Why would Rose throw the necklace?
Very selfish and pointless.
shareA symbolic gesture to let him know she went on and lived a full life. That's how I saw it.
share
MovieChat Forums > Titanic (1997) Discussion > Why would Rose throw the necklace?
She kept the necklace as a reminder of all that happened. Tossing it in the ocean was her way of saying farewell. She died not long afterwards
share
I agree that was the writer's plan, but where it goes off the rails for me is that there was nothing symbolic about the diamond to either her or Jack. The man she loved didn't own it (indeed, it caused him grief when he was accused of its theft) and the man she hated was the one who bought it and it meant more to him.
Not only that but the diamond was a historical artefact. It was worn by Louis XVI so to quote Indiana Jones "it belongs in a museum" not dumped in the ocean like trash.
shareAnd it's not like her children and grandchildren had absolutely no use for the money! Rose herself has a very nice house, but what about the granddaughter that's giving up income to take care of her? What about her children and grandchildren, don't any of them have student loans or periods of unemployment, or would love a chance to give their kids a college fund or go back to college themselves?
So if she'd left the necklace to her family, they'd have been able to sell it to the buyer of their choice, suc as the Smithsonian, and they'd have improved their presumably not-wealthy lives for a generation or three. But what does Cameron care about middle-class people improving their lives? He's filthy rich and was at the time, he's in a position to say "The money didn't matter, emotional closure does", but the popcorn eaters are not. I've never heard anyone they say they liked that stupid scene, everyone has always said something like "But what about her family?".
Excellent point that I totally missed.
Well, it is called “The Heart of the Ocean”.
share