eyewitness acounts, and made a film.

As for the sinking and final plunge... The Baker actually lived what was depicted in the film, as the ship went under. It was said that he didn't even get his hair wet. He survived after being in the water for over 4 hours. Most people didn't even make it past the first 30 minutes in the 28 degree water. His story seems to be the basis of this, and would suggest that the stern was up-ended like the film portrayed.

I think it's as accurate as can be filmed. And let's face it, you don't have to 'play up' something this tragic for it to be effective. I think he did it this way because he truly believe this is how it went. The historians on the film thought that the breakup ocurred a little closer to the water line, and that maybe the ship was too far above water in the film, but they agreed that this was the way of it.