"Brokeback Mountain," the film, is all that you've heard, and more--- Page 2

[eslgr8]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 11:00am

If you don't want to go see it, then don't. There are plenty of people waiting to fill the seats of those feel "obligated" to see this beautiful film.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 11:12am

Master--every once in a while you become uncharacteristically narrowminded. Have you read any of Annie Proulx's work? Surely that alone would make you curious about the film.

[DG]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 11:23am

PJ - I did read the story, and if anything, it's something I'm having to get past to find my way to the film. Beyond not particularly responding to the writing style (which I never-the-less accept as valid and praiseworthy,) I was put off by the pervading sense of despair. Not that I don't acknowledge that it's very real, I just am not drawn to the more negative aspects of human experience.

And Steven, that really is what I was trying to say in my previous statements about feeling obligated - only that even though I'm not drawn to it emotionally, I feel it is important to see and support the effort. I have no doubt that it is beautifully realized piece of art, but if it wasn't for the sense of 'simpatico' with the project, I wouldn't be going to see it. For comparrison, I'm similarly not drawn to GEISHA - but I won't be going to see that because I have no feeling of connection that overrides my emotional distance.
Updated On: 12/10/05 at 11:23 AM

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 11:23am

I thought this movie was a revelation. The year's best. But now, I dont think its gonna win Best Picture. Its a tough year and while reviews were very positive, I think its neck and neck for Best Picture with WALK THE LINE and possibly CAPOTE, SYRIANA, GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK, CRASH, MEMOIRS..., KING KONG, MUNICH et al. We'll see...

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 11:49am

Just saw the film late last night. In Chelsea, no less.
You might be turned off by the marketing of this film. You might even be turned off by the "You must see this!" mentality you guys keep bringing up (sure haven't caught a whiff of that myself).
I have no cowboy fetish. However, I did grow up in a part of the country where, much like Wyoming in the 60s (and hell! Wyoming today), what these two young men did would have earned them a one way ticket to the morgue. So, I guess, from the beginning, I was very much into the forbidden aspect of it because it was very much known to me.
Now, having said it, I can tell you that this show, while possibly overhyped, is worth every ounce of hype.
I have always thought Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal were beautiful to look at but not much worth clamoring about in the acting department.
I would love, love, love for both of these actors to score nominations (although promoting Jake as supporting will be a hard sell, he's pretty much a co-lead). Anne Hathaway is absolutely remarkable, as is Michelle Williams (both very deserving as well). All the way down the line, in fact, all roles are wonderfully cast and performed (especially great supporting turns by Anna Faris - almost unrecognizable - and Linda Cardellini).
The show moves at a wonderful pace. Many find it slow or staid, but it reflected the life these men were leaving. I was moved through the entire film (and found myself surprisingly on the side of Michelle Williams' character, even knowing these men were doing the only they could within society's rules).
Ah, I could go on and on but the point is, this is one of the most moving films I've seen in years.
Strangely, though, I expected to cry (as scads of homos exiting the previous showing were saying they had done) but I did not. Until the final credits rolled, then it all came crashing down on me.
Ang Lee is, at this point, the year's Best Director.

[DG]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 11:58am

I don't think it's being over-hyped in the general media - look to KONG for that. It is, however, getting a little beaten to death on this board.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 11:58am

Oh, DG, better this than Rent any day.

[DG]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 12:00pm

Well, you see which one I participate in

I really DO hope this will generate some discussion within the general population.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 12:03pm

I can't help but think it will, DG, although I certainly imagine that a lot of communities will protest, since "See No Evil, Hear NO Evil, Speak no Evil" seems to be the prevailing mindset within middle America.
And this, certainly, is humanizing the "last" evil to them. Just another sign of the liberal media.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 12:08pm

I believe it's great and truly amazing that it was made by a major studio and IS getting hype in the general media - and is, apparently, an extremely well-done film. And, for the record, I have never thought of Gyllenhall as anything but a wonderful actor, and gorgeous to look at.

I get turned off by anything that gets pushed in my face too much. Just my personality.

Updated On: 12/10/05 at 12:08 PM

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 12:11pm

*shakes his moneymaker in front of Rath*

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 12:13pm

bway, you know you're the one thing I can't resist having pushed in my face...

Updated On: 12/10/05 at 12:13 PM

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 12:13pm

The backlash has officially begun. Doesn't take long. I just hope to see it before I hear another effing word about it.

But this isn't just a gay (or any niche) syndrome. Last year, MILLION DOLLAR BABY was in this position -- the small(er) film up against the behemot, THE AVIATOR, as both arrive at year's end. BROKEBACK vs. KONG will likely be the the 05 version. I remember the raging debate at this board last year about BABY. Many of us who saw it early and were moved by it later faced scathing dismissal. One friend said "pu-leeze, half-ROCKY, half Bette Davis movie, and all cornball!" The BROKEBACK backlash already has some of that flavor.

Posted: 12/10/05 at 12:17pm

[Sideline note to Rathnat: this thread isn't about you. There are enough of those already. You've made your point. You have no interest in the film. Thanks, José]
Updated On: 12/10/05 at 12:17 PM

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 12:17pm

Auggie, this seems fairly typical of the Academy debate yearly these days, though, doesn't it? It's always one type of film up against the other, the juggernaut vs. the underdog. It happens all the time.

[Marquise]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 12:56pm

~ y'know some of you on this board are on some serious head trips.
some of you are taking this attitude that if something is "too popular" and it's getting "too much attention" then you're not going to see it.
~ are you people trying to prove a point by doing this?
give me a break.
you don't want to go see it? fine! suit yourselves.
~ it isn't necessary to repeatedly post your disdain.
we *heard* you the first time.


thank you josé for this thread. i've been looking forward to this film.
~ i've just finished reading the short novel it is based on.

[Luscious]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 3:31pm

My feeling is this... if you don't want to see the movie, then don't. It'll be your loss, not mine. You'll only be cheating yourself out of a beuatiful and moving movie-going experience. As for me, this is the movie I've been waiting my whole life to see. It was an unforgettable experience and a magical evening, and I'm thankful that I had a loving partner and friend to share it with. I'll never forget my first time seeing BROKEBACK, but it sure as hell won't be my last. If the next show wasn't already sold-out (and I wasn't so emotionally spent) I would have stayed and watched it all over again. I'm planning to see it again with another friend tomorrow afternoon.

[Anakela]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 3:44pm

I am loving this thread, this discussion of the demographics of who is and is not going to see this film.

My experience was similar to Jose's, in that I read the short story, thought it was one of the most beautiful love stories ever written, and so I absolutely had to see the movie right when it came out (12:01 am yesterday). Not because of any 'you must see this' hype (although I knew many people who came back from the Toronto fest saying so), or feeling of 'obligation,' or even 'omg you have to go check out the Jack Gyllen-hott' shallowness, but just simply because it's a beautiful film, a (haunting?) love story for anyone. And if I, as a straight female, walk away from this movie wishing that I could someday love and be loved the way that Jack and Ennis do, then maybe there's actual deserved reason behind the 'you must see this' hype.

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 5:50pm

Some posts on this thread have turned my stomach. Just because someone doesn't share your own personal opinion doesn't make said person "narrowminded". It's especially disheartening to hear that from a so-called "liberal". Isn't the whole point of being a liberal to accept and respect other viewpoints, even if you do not agree with them?

I must agree with those who have said that the film is being marketed in a way to make gays feel obligated to see it. The trailers are heavy on the gay context of the story. When one actually sees the full movie, they identify that it is about a RELATIONSHIP, not just a "gay relationship". It wouldn't matter if Jack and Ennis were Jackie and Ennis or Ellen and Jack. The movie is about the power of love, and not your run-of-the-mill stereotypical gay flick.

And Jose, Rath was NOT making this thread about herself. She was simply replying to a message.
Updated On: 12/10/05 at 05:50 PM

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 5:58pm

So, you are saying that if it were a heterosexual story, these two people would have just as hard a time being able to be together? And, would the climax be the same?

It IS about being gay (or bisexual as the case may or may not be). Proulx said she wrote the story to discuss how difficult it must have been to be gay in Wisconsin in the 60s--to not have options. To fall in love and not be able to fully live your life with that person.

Updated On: 12/10/05 at 05:58 PM

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 6:06pm

Number one, you should edit your message to remove the GIANT SPOILER that you posted.

So, you are saying that if it were a heterosexual story, these two people would have just as hard a time being able to be together?


Show me where I said that. I said that this is a movie about the power of love. I said that the movie isn't your typical gay love story, which is true. And I said that those who go in expecting the typical gay may be dissapointed.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 6:07pm

I posted SPOILERS AHEAD in the subject line.

[Greekmusicalfan]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 6:08pm

Oh Jerby, I read the spoiler warning a minute too late
But still, i am very excited to see this film and can't wait for it. Thankfully it is coming out very soon here, as does almost everything EXCEPT RENT, grrrrrr !!!

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 6:15pm

It's fixed.

I don't know why people would read a thread about a movie or TV Episode before seeing it if they don't expect some spoilers to be involved. It's to be expected.

[melissa errico fan]

Posted: 12/10/05 at 6:21pm

There's a difference between a little tiny spoiler and a "might as well just stay home and save my $11" spoiler.