u/meido_zgs

I've made posts lately regarding Cal bumping and almost bumping into people, and Jack bumping into two stewards. So...on this topic, I'm imagining what the characters' reactions would be if I bumped into them 😄

Rose: I don't think Rose would mind much if I bumped into her. If I was a guy, Cal would be furious at me, but I'm a woman, so he probably wouldn't mind too much as long as Rose isn't hurt. Jack and Ruth probably wouldn't mind too much either as long as Rose is ok.

Jack: Jack probably wouldn't mind too much either. Rose won't get jealous over some random woman bumping into Jack.

Cal: He would try to dodge me 😟, if that failed he would be a bit annoyed at some random stranger bumping into him, but no biggie🤭. Ruth might get a little suspicious of some woman bumping into her daughter's fiancé. Rose wouldn't care. Lovejoy would be looking to make sure I didn't steal Cal's wallet or something.

Lovejoy: I think he would successfully dodge me.

Ruth: She would be slightly upset at some unruly peasant bumping into her.

Molly: She would probably laugh and then ask if I was ok.

Mr. Andrew: He would gently ask if I was ok.

Most of the first class men and the crew: Just whatever the standard gentleman response of that time period is supposed to be (I'm not sure what).

Sir. Cosmo: Considering the somewhat creepy way he was staring Rose, this situation might get a little uncomfortable for me if I was a beautiful woman. But I'm just average, so it'll be fine.

Stewards and most maids and valets: Same way the stewards reacted to Jack bumping into them.

Most third class passengers: Some may laugh, some may ask if I was ok, I don't think anyone would get mad unless I hurt someone or broke something.

Lovejoy was somehow able to get all the stewards to cooperate with him in the search for Rose. So do the stewards all know them? I'm not too surprised about the stewards knowing Rose, she was a passenger in one of the best rooms, and even if some stewards didn't know her, Lovejoy can always show them a photo of her.

But the question is, do the stewards know that Lovejoy is Rose's fiancé's valet? If a random man in a suit asked a steward the whereabouts of a lady, I would think the stewards would hesitate to answer? But they did. I can think of four possible reasons:

1. The stewards do know Lovejoy. Even though the voyage was only a few days, the stewards were required to memorize all the "important" passengers along with their respective servants. Perhaps they were given a list of names and photos to memorize before the start of the trip.

2. The stewards didn't memorize everybody at the start of the voyage, but they got to know Lovejoy at some point before that night's search. Perhaps the previous night when Rose went to party in third deck, Cal and Lovejoy were walking together to ask the stewards if they saw her, so the stewards learned that Lovejoy works for Cal.

3. Lovejoy showed them some kind of document proof that he works for Cal. And either the stewards already knew that Cal is Rose's fiancé, or Lovejoy showed them proof of that too.

4. Lovejoy bribed all the stewards for information.

I'm not sure which one of these is most likely. Any ideas?

There's been a lot of posts recently about Cal living the diamond and looking for it after the sinking. Is it really true that he loved the diamond if he offered it to Lovejoy just before running off?

Cal had his valet who was like a father figure in a way to him, do you think that Cal mourned the death of his best friend and bodyguard?

For me, besides all the modern day scenes, it would be Rose and Jack getting stuck behind a locked gate the second time. It feels redundant. We already saw the dramatic scenes with so many people, including Rose and Jack, being trapped behind the gates, and now we're hyperfocusing on just Rose and Jack getting trapped by the same obstacle, again. It took up too much time and disrupted the overall pacing of the movie. Even as a standalone scene, I felt it wasn't even well-made. It didn't show more bonding between the lovers. Jack was scrambling to find the key and then direct it into the keyhole, while Rose was screaming at him which would just distract him and make him fumble more. I think the movie would be better off without this scene. There are plenty of actually deleted scenes that would have enriched the movie much better than this scene if they were kept instead.

I had a discussion with two other users in this thread, and I thought it would be better to make a separate thread for this topic.

Here are the basic points we all agree on:

1. Trudy's salary is currently paid by Cal since Rose/Ruth have no money of their own.
2. If Rose ever told Cal she wanted a different maid, Cal would stop paying Trudy.

Where we disagree is what this actually means. One user said that "Trudy takes care of Rose at Cals discretion," meaning she works for Cal.

I disagree. Rose is the one Trudy directly works for, the one Trudy needs to maintain a good relationship with in order to keep her job. Trudy does not need Cal to like her, just don't anger him and that's good enough. Trudy works for Rose, while Cal simply pays the money on Rose's behalf. Here are some parts of the movie that reflect the dynamics between the three of them:

1. When Rose insults Cal with the comment "The difference between Cal’s taste in art and mine is that I have some," Trudy isn't at all concerned about how Cal would take that. She completely ignores him and casually chats to Rose as if nothing happened, "What’s the artist’s name?"
2. Throughout the movie, we see Rose is comfortable around Trudy, despite being uncomfortable around Cal. This means that Rose does not view Trudy as an extension of Cal.
3. This one reflects the 3-way relationship most clearly: After the table flipping, Rose apologizes to Trudy and Trudy says it's all right. Why would Rose apologize when she did not flip the table? It's because in this context, the identity of the person who flipped the table is "Rose's fiancé," not "Trudy's employer." Between Rose and Trudy, Rose is the one who is closer to Cal.

I imagine Trudy was likely Rose's maid since before Rose's family went bankrupt, and Cal just took on the task of paying whatever Rose needed to maintain her original lifestyle, including her maid's salary. In Cal's eyes, Trudy is an extension of Rose. If Cal got angry at Rose for something, he could potentially take out his anger on Trudy. And if he did, that would viewed as an attack on Rose. If Rose and Trudy got into any conflict, that would be Rose's private issue as far as Cal is concerned, he just needs to know if Rose still wants him to pay Trudy. If Rose ever wanted to fire Trudy, Cal would ok it, no questions asked.

.

If you count the deleted scenes, then the Lovejoy-Cal-Nathan relationship at the time of Lovejoy's hiring is very different from the Trudy-Rose-Cal relationship described above. Rose mentions this in a deleted scene: "I think [Lovejoy] was [a cop]. Cal's father hired him to keep his little boy out of trouble. To make sure he got back to the hotel with his wallet after he's crawled through the less reputable parts of town." In this situation, Lovejoy was not only paid by, but also handpicked by Cal's father Nathan Hockley to watch over Cal. I don't think Cal could get rid of Lovejoy even if he hated him. Perhaps Cal can complain to his dad, but he can't override his dad's final choice. In Cal's eyes, Lovejoy would be "the guy my dad hired to follow me around." Of course, relationships can change over time and it's possible that this was no longer the case by the time of the events in the movie. It's hard to say (this thread to discuss if you're interested) because we don't see their 3-way dynamics on-screen. But at the time of hiring, Lovejoy worked for Nathan, not Cal, regardless of who he spent more time with. Unlike Trudy who worked for Rose, not Cal, regardless of who provided the money for her salary.

I was discussing this with someone on a different platform. The other person suggested that Rose initially rejected Cal's proposal, but then he threatened to spread fake rumors to ruin her reputation, and so Rose was forced to marry him.

I disagree with this version of events. Firstly, in the scene where Cal gives Rose the necklace, he explicitly says, "I know you’ve been melancholy. I don’t pretend to know why." How can he not know why she's melancholy if he was the one who threatened her into marriage? Secondly, Ruth does not mention a word of coercion during the corset scene. Ruth did not feel it was redundant to remind Rose about the money problem every day, so why would she not mention such an important and relevant danger during that conversation if it had happened? Thirdly, is it really that easy to just make up something to ruin an old money family's reputation? Anyone can just threaten anyone in that circle? I find that hard to believe.

I imagine things went something more like this:

1. Cal sees Rose for the first time at some social event, and he is immediately interested in her. He goes up to her and they talk and dance together. Rose is cold towards him but not outright rude.
2. Ruth notices this, and after the event is over, tells Rose that she must hold on to this opportunity to save the family from poverty. Rose of course is uninterested, they argue a bit. Rose doesn't take action towards or against it.
3. After some more interactions at more social gatherings where Rose continues to act indifferently towards him, Cal makes up his mind that he wants to marry Rose. He asks his dad for permission, dad says he will look into it.
4. Dad does a thorough background check on Rose and her family.
5. Not sure if Cal's dad would meet Rose face to face at some point during the investigation period to ​judge her character. If yes, he might talk to Cal afterwards: The girl seems quite arrogant, probably looks down on us for being new money, are you sure you want to deal with this for the rest of your life? Cal insists that he loves her, will win over her love. Dad sighs and says fine.
6. Cal's dad meets Ruth to discuss Cal and Rose's potential marriage. I'm guessing Cal and Rose themselves wouldn't be present during this meet up? Ruth expresses she is happy to accept the marriage. At some point her financial situation would have to be discussed (either he asks her directly or he already found out during the background check), but he says the debt part is no problem, they can afford to pay it off.
7. Cal's dad tells Cal: All good you can go ahead. If #5 had happened, he might add something like: You can marry her if she agrees. But make sure you don't publicly propose unless you're sure she would say yes, don't embarrass our family with a rejection.
8. In the meantime, Ruth talks to Rose about this in private and they have a huge argument. Rose says she doesn't like Cal, Ruth says they have no money blah blah, pressuring her to accept it.
9. Cal then officially proposes to Rose. Ruth is present is and stares at Rose to pressure her. Rose gives into the pressure and reluctantly says yes, Cal puts the engagement ring on her hand.

First he makes a huge deal about a supposed robbery, making the Master of Arms come over immediately and get the whole room photographed. Then after Rose enters, he says, "Two things dear to me have disappeared this evening. Now that one is back, I have a pretty good idea where to find the other."

Wouldn't the Master of Arms think "You called me over to investigate a robbery before confirming own fiancée wasn't just wearing it the whole time??"

Lately there's been some debate on Chinese social media regarding the morality of Rose's actions towards Cal, with a small minority of Rose critics arguing that she should return not just the diamond, but also pay back all the money he ever spent on her. So that got me thinking, how much money did he actually spend? Could she have possibly paid it back over the next 84 years?

1. There's the diamond of course.
2. The coat he put on her.
3. The first class tickets (there are two, Rose plus her mom), definitely not something Rose/Ruth were able to afford.
4. Debt? I think this one is a misunderstanding by some Chinese viewers, wrongly interpreting Ruth's dialogue as saying that Cal already paid back their family debt for them. I'm pretty sure Ruth was saying they still have this huge debt looming over their heads, and that Cal would pay it for them after marriage, meaning he hadn't paid yet.
5. Clothing? Rose's clothes are no doubt expensive, but it's not explicitly stated how many are her old clothes from before going bankrupt, and how many are newly bought and paid for by Cal. I think I've seen someone mention before that her clothes are mostly French style, meaning they were likely recently bought during her trip with Cal to Europe, meaning Cal paid for them?
6. I think I've read somewhere that the entirety of their trip to Europe was probably paid by Cal? The reasoning is that Rose and Cal are both Americans, so they likely met and got engaged in US, and decided to travel to Europe together for a holiday, maybe a few weeks or something.
7. Living expenses (including the salary of both Rose and Ruth's maids) probably? Unclear how long.

We know Rose ended up becoming an actress, not too famous (otherwise Cal and Ruth would have found out about her). In the modern scene of old Rose's house, she seemed pretty well off. If she tried to pay back everything, would it likely have been possible?

Edit: Just thought of another one, the wedding costs. That was already underway (Ruth was talking about how Rose chose lavender for the bridesmaids gowns), I think most likely Cal was paying for that?