RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,107
Posts: 5,400,197
Members: 24,744
Currently online: 475
Newest member: Ohwowmelody

TrekToday headlines

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Retro Watches
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

New DS9 eBook To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

Trek Ice Cube Maker and Shot Glasses
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > TV & Media

TV & Media Non-Trek television, movies, books, music, etc.

View Poll Results: Was Rose responsible for Jack's death?
Yes. 15 45.45%
No. 18 54.55%
Voters: 33. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 30 2013, 02:36 AM   #16
CaptainCanada
Admiral
 
CaptainCanada's Avatar
 
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Re: Titanic question.

intrinsical wrote: View Post
I guess you guys haven't seen the Mythbusters Titanic special. They proved if they were smart enough, both Rose and Jack could have feasibly stayed on the bed frame and both would have had equally high chances of surviving.
That episode demonstrates that they might feasibly have survived if they had had the time, capability, and knowledge of floatation dynamics to think about that. The Mythbusters team found a way to make it work in a lab scenario.
__________________
"I'm a white male, age 18 to 49. Everyone listens to me, no matter how dumb my suggestions are!"

- Homer Simpson
CaptainCanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 03:34 AM   #17
Trekker4747
Fleet Admiral
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: Titanic question.

CaptainCanada wrote: View Post
intrinsical wrote: View Post
I guess you guys haven't seen the Mythbusters Titanic special. They proved if they were smart enough, both Rose and Jack could have feasibly stayed on the bed frame and both would have had equally high chances of surviving.
That episode demonstrates that they might feasibly have survived if they had had the time, capability, and knowledge of floatation dynamics to think about that. The Mythbusters team found a way to make it work in a lab scenario.
Exactly. It was a good episode but they "proved" nothing. A team of college engineering students also once determined that everyone on the ship could have survived if people had worked together to form a "ring" with the light boats and tied a bunch of the deck chairs, tables, and other floating devices together in the center of the ring. This would have created a large, massive, single flotation device that could have supported everyone on the ship. But, again, the problem with that is it requires dozens of people in a crisis situation to work together to formulate this plan to implement it and 1000s of people during this process to not panic.

The movie probably could've done a better job of establishing that the debris couldn't support both Jack and Rose (as it is they both seem to try and climb on it at the same time which simply causes it to tip over rather than sink under the weight.) But I've always maintained that they both simply couldn't be on it at the same time. Switching out on the debris wouldn't be practical nor likely to do any good as only minutes in the water would have been deadly.

The Mythbusters did nicely show that as shown in the movie the debris couldn't support two people at once (even if it was the right physical size) wood is buoyant but not THAT buoyant. Jamie and Adam were only able to get the debris to support both of them after modifying it by tying their lifebelts to the debris. Something that would have taken time (and thought) for Jack and Rose to do, something that likely didn't have going for them in arctic conditions in the early hours of the morning after having been running around for the last 2+ hours. (Not to mention not having the advantage of hindsight.)

I do "agree", though, that had Rose stayed on the lifeboat Jack may well have survived as he would have found the debris and gotten shelter on it while she was in the lifeboat, Jack then later would have been saved when the lifeboat came back for survivors. But then there's the question on whether or not he and Rose would have been able to reunite and live happily ever after or if Rose would have gotten drug away by Cal or her mom.

(We could also quibble, though, that if Rose stayed on the lifeboat then things might have been changed so much Jack may never have found the debris. Butterfly effect and all.)

But Jack was a third-class male passenger. The odds weren't in his favor to begin with.
__________________
Out of hope.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 03:40 AM   #18
Vanyel
The Imperious Leader
 
Vanyel's Avatar
 
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Re: Titanic question.

Mojochi wrote: View Post
Vanyel wrote: View Post
Was Rose responsible for Jack's death? I have always maintained she was, in part to annoy my niece who loved DiCaprio, but also because Rose got off the damn lifeboat. Jack had enough street smarts to keep away from Cal long enough to do as he did with Rose to survive the sinking.
Moot. Rose was one of only 6 people pulled from the sea.

And Rose only got saved because she had a whistle. Jack's no whistle having butt was doomed all along, if you ask me
Rose didn't have a whistle either. It was the whistle of one of the Titanic's crewmen. She took from his body and used it.

I do love how you put it:
Jack's no whistle having butt was doomed all along
__________________
Imogene, get serious! Who do you think you're talking to?! I've known you for 27 years, and all I can say is, if God was giving out sexually transmitted diseases to people as a punishment for sinning, then you would be at the free clinic all the time! And so would the rest of us!
--Julia Sugarbaker
Vanyel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 03:51 AM   #19
Trekker4747
Fleet Admiral
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: Titanic question.

It's "likely" that even without the whistle Rose (or Jack) would have been found as in the real sinking some survivors were pulled from the body field.
__________________
Out of hope.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 04:40 AM   #20
Yoda
Rear Admiral
 
Yoda's Avatar
 
Location: San Diego
Re: Titanic question.

I haven't seen it since its theatrical run (school mandated for some reason), so I'm more than a little hazy on the details. I thought at the time they could both fit, but if it's me instead of Leo, and the perception is that only one person can make it, then the random chick that I'd gotten to know for all of one sea voyage is getting dunked into the drink until she stops moving, and I'm riding that debris. Would've been a much better ending too IMO. Granted, might not have grossed a billion plus that way.
__________________
Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 05:11 AM   #21
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: Titanic question.

Yoda wrote: View Post
I haven't seen it since its theatrical run (school mandated for some reason), so I'm more than a little hazy on the details. I thought at the time they could both fit, but if it's me instead of Leo, and the perception is that only one person can make it, then the random chick that I'd gotten to know for all of one sea voyage is getting dunked into the drink until she stops moving, and I'm riding that debris.
You would deliberately murder someone else to ensure your own survival?

Good to know.
__________________
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it." - George Orwell, 1946
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 05:24 AM   #22
Yoda
Rear Admiral
 
Yoda's Avatar
 
Location: San Diego
Re: Titanic question.

And you would of course deliberately release yourself from this mortal coil because she was on the debris first and you had a week of true love?
__________________
Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 05:28 AM   #23
scotpens
Vice Admiral
 
scotpens's Avatar
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Re: Titanic question.

Sci wrote: View Post

Right, we shouldn't condemn the White Star Line for not making sure that there were enough lifeboats for all of their passengers. After all, the law didn't require it, and no corporation should ever be condemned for not taking obvious safety measures to prevent thousands of deaths if they're not compelled to by law. Corporations, after all, have no obligations to morality or human decency, only legal obligations. Saying they do would be "unfair."

Easy enough to say with the benefit of modern sensibilities and a hundred years' worth of hindsight. At the time, lifeboats on the Titanic were considered a cosmetic feature, mainly to provide peace of mind for the passengers. The big boat was unsinkable, after all.
__________________
“All the universe or nothingness. Which shall it be, Passworthy? Which shall it be?”
scotpens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 05:37 AM   #24
AllStarEntprise
Fleet Captain
 
AllStarEntprise's Avatar
 
Re: Titanic question.

What are you folks talking about?

How can Rose be responsible for Jack's death when she is the one in the pool of water.


As you can see Jack is safely outside the freezing water.

ROFL
AllStarEntprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 06:52 AM   #25
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: Titanic question.

Sci wrote: View Post
Yoda wrote: View Post
I haven't seen it since its theatrical run (school mandated for some reason), so I'm more than a little hazy on the details. I thought at the time they could both fit, but if it's me instead of Leo, and the perception is that only one person can make it, then the random chick that I'd gotten to know for all of one sea voyage is getting dunked into the drink until she stops moving, and I'm riding that debris.
You would deliberately murder someone else to ensure your own survival?

Good to know.
Did Rose then murder Jack by not making any serious attempt to share the debris with him?
__________________
--DonIago
It was the best of Trek, it was the worst of Trek...
"If I lean over, I leave myself open to wedgies, wet willies, or even the dreaded Rear Admiral!"
DonIago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 07:17 AM   #26
Dorian Thompson
Admiral
 
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Re: Titanic question.

No, she didn't murder him. Honestly, such conjecture over two fictional characters. If we want to ask the really important question, we must ponder this:

Wouldn't Mr. Calvert have been reeeeeeeally pissed off to find out that his wife of sixty plus years and mother of his children didn't come join him in the hereafter and stayed instead with this skinny kid she knew for three days back in 1912 ten years before she and he got married? You fucked him once, honey, and you're spending eternity with him?

Rose was independent. A newly independent suffragette lady of the 20th century. She didn't have to get married "back in the 20s" per whatshisname the funny fat guy at the beginning of the movie. No one was forcing her this time. Presumably she loved the guy.

So she goes to be with the skinny little nerd in the afterlife? Or maybe since they're in heaven it's a Big Love type scenario, only Rose gets to be the husband? She and Mr. Calvert do the heavenly deed in the clouds Mondays through Thursdays and Jack gets her on Fridays and weekends? Discuss.
__________________
http://www.noahswish.com

Best disaster animal relief charity around. Don't forget our animal friends. Donate, train to be a volunteer, or be a foster parent for a displaced pet.

Last edited by Dorian Thompson; July 30 2013 at 07:27 AM.
Dorian Thompson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 07:44 AM   #27
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: Titanic question.

Yoda wrote: View Post
And you would of course deliberately release yourself from this mortal coil because she was on the debris first and you had a week of true love?
Fuck true love. I'd just never be able to live with myself knowing I'd murdered someone else.

scotpens wrote: View Post
Sci wrote: View Post
Right, we shouldn't condemn the White Star Line for not making sure that there were enough lifeboats for all of their passengers. After all, the law didn't require it, and no corporation should ever be condemned for not taking obvious safety measures to prevent thousands of deaths if they're not compelled to by law. Corporations, after all, have no obligations to morality or human decency, only legal obligations. Saying they do would be "unfair."

Easy enough to say with the benefit of modern sensibilities
Oh, bullshit. There had been workers' rights movements fight for safe working environments for decades before the Titanic was launched in 1912. That's not a "modern sensibility."

and a hundred years' worth of hindsight. At the time, lifeboats on the Titanic were considered a cosmetic feature, mainly to provide peace of mind for the passengers. The big boat was unsinkable, after all.
Yes, and all you've demonstrated is that the White Star was the same kind of corrupt corporation willing to be slack on commonsense safety measures out of hubris and a sense of invincibility that we see all the time today. There's nothing excusable about that mindset today, and there was nothing excusable about it then -- and it's not being unfair to state a basic fact: That the White Star was responsible for every single death aboard the Titanic.

DonIago wrote: View Post
Sci wrote: View Post
Yoda wrote: View Post
I haven't seen it since its theatrical run (school mandated for some reason), so I'm more than a little hazy on the details. I thought at the time they could both fit, but if it's me instead of Leo, and the perception is that only one person can make it, then the random chick that I'd gotten to know for all of one sea voyage is getting dunked into the drink until she stops moving, and I'm riding that debris.
You would deliberately murder someone else to ensure your own survival?

Good to know.
Did Rose then murder Jack by not making any serious attempt to share the debris with him?
No. She made a serious attempt to share the debris; Jack realized it lacked enough buoyancy to save them both, and so chose to sacrifice himself to ensure Rose's continued survival.

Which is quite a different thing from actively removing someone from the debris and condemning them to freeze to death.
__________________
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it." - George Orwell, 1946
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 08:42 AM   #28
Vanyel
The Imperious Leader
 
Vanyel's Avatar
 
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Re: Titanic question.

Dorian Thompson wrote: View Post
No, she didn't murder him. Honestly, such conjecture over two fictional characters. If we want to ask the really important question, we must ponder this:

Wouldn't Mr. Calvert have been reeeeeeeally pissed off to find out that his wife of sixty plus years and mother of his children didn't come join him in the hereafter and stayed instead with this skinny kid she knew for three days back in 1912 ten years before she and he got married? You fucked him once, honey, and you're spending eternity with him?

Rose was independent. A newly independent suffragette lady of the 20th century. She didn't have to get married "back in the 20s" per whatshisname the funny fat guy at the beginning of the movie. No one was forcing her this time. Presumably she loved the guy.

So she goes to be with the skinny little nerd in the afterlife? Or maybe since they're in heaven it's a Big Love type scenario, only Rose gets to be the husband? She and Mr. Calvert do the heavenly deed in the clouds Mondays through Thursdays and Jack gets her on Fridays and weekends? Discuss.
That kinda pissed me off too. A marriage that bore at least one child, and he's not there. But presumably he was never on Titanic. And Jack, maybe was the first person who loved her for her. To her mother and Cal she was a commodity to be traded, a thing to be possessed. But Jack showed her true love in their short time together. So I like to think she goes back to Titanic to be welcomed into Heaven by the first man she loved. Then went on to her husband.

That or she's trapped on Titanic and doomed to haunt it until it crumbles away.
__________________
Imogene, get serious! Who do you think you're talking to?! I've known you for 27 years, and all I can say is, if God was giving out sexually transmitted diseases to people as a punishment for sinning, then you would be at the free clinic all the time! And so would the rest of us!
--Julia Sugarbaker
Vanyel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 08:52 AM   #29
teacake
Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.
Re: Titanic question.

In heaven there is polyamory.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 02:17 PM   #30
Mister Fandango
Fleet Captain
 
Mister Fandango's Avatar
 
Re: Titanic question.

Sci wrote: View Post
You would deliberately murder someone else to ensure your own survival?

Good to know.
Most people would. It's kind of hardcoded in, you know. Romance fiction (emphasis on the word "fiction") notwithstanding.
Mister Fandango is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:14 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.