Ruth was the worst character in the movie - Titanic (1997) Discussion

[–] Otter (24464) 7 years ago

She had to be awful, to justify Rose faking her own death and abandoning her mother to a life of genteel scrounging.

reply

[–] strntz (12225) 7 years ago

^^^ Exactly.

reply

[–] bigben (36) 7 years ago

I understand it, I'm not saying it was bad writing or anything. Just that she's truly awful, but I think a lot of people focus on Cal more than Ruth, understandably.

reply

[–] captainbucky (15252) 7 years ago

Cal was a sign of the times, Ruth was an ax weilding phsyco mega BITAHC!

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 7 years ago

Not to defend Ruth, but she had real troubles to worry about while Cal didn't. Ruth was broke and thought that pushing Rose into a bad marriage really was the best option available to either of them, her actions were awful but her motives included desperation and good intentions as well as greed.

Cal had absolutely no excuses for his evil behavior. He had money and complete personal freedom, he could have devoted his life to feeding the hungry and getting women the vote, instead he used his advantages in life to devote himself to being a total sleaze.

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

Well, rich people are often arrogant fuckwads tbh.

reply

[–] Eddym123 (156) 7 years ago

Yup, and the poor are always warm-hearted individuals with nothing but good intentions and accept everyone for who they are.

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

That's not what I said... Human nature is in itself pretty abysmal poor or rich...

reply

[–] Eddym123 (156) 7 years ago

You said that rich people are often arrogant fuckwads, did you not. Your words generalized a group of people and now your reply is a backtrack.

reply

[–] samoanjoes (56646) 7 years ago

"faking her own death?"

No, she was really trying to kill herself.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 7 years ago

She tried to kill herself in the first part of the movie, and faked her own death towards the end.

She gave a false name ("Rose Dawson") to the guy who was taking a list of survivor's names, which meant that as far as anyone knew Rose DeWitt was dead and her mother was bereft. Which left young Rose free to start an adventurous new life with Cal's diamond, and left her mother bereft, grieving, stony broke, and alone. Which would be a horrible, irresponsible, unsympathetic thing for Rose to do, if the audience hadn't been made to believe that Ruth deserved it for trying to sell her daughter to a monster.

reply

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

I can't stand women like her. I actually lived in a sharehouse with a wench like her. She lived with her boyfriend and considered anyone interacting with him to be a threat to her, even though I'm a guy. I'd still say 'good morning' and sometimes she'd just grunt. She eventually got him to ask me to move out!

A truly despicable person. They do exist. So I dont' see Ruth as far-fetched at all.

I could at times understand Cals frustration with Rose. She's agreed to be his wife yet is behaving like a school child.

reply

[–] Eddym123 (156) 7 years ago

You all have a very narrow view of the situation and refuse to see what happens in the story and ignore the mindset of woman. Ruth was basically doing what any mother would have done at the point in history. She was not cruel but she was more desperate considering the situation they were in. She did not have any other mean of money and Rose was of marrying age at that point, so what was occurring was going to happen anyway. Also, Rose did agree to marry Cal under her own volition and it was not an arrangement. She supported the union and from what she saw Cal was very generous to her and Rose and treated them well. He was not hostile with Rose until Jack came into the picture and Ruth never witnessed his anger, justifiable anger at Rose. She also made the seating remark BEFORE she was aware the ship was sinking. At the point of boarding only Rose and Cal were aware of the severity and Ruth became aware when Rose shouted at her. She was snobby but she was not evil nor cruel.

reply

[–] bigben (36) 7 years ago

You deliberately ignore how her first reaction to Jack wasn't to thank him for saving her daughters life and her own future, but to look at him like he was scum. Did you hear one word of gratitude or relief from her about Jack saving her only daughters life? I thought so. She then does her best to degrade and humiliate him at dinner. He saved Rose, yet she doesn't care, and only wants to mock and judge him.

She's a horrible, horrible, person. She's the definition of cruel.

reply

[–] Eddym123 (156) 7 years ago

Well, she correctly smelled a rat as Jack definitely has his eye on Rose, so...Yeah. She walks up on them hocking spit and he has drool coming down his face, not a good first impression. She also knew that Rose had a skanky streak in her. Jack was scum. "She was a horrible, horrible person. She's the definition of cruel" How old are you?

reply

[–] bigben (36) 7 years ago

Please, she had zero idea that Jack would end up doing what he did with Rose. Yeah, he was spitting. You know what he did before that? Saved Rose's life. You keep ignoring that. She should have been on her knees thanking him. Instead she does her best to insult, degrade, and humiliate him. She knew Rose had a "skanky streak"? Where's the proof of that? Oh right, there is none. You literally just made that up.

You question my age for calling Ruth horrible, meanwhile you call Rose a skank and Jack scum? Are you trying to be a hypocrite? Or is it just something you can't help?

The fact you hate Jack but defend Ruth is very telling. Jack was definitely a pain, but when she first met him all she knew was he saved her daughter's life. That's it. Oh, and he was a third class passenger, because that's all that mattered to her. Rescue her daughter? Who cares, he was a third class waste of life to her.

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

"Oh, and he was a third class passenger, because that's all that mattered to her. Rescue her daughter? Who cares, he was a third class waste of life to her."

Damn I like you, glad I'm not the only one who was bothered by all this.

"And the fact that she cared more about his class than the fact that her daughter was only alive because of him is disgusting."

Absolutely!

reply

[–] Eddym123 (156) 7 years ago

I am glad you found a common shallowness in the other user. Stupidity in numbers.

reply

[–] Eddym123 (156) 7 years ago

Yes, she knew he meant trouble, otherwise why would she instantly dislike him? She would not have been threatened otherwise but she could see what his intentions were are we supposed to know that. I did not ignore and I highly doubt that Ruth was unaware of what happened the previous night. I question your age because of your infantile grasp of the situation. Rose was a skank for sleeping with a man she knew for less than 36 hours while being engaged. She was rude and inconsiderate and did not consider other peoples feeling. Jack wanted her the moment he saw her and had no hesitation sleeping with a woman who was engaged.
What does it say about me? That I have more wisdom than you.

reply

[–] bigben (36) 7 years ago

And Ruth wasn't rude and inconsiderate and didn't care about other people's feelings? Seriously? She didn't give a damn how Rose felt about Cal, the man she had to spend the rest of her life with. She only cared about how how it would affect her. Nothing more.

You are lying by saying she had any reason to feel threatened by Jack when she first met him. She hated him only because of his class. There was no sign that either had feelings for the other at that point. All she knew was he was poor, and he saved Rose's life. The former mattered far more than the latter to her. Did she thank Jack for saving her daughter? No. She just went out of her way to demean him. And again, Cal wasn't threatened by Jack that whole dinner. It wasn't until Rose went to the party with Jack. If Ruth was rude to Jack after that party, I'd agree with you. But she was rude BEFORE. When she only knew he was poor.

LOL. You say you have more wisdom and I'm infantile, yet you're the one who felt a need to resort to personal attacks. I'm having a discussion about fictional characters. You for some reason are taking this so personally you resort to laughable insults. All over Ruth from Titanic. Go ahead and pretend you have more wisdom, little boy. When you learn to have a discussion about movies without needing to insult people, that claim might not be so laughable. Grow up son.

reply

[–] Eddym123 (156) 7 years ago

Sigh, I am not personally insulting you, I am merely pointing out observations, true observations. The problem with your take is that it totally disregards the mindset of Edwardian society. And you also are on the dense side as it is clear in the film that Ruth clearly saw Jack as a threat, which is why Rose says " my mother looked at him like an insect that must be squashed quickly" how do you make sense of that? Just because he was poor? I'm lying?Let me give you another observation, you are an idiot, nothing personal.

reply

[–] bigben (36) 7 years ago

Your own quote proves you wrong. "An INSECT that must be squashed quickly". She viewed Jack as nothing more than an insect. Even after he saved Rose. The reason? Because he was poor. If he had been a young rich man, she'd have had zero problem with him right then. But because he wasn't rich, she despised him and didn't want any association with him at all, even if it was just thanking him for saving Rose from dying.

You totally disregard Rose's mindset of a controlled and abused teenager and don't even try to understand why the actions of Ruth and Cal and would push her away from them and to Jack, as the other poster pointed out. You just call her a skank and leave it at that. How pathetic.

LOL, you're so funny. I hope you're trolling and are purposely being a hypocrite. Imagine getting so worked up and angry at other people over a character in Titanic. I actually pity you. You must have a very sad and lonely life.

reply

[–] Eddym123 (156) 7 years ago

People like you make me second guess my pro-life stance.

reply

[–] wilson24 (62) 7 years ago

It's always funny to watch someone clearly lose an argument and be backed into a corner.

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

But... He's right.

reply

[–] kjc211 (52) 7 years ago

You call other posters understanding of Ruth infantile yet you don't realize your understanding of Rose is infantile. You launch this defense of Ruth yet label Rose a skank and nothing more.

Yes, she cheated on Cal, which was wrong. Yes, she did fall for someone after a day of knowing him. But it's not that simple. Cal was controlling and had anger issues, and proves in at least one instance he's physically abusive. Rose was forced by her mother to marry someone she didn't want to spend the rest of her life with, and who wasn't a good person or husband. It's easy to see why she'd fall for someone else. Jack treated her like a person, not his property. When her fiance treats her badly, can you not see why she would rush to someone else who didn't treat her badly? When she was being made to marry Cal and was being told how she'd have to spend the rest of her life, can you not see how Jack's life of not being tied down and just going where his life takes him would be appealing at first?

I mean you are using things that are never even hinted at to support your defense of Ruth, so it's odd you simply screech, "Rose is a skank!!!!" without trying to understand her actions like you do Ruth. Because it's clear Ruth's immediate dislike of Jack was only because of his lifestyle and class. She didn't even have one tiny hint that Rose and Jack might want to get together and Rose would leave Cal when she first met him. Saying otherwise is simply a lie. And Ben is right when he points out Ruth didn't even care that Jack saved Rose. How can you defend that? Rose would have been dead if it wasn't for Jack, yet Ruth doesn't care about that.

I guess I just have more wisdom than you do, since you really have such a juvenile attitude toward Rose.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 7 years ago

To be fair, if she had looked at Jack for the first time and thought: "This is a guy who will fill my daughter's head with all sorts of unrealistic ideas about how much she'd enjoy being footloose and poor, and who would gladly take her virginity and ruin her chance to marry money, and who has absolutely no potential for supporting her in the style she's accustomed to or even sticking around to be a responsible husband and father of his children"...

She'd have been absolutely spot-on.

reply

[–] bigben (36) 7 years ago

She had zero idea what would happen between Jack and Rose. All she knew at that point was he saved her life.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 7 years ago

Oh please, within a few seconds she'd be able to tell that he was "beneath her station", was sexually interested in her anyway, and that he didn't respect class divisions enough to stay away from her.

Yes, you can tell that much about a person immediately upon meeting them, and if she'd sized him up as a potential threat immediately she would have been correct.

reply

[–] bigben (36) 7 years ago

Rose sought him out at that first meeting, and he saved her life. She was thanking him. Only a cold hearted jerk would brush something like that off. And the fact that she cared more about his class than the fact that her daughter was only alive because of him is disgusting.

Hindsight is wonderful, isn't it? No, she had zero idea they'd connect the way they would. After she spent the night at the party with him, sure. But not before that. Even Cal wasn't threatened by Jack then.

Ruth had a problem only because he was third class. And that was more important to her than saving Rose from dying.

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

"that he didn't respect class divisions enough to stay away from her."

Oh because THIS is supposed to be an honorable thing? I understand that we are talking about the beginning of the 20th century and this was pretty much people's mindset back then (and unfortunately still is to a certain degree), but it is NOT a good way of thinking.

Poor or rich we are all human beings. Especially for a thing like love this isn't supposed to be a burden.

And "didn't respect class divisions enough"?? Really?? That's just stupid.

So thinking that way it is better for a girl to marry a rich cheating and abusive asshole than a caring and sweet poor guy. Okay... If you think like this I'm glad I don't know you.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 7 years ago

Hoo boy. I'm not saying that lack of respect for class divisions made Jack a bad person, I'm saying a lack of respect for class divisions made him a threat to Ruth! Geddit?

And yes, Ruth is a pretty awful person, grasping and small-minded and a crashing snob, but I tend to be much more forgiving towards people who don't have any good options than the Cals of the world. Or the Jacks for that matter, few modern people really grasp what it meant to defy convention and have passionate romances that broke social barriers in the days before birth control. If Ruth was against Jack and Rose's relationship, that alone didn't make her an awful person, because it wouldn't take long for their passion to sour in a morass of poverty, babies, and a live-in mother-in-law.

reply

[–] Eddym123 (156) 7 years ago

Yup, but they believe that she was " ick, third class..kill it". She knew Rose had her ways and would do something stupid with him, and she was right.

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

I agree, from the first time I watched the movie I hated her. She is so over her head and is a judgemental bitch. I too was always shocked about the coment she made about separating classes. In a survival situation nobody has a class, everyone is equal. No matter how successful or how much of a failure you are, in a tragedy like this it is all is one and one is all.

Bottom line, she is despicable.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 7 years ago

Despicable and pathetic at the same time - do you realize that the second-class passengers she's sneering at probably have a lot more money that she does? Yeah, she's broke and is traveling in first class as someone else's guest, while all the middle-class people in second class paid for their tickets out of their disposable income. They're not only wealthier than she is, hell, and therefore better by her standards, but she's incapable of earning a living and everyone in 2nd class through steerage are all smart and hard-working enough to afford luxury-liner trips to another continent.

I do have a little sympathy for anyone in desperate circumstances, but sheesh. She's got no cause to feel superior to anyone on Earth.

reply

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 7 years ago

Man I didn't even think about that but yeah you are so right! This makes her even more pathetic.

reply

[–] duckofprey (1557) 7 years ago

The OP said:
“... but Ruth was just spiteful and despicable.”

She was, well...ruthless. ;-)

reply