Kate Winslet was at the start of her career when she was cast as Rose in James Cameron's Titanic, but how old she was in real life did not match the age of her character. Despite their age difference, Winslet was able to give a performance that captures Rose's naivety and anguish onboard the titular ship. Titanic's multiple timelines show that as long as you cast the right actor for the part, the age gap between them and their character will not distract the audience.
When she was cast in the record-breaking Titanic, Kate Winslet had just come off a string of roles in highly acclaimed and successful movies. They included Ophelia in Kenneth Branagh's four-hour version of Hamlet and an Oscar-nominated supporting part in Ang Lee's Sense and Sensibility. She had previously made her film debut in 1994's Heavenly Creatures, directed by future Lord of the Rings helmer Peter Jackson. Going into Titanic, Winslet was a very successful up-and-coming actor, perfect for a leading role in a massive blockbuster. By comparison, her character in Titanic, Rose DeWitt Bukater, is a young girl trapped in an engagement with a much older man whom she hates so that her family might maintain their upper-class lifestyle after the death of her father.
Related: Titanic True Story: How Much Of The Movie Is Real?
Rose was 17 years old during the Titanic's real-life doomed maiden voyage in 1912. Despite playing a teenager, actress Kate Winslet was 20 when filming began in 1996. With Titanic's mammoth $200 million production lasting for 160 days, Winslet actually celebrated her 21st birthday during filming, making her four years older than the character she was portraying. In contrast, Gloria Stuart, who played the elderly Rose in Titanic's
Read more on screenrant.com