Gay talk show host takes aim at "brave" stars of Brokeback- Page 3

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 1:23pm

BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN isn't about being gay. It's not about being accepted - it's about love. It's about wanting something so bad that it destroys you - gender aside.

I'm so sick of "openy gay" this and "gay" that. Just STOP.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 1:25pm

When I made similar comments after reading some of Jake and Heath's interviews, I had my ass chewed on this board. Would some of you like your teeth back?

I am happy this film is doing well, and I hope it has a positive impact on the social and political landscape. But, as I have been saying for months, it would be nice if the actors could be "brave" by not dramatizing the work it took to play a gay character.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 1:29pm

Well, there, munk, you are wrong. Brokeback is about many things, but it is most definitely about being gay---in the 60s in Wisconsin and not having the option that us city folk do of living our lives with our partners, etc. Proulx wrote the story to specifically cover this issue.

If you think I am wrong (which I'm not), please show me what could be substituted in this story to create the same conflicts for these characters. Show me how the fate of these characters would be the same if it wasn't about being gay.

[eslgr8]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 2:26pm

Jrb, good for you to have raised this question of "bravery" before. The brave thing would have been for Heath or Jake simply to have said, "It was a good role, so I took it." Or "I wasn't any more concerned about the sex or kissing than I would have been had I been playing opposite a woman." That would have been brave!

[roquat]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 3:34pm

Karel's article didn't make me think about homophobia, the media, Hollywood, or actors' bravery. It made me think he is a pretentious, whiny twit. I got the same feeling after reading Vito Russo's "The Celluloid Closet." Both of these writers are less interested in exploring the subject of homosexuality than in seeking grounds for indignation. ALL THE TIME. There is nothing Heath and Jake could have said that would have satisfied Karel's internal "politically incorrect" detector.

By the way, all actors are brave. All of them, famous or obscure, risk failure and public ridicule every moment of their lives. We should applaud those willing to take the big risks on the complex, emotionally difficult roles that come along all too rarely. It seems fairly evident to me that "Brokeback Mountain" posed just that kind of risk, and the risk would have been the same for gay actors playing the roles. The fact remains that these two actors were willing to take that risk, and the movie wouldn't have been made without them. For that fact alone, I salute them, and I leave it to the critics to carp about whether they succeeded or failed.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 3:41pm

Sensible points all, roquat.

[eslgr8]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 3:45pm

Even assuming that Karel is a "a pretentious, whiny twit," that doesn't make his points any less valid or true, at least as I see them. Truth is I suppose often in the eye of the beholder.
Updated On: 12/16/05 at 03:45 PM

[PalJoey]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 3:49pm

Vito Russo's Celluloid Closet was a landmark book.

And I think Vito would have been the first one to say that Ennis and Jack are unhappy NOT because they are gay but because they are forced to live in a closet.

By the way, I love this thread.

[roquat]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 3:50pm

Thank you, Auggie27--let me make one more. An actor's job is to act his/her role with all the emotionally honesty possible. It is not to "make a statement" or a social judgment on that role. Most actors are at their worst in interviews when they try to explain what they were "saying" by taking this or that role (besides "I needed the money.") It is natural, and I don't think they should be crucified if they fumble sometimes.

[roquat]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 3:55pm

"Even assuming that Karel is a "a pretentious, whiny twit," that doesn't make his points any less valid or true"

Oh yes it does, eslgr8.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 4:08pm

Am I a pretentious, whiny twit?

Wait--some of you DON'T ANSWER THAT! lol

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 4:19pm

Here's an article I found from the Sun-Times (probably Chicago, but I don't really know - I found the article on another bulletin board). I've bolded some of the more interesting parts. (I've also cut out the boring middle section so we don't get in trouble with the copyright.)

-----------------

December 16, 2005

BY KEVIN NANCE Arts Critic

Screenwriter Barry Sandler had watched the debacle unfold in test screenings of his film "Making Love," and now, in a movie house in Miami on Valentine's Day weekend in 1982, it was happening again. As the sexual tension built between Harry Hamlin and Michael Ontkean on the screen, a different kind of tension built inside the theater: discomfort, then nervousness, and finally something akin to panic. When the two actors kissed, much of the audience burst into gales of derisive laughter or shrieks of anger and disgust.

"People were actually storming up the aisles to get out," Sandler recalls. "It was like there was a bomb in the theater. People just didn't want to deal with two men having sex."

Fast forward to a sneak-peek showing of another gay love story in Los Angeles this month: As Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal first had sex in "Brokeback Mountain," the critically acclaimed film opening in Chicago today, a different current of feeling ran through the audience.

"You could feel the air go out of the room, but it wasn't negative -- it was more like, 'wow,' " says L.A. resident Mark Cirillo, who was present. "After that, people were paying such close attention and getting so emotionally involved that you could hear a pin drop. When the credits started rolling, nobody got up -- which is really unusual because in L.A., people don't stay for the credits, ever. But the ending was incredibly emotional, and there was this really long moment where people just sat there, stunned."

The radically different reactions to the two films undoubtedly has more than a little to do with their quality. "Making Love" got mixed reviews, while "Brokeback Mountain," about a pair of sheepherders who fall in love in Wyoming but are mostly kept apart, is breaking box-office records in limited release, attracting critics' awards and multiple Golden Globe nominations. Ledger and director Ang Lee are shoo-ins for Academy Award nods; some Oscar watchers proclaim "Brokeback" the frontrunner for Best Picture. "As of now," Time magazine film critic Richard Schickel says, "there are no serious American movies that have the kind of buzz going for [them] that this one does."

But the early success of "Brokeback Mountain" also signals a seismic cultural shift in the American moviegoing public's attitudes toward homosexuality -- specifically toward gay men who aren't drag queens or there for comic relief -- in the past quarter-century. It seems possible now, as "Brokeback Mountain" stands poised to prove, for a substantial mainstream audience to embrace a tender romance between two men without scattering popcorn all the way to the exits.

"In a very mixed audience I was part of, it got a standing ovation at the end," says Damon Romine, entertainment media director for the Los Angeles-based Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD). "It's an American love story, and a tragedy as well, that transcends gay or straight. It's about the age-old theme of forbidden love, and who can't relate to that?"

Heath and Jake? 'Yeah!'

[...]

Many are skeptical of the film's chances in the heartland. "There've been a lot of comedic, camp gay characters in mainstream movies, but it remains to be seen how 'Brokeback,' which is sort of serious and heavy-breathing, will play," Schickel says. "I think it'll be controversial on some red-state level, because there is an America out there with an unsophisticated audience that's resistant to the possibility that gay people can have serious romantic relationships that involve us emotionally as opposed to comedically. I don't think think it's an easy sell."

And Mart Crowley, whose landmark gay comedy "The Boys in the Band" galvanized audiences when it hit movie theaters in 1970, says that there are still large sectors of the population that aren't likely to rush to the cinema to see a gay love story. "The younger generation doesn't seem to care, but until my own generation dies off and gets out of the way, we're going to have problems," Crowley says. "And there are a lot of Bible-thumping Baptists who aren't going to like 'Brokeback Mountain' any more than they liked 'Boys in the Band.' "

But "Brokeback" is expected to have high turnout among gays and, more surprising, heterosexual women. "The studio is targeting gays and women," says Ellen Huang, a former movie industry executive who now heads Queer Lounge, a networking organization for gay filmmakers at Sundance and other film festivals. "I think it's going to be pretty hard to convince straight males to go unless their girlfriends drag them to it -- and the girlfriends might do that, because women have the ability to see the transcendent aspects of the love story."

In fact, straight women formed the core audience demographic for gay-themed TV shows such as Showtime's "The L Word" and "Queer as Folk."

"Our No. 1 demographic was heterosexual women from 18 to 49, with gay men No. 2," says Del Shores, an executive producer and writer for "Queer as Folk," which ended this year after five seasons. "Straight women loved the show, I think, because it had real relationships and good story lines, and because -- seriously -- of the really hot guys. My teenage daughter's friends were all in love with Gale Harold [who played the show's handsome libertine, Brian Kinney]. They just pretended he was straight."

Amy Verdon, a 28-year-old Chicago administrative assistant who for weeks has been in a state of high anticipation of seeing Ledger and Gyllenhaal lock lips in "Brokeback," says that Shores knows whereof he speaks. "To see those two gentlemen making out -- yeah! There's not anything about that that I don't want to see."

But, she adds, it's more complicated than mere sex appeal. "From all accounts, it's going to empty out your tear ducts, and I think it's nice to be touched emotionally by something that's presented in a genuine, authentic way. I can't wait."

The first gay crossover movie?

Aside from the issue of how "Brokeback Mountain" will play in Peoria, the biggest question is how the film's success might affect the climate in Hollywood. If "Brokeback" wins Oscars and becomes a substantial box-office hit, will it embolden formerly skittish major studios to follow TV's lead and greenlight more gay-themed projects aimed at mainstream audiences?

"I do think it's going to open the doors for people who want to make gay films -- if not with the studios at first, then with people who are interested in investing in major independent projects like 'Brokeback,' " Shores says. "I want it to make a [boat]-load of money so bad, because if it does, it's going to help us all."

Cirillo goes further, predicting that "Brokeback" will do for the cinema "what 'Will & Grace' did for TV. It's going to be the first really big gay crossover movie."

Others aren't so sure.

"I was hoping that when [1997's] 'In & Out' appeared with Kevin Kline, it would have that effect. It didn't," says Jeff Weinstein, a columnist on gay issues for the Philadelphia Inquirer. "Hollywood loves success and imitates it, so things could move in that direction. But I'm still cautious about the future of movies with honest gay content -- honest as opposed to cliched, drag-queen stuff, the gay character as comic relief. Films that include gay life and roll it into a real narrative, a real story? That's still something I await."

'Brokeback' looked good, but made actors skittish
In 1997, when screenwriters Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana optioned author Annie Proulx's short story about a love affair between a Wyoming ranch hand and a rodeo cowboy, they were amazed at how quickly their script seemed headed for the big screen. Within a week of the screenplay's making initial rounds in Hollywood, director Gus Van Sant ("Good Will Hunting") had signed on. Soon, top producer Scott Rudin was also attached, as was a major studio, Columbia Pictures. All they had to do was cast the lead roles.

That's when things fell apart.

"Several prominent actors read the script, really warmed to it, but then they'd waver in anguish, and finally let it go," Ossana says. "They wouldn't say why, specifically, but it was fairly clear to us what the issue was: the subject matter. There was a sex scene, a kissing scene, and I think they felt ambivalent about it. At one point, Joaquin Phoenix ['Walk the Line'] was ready to play one of the roles, but we couldn't cast the other."

McMurtry ("Terms of Endearment," "Lonesome Dove") and Ossana developed a theory that the actors -- whom she wouldn't name -- wanted to do the movie but were dissuaded by their agents and managers, who were afraid that playing a gay role would harm their careers. Several years passed before Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal took the "Brokeback" parts.

The episode demonstrated an old problem in Hollywood: the fear of playing gay. Screenwriter Barry Sandler recalls that in the early 1980s, Michael Douglas, Richard Gere and Tom Berenger considered playing the gay couple in "Making Love," but eventually decided against it. Michael Ontkean ("Twin Peaks") and Harry Hamlin ("L.A. Law") took the roles.

More recently, according to writer-actor John Cameron Mitchell, Ashton Kutcher ("That '70s Show") declined to audition for a role in the 2001 film version of "Hedwig and the Angry Inch" that ended up being played by Michael Pitt. "He seemed to have a problem with the material," Mitchell says.

"It's still seen as extremely risky for a male star to play gay," says Ellen Huang, executive director of the gay filmmakers network Queer Lounge. "That's probably why we're seeing so many stories now about Heath Ledger's marriage to Michelle Williams and Jake Gyllenhaal's relationship with his girlfriend. It wouldn't surprise me if some of those stories were planted by the studio [Focus Features]."

But perhaps the anxiety is increasingly unnecessary. Many moviegoers -- notably teenage girls and young women -- are showing signs of a growing willingness to separate actor from role. Huang recalls that at the "Brokeback" premiere at the Toronto Film Festival, "there were legions of screaming women outside waiting to see Jake Gyllenhaal, even though they were very conscious of the fact that he was going to be onscreen making out with another guy."

And at least among younger male actors, inspired by the Academy Award-winning turns of William Hurt in "Kiss of the Spider Woman" in 1985 and Tom Hanks in "Philadelphia" in 1993, the allure of a potentially award-winning role may be starting to outweigh other fears. This year, Philip Seymour Hoffman is being touted as a leading best actor contender for his role as the gay hero of "Capote."

"Some young actors love to play gay because there's a potential to get an Oscar for it," Mitchell says. "In the case of Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal, it puts them into the next level, into the category of Oscar nominations. It's kind of hilarious, actually, when straight actors are given laurels for playing gay, because of their perceived braveness and courage for doing so. To me, it's not very courageous to want to go for the Oscar gold."

Updated On: 12/16/05 at 04:19 PM

[Elphaba]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 4:24pm

I'm so sick of "openy gay" this and "gay" that. Just STOP.


sorry Munk, spent too many years in the closet to accomodate you......

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 4:30pm

Fantastic article, Bluey! :)

[roquat]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 4:50pm

Wonderful article--but that last line?

So we lambast actors for taking safe, big-money roles, and when they actually go for challenging roles in risky projects, we say they're "just going for the Oscar gold"?

And then we wonder why most movies suck.

Sigh.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 4:52pm

FYI, guys,
this movie IS marketed at straight audiences in some ways. Straight audiences in areas of this country where, believe it or not, EXACTLY the same sentiments portrayed in the film are prevailing today.
I find it wholly unsurprising that someone like you, Robbiej, wouldn't necessarily identify with Ennis. I, on the other hand, see every one of my uncles, neighbor's dads and so on in that man and his demeanor.
We live in a sort of cultural bubble in the northeast and the same can be said of other homosexual havens such as San Francisco.
The majority of this country, as continuously shoved down our throats by the majority of people who continue to vote red, DEFINITELY share the viewpoint of the characters in this film.
And that's what shook me directly to my core. The events take place in the 60s-80s, but they might as well have just set it in Texas over the last 20 years, the story wouldn't need to have been changed one iota. I grew up like this, and that's in the 70s to today. Not everyone, just because they know of places like San Fran and New York, have the wherewithal to escape these areas. And so they suffer in silence, or they behave as Ennis and Jack do and have "best fishing buddies."
The attitude that gay is accepted because of Will and Grace and Straight Eye is just a big, whopping fallacy. It ain't true. Don't believe me? Come home with me to the south for Christmas this week and I'll show you a world filled with hate, rage, and a couple million Ennis and Jack look-alikes.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 4:53pm

No, but I don't think we should call them brave, either. There's nothing brave about taking a lead role in an Ang Lee movie. Instead, we use the word "lucky."

The cowardous actors who turned down the parts due to the gay content are probably kicking themselves right now.

[TheEnchantedHunter]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 4:56pm

IN & OUT "didn't have that effect" because it's a completely dishonest film that betrays its own premise.


Maria Ouspenskaya
Tula, Russia

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 4:59pm

Will & Grace and QE HAVE had a positive effect on matters. They may be trivial to those of us who have been living it or live in a major city, but I know from my family alone that it has been a bridge for some people--a first step.

Updated On: 12/16/05 at 04:59 PM

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 4:59pm

IN & OUT "didn't have that effect" because it's a completely dishonest film that betrays its own premise.

Then I think you didn't get the film. It was a complete tongue-in-cheek satire.

Updated On: 12/16/05 at 04:59 PM

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 5:28pm

This whole "bravery" thing would never have come into play if the two male roles were played by George Clooney & Matt Damon.

"Mr. Clooney, what attracted you to do such a risky gay role?"

"I wanted to spend even more more time with Matt's great ass."

Updated On: 12/16/05 at 05:28 PM

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 5:29pm

Oh how I quiver at the thought of that casting. Grrr! :)

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 5:31pm

Matt Damon would make a GREAT bottom.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 5:32pm

QUIT TEASING ME!!

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 12/16/05 at 7:44pm

Did anyone see Shirley MacLaine's comments about the movie from a few months ago?

"Why did Ang Lee do it? What are they going to do with two gay cowboys? Do you think the public will care? How old are you, anyway?"
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/12790596.htm

Updated On: 12/16/05 at 07:44 PM