What I mean is, apparently it was not too common, especially for upscale Catholic people, to engage in premarital sex back then. Especially since Rose was a teenager and barely knew Jack.
If this is the case, why even have a sex scene in a movie that really didn't call for one?
Because it informs Rose's character - she is rebelling against the codes and expectations of her class and era. Sex is a facet of that rebellion.
And because it's a 1990s entertainment blockbuster designed to be understood and enjoyed by a 1990s mainstream audience; it isn't an academic exercise.
That makes sense.
shareMorals had loosened up after the Victorian age in America nd elsewhere. But even back in the more prudish times people had sex. I just the story about Ruth Blay who was hanged in the 1700s because she was an unmarried schoolteacher who had a stillborn child and buried it or so she said. History is full of stories about illicit sex between the rich and poor, old and young, white and black, and every mix of religion there is.
shareI agree 100%. They unrealistically show couples having sex in historical movies all the time because that's what modern American audiences expect. One of my pet peeves since it was rare.
If you watch many foreign movies and series, couples don't have premarital sex.
> If this is the case, why even have a sex scene in a movie that really didn't call for one?
Same reason we saw Rose posing naked for Jack.
So we had something worthwhile to watch instead of just a bunch of people talking for the first two hours.
Also, the posing showed how much Rose trusted Jack and the sex took their “love” to the next level.
Everyone knows you can’t truly love someone until you see them naked and bang them.
Rose wasn't a Catholic.
Also, I agree with the poster above who pointed out that people did have premarital sex all the time even when it was frowned upon.