Brokeback Mountain, A Break Through or Expected Revelation?

SPOILER AHEAD

Heath didn't fully realize his love until the end of the film when it was too late. I can't remember a character in a Western even remotely close to the portrayal. I do agree that Gyllenhaal isn't being given full credit for his superb performance. The mother was one of the real heartbreakers of the film. In the end, it turned out for me that Ennis was the character with the magnificent obsession. He had been laden down with his own homophobia which Jack had been able to surmount. Jack had gone on with his life with a new paramour.

The relationship was meant to take place more in one's mind -- I think it was wise to suggest what their feelings were. Otherwise, one could end up with a tear-jerker soap opera, not an adaptation of an Ann Proulx story. Ang Lee relies on the viewer's own imagination and emotional response than laying it all out on the ground. Witness "The Ice Storm," and "Eat Drink Man Woman." "The Wedding Banquet" being a comedy has the characterizations and the interactions more clearly layed out.

Of course, Amigo, the porno machine is already going to be cranking out cowboy flicks -- but that's nothing new. They've had cowboys, auto mechanics, marines -- you name it, they've done it.

To see a refined, understated exposition of such a romance is a welcome revelation. The only comparable film is "Maurice." That ended in much the same way when one thinks about it.

From the LA TIMES

Unscripted Moment Over 'Brokeback'

I agree that Ang Lee probably intentionally and specifically left most of the relationship between the two to the viewer's imagination - but in the end, I don't think it was a successful device in this particular movie (though it may have worked in his others).

An example of a movie that progresses in much the same way that is successful in communicating an emotional bond, despite the fact that the two main characters never even have sex, (though they do fall asleep together - actually a pivotal scene) is Sophia Coppola's Lost In Translation. In that movie you have two disparate characters who spend much of their time on screen alone, not with each other. They are obviously mismatched, Bill Murray being probably 35 years older than Scarlett Johansson, both married to other people, they seem to have no common ground at all, but by the end of the film you are convinced that they are two souls who should be together.

In Brokeback Mountain on the other hand, by the end of the film, Ennis is breaking dates and Jack is sounding like a neglected wife nagging his husband to spend more time with him. Their relationship had fizzled out - which makes sense because that's what happens to relationships when there's no emotional depth to them. Their deep love is then represented by Ennis hanging their two shirts together. I think it could have been shown more effectively and truly, I wish it had.

Because as the article you posted stated - many people who might tend to have negative views of homosexuals are seeing this movie. It will probably leave a lasting impression on a lot of people. What I viewed was a man who was willing to cheat his family to secretly meet another man three times a year to have sex without admitting to anyone, even himself (until it's too late) who he is or what his life is about. Maybe some people will take this as a message that all people should be free to live as they are meant to live - but others will probably leave with the same impression they went in with - that homosexuals are deviant and dishonest and unable to live in committed relationships- and get what's coming to them in the end. Maybe I'm disappointed because I listened to the hype and I shouldn't have gotten my hopes up. I just think it would have been more accurately described as the story of a tortured, closeted, cowboy instead of the saga of a great love between two men.

(And I've seen millions of cowboys on film just like Ennis - strong silent types with hair trigger tempers who mumble out of the sides of their mouths- Ennis was just also a closeted homosexual or bi-sexual actually- which when you think about it is probably really common in cowboys and ranchers as in all environments where men work, live, eat and sleep with other men and don't have access to women).

Lightwizard - I feel like I should say I'm not trying to rain on your parade, or anyone else's for that matter.

I think Ang Lee had every good intention of making a movie about honoring all kinds of love and what happens to people when society does not allow people to express the love that comes naturally to them. And I believe enlightened film goers will get that point.

But my fear is that some filmgoers will look at what happens in the lives of these men as the logical conclusion of love that should not be allowed to exist- almost like confirmation of what they've always known- or the just deserts of each of the characters. Even the title foreshadows that what happens on that mountain will break these men. And it does. I believe it's due to society's bigoted views of them , but others will attribute it to their homosexual behavior.

I think some of the knee-jerk tendency to do that could have been alleviated if there had been more insight into their emotional reasons for loving each other. That was my only disappointment.

Otherwise, I thought it was an interesting film (though not Oscar worthy). I want to read the story now.

Apart from the main characters cheating on their wives(they shouldnt have marrid to begin with) I dont thtnk they did anything wrong.

It seems the attack on one of the characters says more about how others dont except homosexuality.

I would like to have a specific name of a cowboy on screen who was anything like Ennis. Millions? A slight exaggeration.

Ennis doesn't break dates, it was the second annual tryst he breaks and if you can't figure out why, you didn't get the film at all.

No, I don't believe any intelligent person would believe the film at all suggests that they shouldn't be together. It leaves open the distinct possibility that Ennis would have eventually relented before fate intervenes.

It leaves open speculations and is being discussed across the boards at many film forums, Rotten Tomatoes for one.

Besides, who knows what will happen to Ennis after the closing of the film. You don't suppose he finally decides to pull up roots and move to San Francisco?

(There appear to be enough that did get the film which will wisk it into at least Oscar nominations -- I'd suggest reading some of the more astute reviews, especially the New York Times).

Ennis does not hang their shirts together, they are found hung together. The question would be why the Mother didn't launder the shirts. What film did you see?

Richard Corless in this issue of TIME:

In certain events that leave their mark on pop culture, there comes a flashpoint when everyone's talking about the same thing. Call it the Bennifer blitz, the Monica moment, the Janet Jackson distraction. Ground down and fed up by news that matters, Americans lock their vision on a movie-star romance, a sex scandal, a Super Bowl oops as tabloid headlines and talk-show hosts exploit and orchestrate the public's evanescent fervor.

In a more benign and constructive way, America is now experiencing the Brokeback breakthrough.

BROKEBACK TIME ARTICLE LINK

Wow, great article. Thanks LW.

I loved that quote: "What we're witnessing, Larry, is the homosexualizing of America." Her greatest fear, I'm sure.

Such paranoid people in this world and the neo-cons are in most need of therepy. What do they believe -- that this will mean George W. Bush will decide to star in the sequel?

Oh, Oh, this could mean the beginning of a thread of sequels to "Brokeback Mountain."

"Brokenut Mountain" In the sequel, Ennis is so drunk, he misses and creates such pain that every guy in the audience can feel it.

Yeah, right exactly the point I've been making all along. Jack felt and expressed the love, obviously. His mother understood the love and allowed it to stand and she honored it as love. And in the end, after it was too late, Ennis memorialized the love.

All I'm saying is that in most love stories there's some indication (other than sex) what it is about the person someone loves. In my opinion, this was not as fully explored as it could have been. This movie (and all they hype) seems to focus on the fact that they are gay and in love - instead of just their love. My question is why should that be such a big deal? I am more interested in learning about the people, their personalities and how or if their love enriches their lives. But I guess when two people are gay - their sexual escapades and the fact that they have them is enough of a focus for most people.

I saw Brokeback Mountain. But I guess it affected me differently than it did others, and I gave myself permission to interpret it through the lens of my own experience. Isn't that allowed? Or do we all have to see it your way and interpret it as you do to be considered as having seen and understood the film?

(And in terms of reviewers- I don't feel compelled by anything they ever say to see it their way either - my right as a film goer).

I haven't seen the film yet - but I think I understand where you're coming from Aiden. If there is little or no insight given into what moves
two humans to fall in love, then any relationship that follows could (by some) be construed as simple lust or experimentation.

To be honest, I'm glad to have heard a few negatives about the film. I was beginning to worry!

Really though, a film such as this is a brave thing in my book and perhaps just a tentative start towards more honest filmmaking about the mental anguish that predudice causes people in all walks of life, in the future.

Whatever it's faults, the film's reality at this time makes it a very important milestone. Perhaps it's a step towards recognizing homosexuality in other areas where men are thrown together, such as the military. Here in Britain, a new law was recently passed which allows gay partners to claim the normal wife's pension of a soldier killed in war. I don't think it's like that in the states yet is it?

I think this film may be the opening of a new door.

Looking forward to seeing it with some friends on the 3rd.

The two actors communicate that they are deeply in love and not through a lot of contrived dialogue which is the bane of most romantic films. The director wisely did not dwell on the sex and I am amazed that some don't acknowledge that fact. Sorry some didn't get it -- perhaps they are missing a gene? There are a few critics who didn't get it (somewhere around 10%). Have little idea from their reviews why the film did not communicate with them. Not necessarily my concern either.

You're right about that Endy. I'm not saying I'm not glad it was made. I am. I'm not saying I'm not glad it is being well-received. I am. I'm not saying I don't sympathize with the unfair discrimination directed toward people who are gay and the unwillingness of people to recognize their love and commitment to each other. I do. (And by the way I'm living in England so I'm less aware of what's happening with the whole civil partnership thing in the US than I am with what's going on here right now - and I am thrilled that such a basic and necessary right has been recognized, over here at least because I think it is long overdue and simply a matter of justice.)

All I'm saying is instead of an A, I'd give this film a B. I thought it was good, but not great. I went hoping to be blown away and I wasn't - although I thought it was an interesting story and it held my attention for the duration. I have to admit by the end though, I felt disappointed. It started really strong and I had hopes, but maybe my expectations were too high - maybe I expected too much. But that's just my opinion. No more than that.

In terms of any Oscars - I though the cinematography was absolutely stunning and I though Michele Williams was absolutely perfect as Ennis' wife. I don't know who else or what other movies have been nominated though (except Crash), so I can't compare - although overall - in terms of direction and script - I think Crash was just as affecting if not moreso. But again, that's just my opinion.

"Crash" is my other favorite film of the year and we probably should steer the Top Ten thread towards a top ten of the year.

The cinematography locale of Alberta, Canada was a great double for the actual Wyoming location. I know this is a film I'll have to see multiple times to delve into the sublime symbolism. It is not the Douglas Sirk inspired melodrama of "Far From Heaven." It bears more resemblance, as I've stated before, to "Maurice." It bears little or no resemblance to the prosaic self-indulgence of "Making Love."

From the Wall Street Journal, hardly a liberal voice -- read it and weep thou naysayers of what could easily be the one of the most financially successful film of the year:

HOLLYWOOD REPORT
By JOHN LIPPMAN

January 27, 2006

MINING BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN

To Make Hit, Studio Wooed
Women, Weighed Venues;


Despite the cracks about gay cowboys on late-night TV and chin-stroking about whether it would play in Peoria, "Brokeback Mountain" is poised to be not just one of the most praised films of the 2005 Oscar class -- it will become one of the most profitable movies of the year, and a mainstream one at that.

How did "Brokeback" break out? By surgically targeting where the movie would play in its initial release; selling it as a romance for women rather than a controversial gay-bashing tale; and opting out of the culture wars rather than engaging them.

"I'm more proud of what we didn't do with this film, as opposed to what we did do," says James Schamus, co-president of Focus Features, explaining the contrarian marketing and distribution strategy behind the $14 million film.

BALANCE OF WSJ ARTICLE LINK

"Brokeback Mountain" has officially been banned in Communist China. Well, now, let's see how this equates with the rightwing response to the film -- banned at a Utah theater and drawing fire from conservative religious groups makes one think there's some connection with their way of thinking and the communist way of thinking. Talk about turning the world on its ear.

The cast will by on Oprah today at 4:00 PST.

Damn, I'd love to see that - I'll miss most of it by the time I get there.