Will It (Brokeback) Play in Peoria? Yes It Will!

Roxxxanne wrote:

There will always be bigots, but as racism is not socially acceptable now, so will homophobia not be acceptable in the future.

But we are not there yet.

Drat! Finally a point on which we can agree.

(for the record Roxxxanne, I did not vote in the poll....the 2 choices weren't exactly applicable to my thinking.)

0 Replies

<I didn't vote either. Neither option works for me.>

Sturgis, why won't you go to see the film?

Cuz, ya know, it seems a bit nose/spite/face thing - if you generally like good movies. If you're not a movie-goer in any case <shrug>, but why avoid what truly appears to be a good film?

0 Replies

I'm still searching for the "dozen sex scenes" which don't exist.

0 Replies

It's garnered the most Oscar nominations at eight:

http://www.oscar.com/nominees/list.html

0 Replies

The film does not have any agenda. It's just a story and a very good story. It's also just sex and if one wants to recoil at the thought of two guys doing it, try and imagine your grandparents doing it. Now I hope I've trumped the theme of the movie by putting that image into your head for today.

0 Replies

What is a political thread doing in the film forum? This thread is not about the film, it is about politics.

0 Replies

ehBeth wrote:

<I didn't vote either. Neither option works for me.>

Sturgis, why won't you go to see the film?

Cuz, ya know, it seems a bit nose/spite/face thing - if you generally like good movies. If you're not a movie-goer in any case <shrug>, but why avoid what truly appears to be a good film?

I don't understand why he is so admant about not seeing it either. It is rather puzzling.

0 Replies

I don't agree -- perhaps a hybrid of a political and film topic. There is already a thread on the film but check on Google for the news and on Rotten Tomatoes, IMDb and Box Office Mojo -- the debate on this movie is widespread and, of course, diverse.

The point is, the film is playing well in Peoria at over 50M and climbing, often it has been the top film during the weekdays at theaters. The theater I last law it in is in the heart of Orange County, Facist Island (okay, Fashion Island) and the bastion of conservatism and money. The theater at 2:00 PM was over half full and almost nobody got up after the credits began to roll. I'm sure the many straight guys there were not going into the lobby with watering eyes. Oh, the allergies are bad in this area at this time of year?

0 Replies

Bella Dea wrote:

I was going to vote but neither of those even come close to my answer.

What is your answer then?

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

What is a political thread doing in the film forum? This thread is not about the film, it is about politics.

I guess I shouldn't complain since I finally hit the "big time" with a featured thread! Smile

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

I don't agree -- perhaps a hybrid of a political and film topic.

My intent was to explore the homophobic aspect of some who refuse to see the film.

0 Replies

Two featured threads on the same movie. Hmmm, what could the buzz be all about? It wasn't created by Ang Lee but by the self-induced silence which originally greeted the film by the severe right wing religious nuts. They just couldn't shut up, however, and decided to characterize a film they haven't even seen as forbidden. They also tried to characterize it as a flop when it is surging internationally and domestically towards 100M. For a 14M budget film, that's extraordinary. They are also pissed that three gay themed films are at the top of the awards list this season, "Capote," "Brokeback Mountain" and "Transamerica."

0 Replies

"Crash" whose cast won the SAG Awards (and deservedly so as the cast of "Brokeback Mountain" had a weak link IMHO) is about latent racism. These subject should be explored -- the main characters in "Brokeback Mountain" are suffering from homophobia themselves, or at least one of them throughout their life until, it's suppose, at the end of the film.

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

Two featured threads on the same movie. Hmmm, what could the buzz be all about? It wasn't created by Ang Lee but by the self-induced silence which originally greeted the film by the severe right wing religious nuts. They just couldn't shut up, however, and decided to characterize a film they haven't even seen as forbidden."

They should have known the Golden Rule of Promotion. There is no such thing as bad publicity. I haven't seen it yet ! I really want to see it in the theater. Maybe this weekend.

0 Replies

You won't be disappointed. It is majestically and methodically filmed (not slow) and not for those who want an Arnold Schwanzanegger (sic) pot-boiler action film. Two central dynamite performances and even if Jake is a dark horse for the golden statue, he's got the turn as the investigative reporter in "Zodiac" coming up. Both actors will be offered the usually big budget popcorn movies but I hope they don't go down that trail. Oscar nominated and winning actors have a tendendancy to take roles in mediocre movies for the money. Look at Halle Barry. Hasn't made a film anything near the calibre of "Monster's Ball" film since and was in one of the worst of the decade, "Catwoman." "Monster's Ball" was also Heath's breakthrough serious performance.

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

ehBeth wrote:
<I didn't vote either. Neither option works for me.>

Sturgis, why won't you go to see the film?

Cuz, ya know, it seems a bit nose/spite/face thing - if you generally like good movies. If you're not a movie-goer in any case <shrug>, but why avoid what truly appears to be a good film?

I don't understand why he is so admant about not seeing it either. It is rather puzzling.

ehBeth...my main reason is the fact that I find the film over-hyped and I see no reason to go see a movie which is given too much publicity. It always ends up with a feeling of being let down...much akin I would say to being told how wonderful the food is at a particular establishment and then finding the food to be good but not anywhere near as wonderful as it was said to be. Why force upon myself unneeded disappointment?

Roxxxanne...I guess the answer remains the same to you as to ehBeth. Truth be known, I do not see that many movies each year...usually two per month, totaling about two dozen annually; so, when a movie comes out I want it to be on a subject matter I have an interest in and quite frankly I don't care much for cowboy movies. Combine my distaste with over sensationalizing a movie...based at least within the homosexual community mainly on the gay subject line and NOT the directing or acting or overall story and my lack of interest in cowboy movies and you will quickly realize why I have no intentions of seeing the movie.

People seem less interested in the plot, direction, acting and cinematography than they do with the idea of two men having a physical connection. My main reason to see a film is with regard to what the main storyline is about...nothing anywhere in the description of this film has grabbed my any of my interests. Maybe on Thursday when I'm over at the Plaza to (for some unknown reason) take in Underworld: Evolution I will have a change of mind and give it a look-see...or maybe I can go over to Westway and see Memoirs of A Geisha. Decisions, decisions.

0 Replies

(As I've said a zillion times, sorry), I've read the story and it's one of the best STORIES -- just plain stories -- I've ever read. The cowboy thing is completely not the point (marketing technique) and the gay thing is even not really the point, just a literary device upon which to hang a superlative story.

I haven't seen the movie, but wanna.

Can't you just go in with low expectations rather than not going at all?

0 Replies

The "cowboy thing" was not promoted by the filmmakers but by jokesters and naysayers who want to lable the film, so it's not a "marketing technique." Jack is a bonefied cowboy as a rodeo rider, Ennis comes from his family ranching where it's not clear if they did have cattle. The term "cowboy" has become a demography rather than referring to an occupation anyway.

If one doesn't go to the movies, their blattering about not going to see this particular one is null and void.

0 Replies

Not going to see a film because "it's getting too much publicity" is a peculiar reaction to me. This is some sort of weird backlash? I went to see it the first time with a straight lady friend and my boss who is gay. They both loved the film and I had read the novella so I warned them to bring Kleenex. Instead, they both came out with very damp chapeaus.

0 Replies

Thanks for the response, Sturgis.

I know I'm biased.

I like most Ang Lee films (not Hulk Confused

). He never does the same thing twice - and his perspective as a film-maker, IMNSHO, is invariably interesting.

I'd see an Ang Lee film, almost regardless of subject matter (I'd skip it if he tried another t.v. to movie adaptation), just to be sure I don't miss a good film.

from IMDB

Quote:

Brokeback Mountain (2005)
Hulk (2003)
The Hire: Chosen (2001)
Wo hu cang long (2000)
... aka Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (USA)
... aka Ngo foo chong lung (Hong Kong: Cantonese title)
... aka Wo hu cang long (China: Mandarin title)
Ride with the Devil (1999/I)
The Ice Storm (1997)
Sense and Sensibility (1995)
Yin shi nan nu (1994)
... aka Eat Drink Man Woman (USA)
Hsi yen (1993)
... aka The Wedding Banquet (USA)
Tui shou (1992)
... aka Pushing Hands

There are some dang fine films on that list.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000487/

0 Replies

Will It (Brokeback) Play in Peoria? Yes It Will!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know