It was also the time when she watched a man die to save her life.
He didn’t even have to, mythbusters did a show on it lol
Idk why you’re being downvoted. They did, and you’re right. A door of that size made with accurate wood could hold two adult men out of the water when they removed their life vests and put them under the door.
If Jack and Rose had done the same, they would have increased the chance of survival for both of them by both being out of the water and having double the body heat to warm each other.
Did they come up with that idea while floating in sub-freezing water, after having just experienced multiple near-death scenarios, while afraid for their lives? The reality is that it’s easy to solve a problem in a lab, not so much under duress.
Because you missed in the same episode during that part where David Cameron said that Leo’s character dying was what had to happen. That was the story. It is a pointless gotcha, based on the movie not spending the time to determine the exact amount of buoyancy of a ship wreck.
They try in the movie and it causes them both to be in the freezing water. It wasn’t about him being able to float, it was about them both not freezing to death.
They don’t put the life vests under the door in the movie, which is the key detail tested by the Mythbusters.
She was involved in a major historical event where the person she thought she’d be with forever died right in front of her.
Also she’s telling the story of the Titanic to people who asked her to tell the story about her time on the Titanic. Why would her kids or family be relevant? This is just rage bait.
She also wasn’t on her deathbed lol she was just old
She died in bed at the end of the movie, so technically she was on her death bed every night that she slept on that ship.
I don’t remember that, is that a deleted scene?
Rose had adopted a new life under an assumed name after the sinking. Her family wasn’t even aware that she had been on the Titanic, much less met what she considered her soulmate.
Rose allowed herself to tell the story that had weighed on her for 70 years, nearly her entire life, because she knew she was nearing the end of her life.
That’s why her scenes are so powerful.
I’m so confused because I thought Rose was an amalgamation but you’re speaking of a singular individual in a factual way that makes me wonder how wrong I am. Is there really a Rose from the titanic that aligns with what you’re saying?
Not sure how long it’s been since you saw the movie but it starts and ends with a much older Rose in the modern era, on board a research vessel out looking for the wreck of the Titanic. While aboard she starts telling the story of her time on the Titanic, that story then becomes the rest of the film. There’s a sort of epilogue at the end where she wraps it up, then passes away in bed.
I think that’s what OP is talking about.
deleted by creator
Even besides all that, why does any of this reflect on other women? incel ass shit
Edit: judging by the voting, a bunch of incels found this thread
I think the post is dumb but the logic is that it reflects on other women because millions of them think it’s a good love story (as per the post).
Except, this logic falls apart immediately when you start understanding that she was in love with the dude and he died trying to save her. That’s something you remember your whole life. This is just a bad unhealthy take from OP and the downvoters here.
Sure, but millions of women are able to separate fiction from reality, and thus are able to appreciate a story which didn’t really happen, unlike this anon
Hmm, yea it’s probably the Anon who doesn’t understand reality and fiction, not the people taking a greentext at face value and making sexual judgements.
Did you not read the banner before coming here? The whole point is to make fun of 4chan, perhaps find a few diamonds in the rough.
To answer the question:
- She didn’t know she was going to die on that bed.
- She was asked to tell the story to researchers wanting to find a jewel.
- She got caught up in her story.
Perfectly normal.
Now for what is not normal is that Rose is extremely coldhearted and selfish throughout the entire story, even when she’s telling the story from her perspective and one of her only redeeming qualities that she has is that she’s not Cal. But remember, this is HER version of the story. Imagine how the perspectives could have been wildly different from hers.
Anyway in HER version of the story…:- Rose denies her husband and children her wealth.
She never told anyone about it and throws away the jewel
that could have been extremely useful for her children or grandchildren.
Their tuition, medical expenses, you name it.
Not to mention it would have given the researchers
closure to all of their efforts to find this treasure,
which we now know will be fruitless.
And she’s did it with glee, saying “Oops” with a smile.
Oh yeah, spite those researchers and your children granny!
We’ve really seen how awful they are, especially her children.
And if she hated her own children, she could have given the money to charity.
Or she could have given it to Jack’s family. But I guess the family of a hobo
would never appreciate such a gift. - Rose killed Jack.
She never regretted having hogged the wreckage that could have saved Jack’s life.
Mythbusters proved that the life vests could have been used to give the wreckage more
bouyancy that would have kept them both afloat.
They could have taken turns on that wreckage. She could have given him her life vest.
She could have stayed on the life boats, then Jack would have had the wreckage on his own.
She could have traded herself in for Jack since she was the idiot having made the dumb decision of leaving the lifeboat.
Jack died through her actions and for 70 years until her death this never occured to her.
Not to mention, since she went on the life boat, she’s responsible for taking a seat that could have been taken by another person. A child, a man, a lady. That person would have survived.
Or it could have been her maid Trudy, who died on the ship because there wasn’t enough space on the life boats. - Rose flips on her secret lover
When Jack is being framed by her fiancée of being a thief,
she lets him down by believing her fiancée’s lies,
despite her telling Jack that she trusts him.
I guess not.
This almost gets Jack killed at an earlier time. - Rose knows that through her cheating, she is accidentally responsible for every single one of those deaths of that happened on the Titanic, including children and babies and doesn’t regret that at all.
She could have felt guilt for not communicating clearly to Cal that this isn’t working out.
That she made a mistake by going on board with this ship.
But instead she secretly runs off, kisses Jack on deck, which distracts of couple of crew members that were specifically there to watch the sea for icebergs. She could have felt guilty for not having kissed in a more more private area.
She could have felt guilty for cheating in the first place.
And when her fiancée finds out that she’s cheating with him, she just reacts coldly towards him, to which he flips the table in rage and slaps her… in HER version of the story. - She doesn’t let her mother know that she’s alive.
She lets no one know that she’s alive after the Titanic sunk. That includes her own mother.
Instead she takes up the last name of the man she killed. Creepy.
Speaking of her mother,
when Rose lights up a cigarette and blows smoke close to her mother’s face, her mother asks Rose to please stop doing that, you know I don’t like that,
She then responds to fully blowing smoke into her mother’s face.
Disrespectful. - Her last thoughts before she dies are of her dancing with Jack.
Not of her husband she lived 70 years with.
Not of her children, not of her grandchildren.
Just a hobo she had a fling with for two days… that she killed… among a thousand others.
And she doesn’t think of her husband and children and grandchildren during those last,
she doesn’t think of them during the entire movie. Never. Not once do we see them.
What we do see are eight pictures on her nightstand. Every single one of them are of herself.
Herself.
Now I said ‘one of her few redeeming qualities’ because she another one.
That is that she was 17 at the time,
and being played by a 20 year old Kate Winslet that’s a bit difficult to see.
However, even 17 year olds would be more responsible as she acts like a 13 year old,
since that’s what her character is actually based on, 13-year old Juliet from Romeo and Juliet.
But as much as this would have redeemed Rose’s actions on the boat as a teenager,
those reflections should have hit the Rose the grandma to put things into perspective.
That didn’t happen.Lots of sensitive susans in the comments. If you don’t like it block it and move on. There’s too many people on lemmy that want to dictate what everyone can and can’t see rather than moderating what they themselves see.
How is recommending someone to not interact with a post they don’t like because you don’t like a different opinion anything but being a sensitive Susan yourself?
why the fuck you going around on the internet telling people what they can and can’t do.
They didn’t tell you to or not to do anything, you should reread what they wrote.
This is a really good example of me feeling really one-sided about something and then having my mind changed by the comment section. Somehow I didn’t think about the fact that being on the Titanic sinking would be a pretty pivotal memory in someone’s life lol.
What 4chan does to the chronically online lmfao
Makes them willing to change their view when new evidence is presented? Lol
No, be one sided on an argument and believe you’re right lol
As if a man wouldn’t be having the exact same fantasies
No way.
I’d have a lot more than just one homeless chick.
Of course, because a forced arranged marriage to a narcissistic fuckwit would have made her life so much better… /s
Ain’t that some incel shieet
It’s not even true. She was literally on a ship that was examining the wreckage, so talking about it was relevant.
You can see the wreckage on the screen in the screenshot.
But bro how am I supposed to virtue signal to my fellow misogynists if I have to take things like context into consideration?
