Brokeback Mountain won and it just seemed so ordinary- Page 4

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 1:17am

Well, first, I should point out that Humphrey Bogart was FAR from a matinee idol in terms of his looks and was never cast as a romantic leading man prior to Casablanca and rarely afterwards --- he was the quintessential character actor who got elevated to lead parts because of his acting ability and not his looks.

It's always been rare for any young-ish actor to make it to the level of the Hollywood A-list who is not attractive on some level or another -- conventional (Gable, Brando, Clift, Redford, Cruise, Ledger) or unconventional (Pacino, Hanks, Brody). While you have the occasional Bogart or Bette Davis who end up being stars for their charisma and acting abilities alone, the dream factory in Hollywood still puts forward the beautiful people to be the leads in 90% of films. Even when the characters being portrayed ideally shouldn't be beautful, Hollywood has always preferred making the typically beautiful people less attractive (Theron in "Monster" for example) than simply hiring great unattractive actors.

Given such realities, it seems silly to even bother contemplating how different a film Brokeback Mountain might have been with average-looking people -- how often do average-looking people EVER get cast in lead roles in studio films, regardless of the subject matter? Leave such considerations for indy films out of the mainstream.

Beyond that, I think that casting two "gorgeous guys" in the leads, rather than distancing audiences from the reality of the story, actually serves to trigger more empathy. Watching beautiful people suffer and be miserable and not find happiness has far more impact on the masses than it would be to see unattractive or ugly people go through the same things. People almost expect unattractive people to be unhappy in the movies, but (considering the fantasy function movies play for people) to see very pretty people not be able to get what they want out of life makes a more powerful statement.

Updated On: 1/17/06 at 01:17 AM

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 1:21am

People almost expect unattractive people to be unhappy in the movies,

LOL, how true. Thanks for the post, Margo.

[Jane2]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 1:24am

Margo, thanks for your reply. As for it being silly to even contemplate this, I guess I was being silly. A few of the people I work with were being silly too, because that's when it came up. It is true that average or worse looking actors would never be starring in these leads. I guess the scenario I should be contemplating is perhaps a documentary, where average looking people are used to convey the same story. Maybe even a documentary using the actual people who are involved in the story. I think it would be effective.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 1:30am

I can definitely see Primetime or 20/20 doing a special on "the real gay cowboys of America" after BROKEBACK wins Best Picture; Dianna Sawyer combing Wyoming, Texas and Utah, speaking with gay ranchers and their loved ones. A teary-eyed interview here or there.

Updated On: 1/17/06 at 01:30 AM

[Jane2]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 1:35am

Well let's not get ridiculous, BW. Haven't you ever seen really good documentaries on cable stations? I have.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 9:30am

Oh. The "good for the community" portion of our program is that it might get a 20/20 segment on gay cowboys of Wyoming out of it? I stand corrected.

Believe me, I am the LAST to think that all representations of gay men have to be happy or whatever Blue Wizard wrote. I just want to know why this particular regressive film is being heralded as "good for the community?" I really agree that it's "just a movie" and all this "hail Brokeback" stuff is not particularly deserved and I'm just waiting for somebody to articulate something that explains in real terms how it's helpful.

As for trash, you know, you act as if there aren't a boatload of excellent, not so excellent, and horrible gay films available on DVD. You act as if you really DO live in the bad old days when there were no representations of gay people anywhere. You act as if somebody has to be 19 and troubled to understand why Brokeback is so important. You act as if I dismissed young gay people by not making the leap (as you did) from BM being good for you specifically to the community in general. Even the community of 19 year old queers.
You act as if YOU are in a trailer in Texas and there's never been a Logo channel.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 9:39am

Speaking of real gay cowboys, there are lots of new profiles up at the Gay Dating section of www.gaycowboycentral.com.

Talk about your lonesome doves...
GayCowboyCentral.com: the GAY Cowboy Hangout

[iluvtheatertrash]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 9:44am

It put homosexual love out there. In the MAIN media. So many of those gay films you're talking about Nano, and LOGO, too, isn't accessible to everyone. I don't get LOGO. None of my friends get LOGO. Wished we did, though. And what - "Eating Out", "All Over the Guy"? These films were never wide release. These films never won a major award. BM did. There's a huge difference there. HUGE.

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 9:52am

Well, there is another things this movie does that no other gay movie I've seen has done -- it reveals the only other option for gay men (and the option most fundies want us to take): repress your feelings, marry a woman, and don't let anyone know.

The problem is that love (as we see in this movie) is more powerful than what any society can collectively oppress.

When is the last time you heard anyone say of a gay movie: "You just forgot it was two men."

And THAT is a milestone worthy of making this movie important.

Is this movie our salvation? No, but it will help (if even just a bit).

[DG]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 9:54am

When they showed the clip of BROKEBACK last night for its nomination as best picture, it included three scenes of affection being shown between either of the men and the women in their respective lives, and the moment they showed between the 'cowboys' was of Ennis slugging Jack. That pretty much encapsulated what I think this movie presents as a 'beautiful love story'.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 10:15am

Yes, DG. The BM marketeers are very calculating that way.

And trash, honestly, I am not talking about Landmark Cinema and direct-to-video crap, I'm talking about a boatload of great gay cinema. Also, I totally resent your suggesting I dismiss Transamerica by thinking this BM stuff is over-the-top. Huffman's acceptance speech ALONE is worthy of kudos, acknowledging as it did that there are REAL people who go through difficult times. I don't think I heard anybody in the BM acceptance speeches mention actual gay people. Most seemed to think their colleagues on the creative team were "brave."

That's good as far as it goes, but give me what Felicity said any day.

[xxnewgirlxx]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 10:18am

Yay Joaquin!!!

[DG]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 10:19am

"Huffman's acceptance speech ALONE is worthy of kudos"

AMEN! I even put that in her thread.

And I believe you're right, I didn't hear mention of gay people from the BM creators, either - nor of Randy Quaid, which I thought was a little odd since he was sitting there in the room with them.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 10:36am

The criticisms that are the most laughable to me, are these put downs of the ad campaign(s).

Oh yes, those nefarious suits at Focus Features have been oh so cleverly trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes in red state America. The TV blitz is designed to make you think it's the story of two wonderful, funky out-west herteroseuxal couples, whose husband become best buds on fishin' trips. That's they're goal: They want you to think its two straight couples and their travails, until they get your nine bucks at the multiplex and then --

SPOILER! SPOILER! SPOILER!

SUDDENLY, YOU'LL BE STUNNED TO LEARN THE DARK SECRET OF BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN! THE MOVIE IS *REALLY* ABOUT ... QUEERS! WE HAD NO EFFING IDEA! I WANT MY MONEY BACK!

Oh, they are using lies, lies, lies to sell this "gay cowboy movie," aren't they? And excuse me, does anyone here, even the naysayers, feel Michelle Williams and Ann Hathaway do not contribute to the fabric of this story? Whatever your beefs with the too tasteful way the boys snuggle or bill n'coo, the movie very honestly portrays the toll on the women they choose, the price paid for falling for these men, and the price the men pay for being so deceitful to the two decent women. They ARE part of the story, and earn their place in those "sneaky" ad campains.

[Luscious]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 10:40am

Auggie... you're MY BWW Celebrity of the Day!

Updated On: 1/17/06 at 10:40 AM

[Jane2]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 10:51am

I'm chuckling about "trash" and "nano". Great day everyone!

[robbiej]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 11:02am

Of course, when my reaction was to have far more sympathy for the women than for the men, I think the movie ultimately failed.

There's a basic premise here that everyone's taking for granted: love. Now...yes...it's supposed to be a love story. And some people have seen it. But I didn't. In any way, shape or form as I have experienced love. There was not a single moment of that calm...that simple existence when two people are just with each other. Who cares if the sex scenes were tame? Who cares if we saw them at all? To really understand the loss and the pain, you had to understand the love. And the major artistic failure (for me) in this movie was the inability to show the positive side of their love. So, I never felt the enormity of the loss.

I'm not sure whose version of love I witnessed...but it had not corollary in my own life and existence. And I guess I'm glad about that.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 11:48am

"In any way, shape or form as I have experienced love"

That right there is why I think a lot of gay films fall flat for people--it wasn't what I experienced. Why didn't it tell MY story? It doesn't read as true because it's not how I experienced being gay.

I'm wondering where you grew up, Namo? As a Texan, I know right there that seeing two cowboys kiss is going to rock more than a few minds. I'll never forget how seeing two men two-step at a C&W bar in Dallas affected me having grown up around cowboy types being THE symbol of masculinity. Hell--it was wild seeing Clint Eastwood handing an award to Ang Lee for this film.

I'm sorry you guys feel left out at the party.

[SonofMammaMiaSam]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 11:51am

But those closed minds have to have their butts in the theater to see it Jerby. Those seeing this film are probably already somewhat comfortable with the concept.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 11:57am

And for the record, Felicity Huffman is playing a transgendered WOMAN. And to be more accurate--a transexual woman.

Very true, SOMMS. But awards make a film that much more "must see". And, even if they don't go to the theater, there is DVD, pay per view, cable, and network TV. And a lot of people--especially the closeted folk who would possibly benefit from the film will likely choose the most anonymous of all those options.

[Cue sarcastic disregard from Namo. Cue papa twisting my comments as my saying the film will change the world by next week]

[PalJoey]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 12:03pm

While you queens are fighting among yourselves, there's a Culture War going on out there.

snippet from the folks who bring you the 700 Club:

===

CBN.com – WASHINGTON - Brokeback Mountain is the biggest, boldest attempt yet by Hollywood to gain sympathy, if not outright support, for those practicing the homosexual lifestyle.

As CBN News reports, it is not just an isolated effort. There is a well-planned propaganda campaign at work -- a campaign laid out all the way back in the 1980s.

The movie Brokeback Mountain looks like a big, bold, manly Western movie. But instead of the usual "boy meets girl" romance, this film's about "cowboy meets cowboy."

It is one of the most forward attempts so far by Hollywood to mainstream homosexuality.

"It is very, very propagandistic, because the entire purpose of the movie is to make homosexuality seem like something good and appealing, and to make people who are opposed to homosexuality bigots and homophobes," said David Kupelian, author of The Marketing of Evil....

"They are marketing Red State, Bush-country America," Kupelian said.

But the way the studio did that was by opening it up in just five Blue State cities where there were large, built-in gay audiences, so the first showings had blockbuster numbers.

"And they get these high numbers and all the buzz going,” Kupelian said, “and then pretty soon it's sort of like the emperor's new clothes effect: we're all looking at that -- even middle, Christian America, saying, 'Everybody else says this movie is so great. I need to go see it to see why it's so great.'"

Is there an actual agenda at work here?

Authors Alan Sears and Craig Osten, in a book called The Homosexual Agenda, warn about a complex and well-thought-out strategy to make America "gay friendly" and hostile to those who resist.

These Christian authors quote extensively from After the Ball, a 1989 gay manifesto that laid out this agenda.

Many gays deny such an agenda exists.
Homosexual Agenda Pushed in Movies Like Brokeback Mountain

[robbiej]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 12:03pm

Oh my little Jerby...

Remember your Gemini-ness about the movie? How you can assess the movie on several levels. Well...as you know, you're not the only Gemini here (though you are older than me by ONE DAY, BITCH!)

See...I'm speaking strictly in artistic terms...why I feel the movie failed aristically. If this is a story of love that is repressed and the consequences of such, I don't have a problem with that. But, I found the very definition of 'love', as expressed by this film, to be flawed. Here, it's violent, scary, forbidden and, ultimately, the source for all that is wrong in their lives. But never once is the 'love' portrayed as, well, loving.

I don't need MY experience to be shown on the screen...but to understand the loss, we need to see what is actually lost. Whoever called this film a Rorschach (sp?) test hit it right on the head. They didn't give us much in the way of the 'love', so everyone projects their own views of what love is. And, let me tell you, I've learned A LOT about my fellow posters here.

The love was never defined, which thereby robbed myself (and others, dare I say, you included jerby...as you used the term 'underwhelmed' regarding BM) of any true emotional reaction to the ending of the film. And THAT, in my opinion, is an artistic FAILURE!

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 12:10pm

And as I did say in my assessing the film on 3 levels. I was underwhelmed as a gay man. But I very much respect the work Ang Lee and actors and company did. Thus, my quibble is likely with Ms. Proulx. But, I get the possibility that via direction and certainly adaptation, things could have been told in a different way to fulfill the ideals you are expressing. And, yes, I agree with you on.

HOWEVER, I know many people who were crying at the end of that film. And, clearly this film is affecting many people if not us--at least critics and people voting for awards.

And, Pal Joey, you MUST have made that CBN story up. Because this film ISN'T controversial or political! It ISN'T part of the culture war we have over equality for all people regardless of sexual orientation. You had best delete that fake post before the naysayers get ahold of you, mister!

[Luscious]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 12:12pm

"There was not a single moment of that calm...that simple existence when two people are just with each other."

Oh I don't know about that. Their second encounter in the tent, their playful wrestling, their post-coital pillow talk at the motel, the scenes of them riding, skinny-dipping, and "just being" with each other on the mountain. I think there was enough there to get the message across. At least there was for me.

Updated On: 1/17/06 at 12:12 PM

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 1/17/06 at 12:14pm

"...it just seemed so ordinary"

I missed it. You mean Pat Robertson DIDN'T come flying onstage like Fartman when Lee accepted the award? Someone dropped the ball!