The End of Brokeback Mountain (Massive Spoilers)- Page 6

[LionessInWinter]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 6:35pm

Only gasps, no laughter the 2 times I've seen it.

Was reading some reviews at IMDB and someone mentioned that Ang Lee said on Charlie Rose's show (that I most unfortunately missed) that Lureen lied on the phone to Ennis. Interesting since I think someone here said it was ambiguous in the original story.
If I got that wrong or this is a repeat of something someone said already, sorry. In a fog of illness at the moment.

[Luscious]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 7:02pm

Where did you see it, Namo; a High School auditorium in Des Moines? The audience I saw it with was extremely well behaved. You could hear a pin drop throughout the whole movie.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 10:14pm

Roquat, Luscious, shhhhh! The grown ups are talking now.

Auggie, the laughter at the show I saw wasn't mocking, it was the laughter of an audience that seemed to think Dennis Quaid was Jack Tripper thinking he's seeing Chrissie and Janet getting it on.

The laughter at the kiss had more of a "ha ha, the battleax will finally find out the truth and our heroes can be together forever as the music swells in the background, hooray!" tinge to it.

It actually made me feel bad, especially the latter scene, because it seemed as if the decks were stacked quite unfairly against the wives.

[roquat]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 10:20pm

Randy Quaid, dear. Not Dennis.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 10:21pm

I said good day.

[roquat]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 10:24pm

I'm starting to think you were put on earth to make Howie Mandel, Pauly Shore, and Carrot Top feel like overachievers...

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 10:28pm

You can keep trying and you can keep trying and maybe one of them will eventually be funny by the sheer statistical chance of it, or you can just give up now.

I'm sorry I did not think that the deeply flawed fundamentally conservative homosexual tragedrama that so many are overidentifying with just isn't all that good.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 10:34pm

Namo, from the first moment I saw the cloying, TITANIC-esque poster, I wanted to hate this movie. I started posting on it before I saw it, unfairly dissing it, trashing its ambitions and the insidious safety net for the audience ("see?! They're really straight!") it seemed to provide. But I saw it, twice, and do not think it can be pigeonholed thusly. On the contrary I think it is so powerful a validation of homosexual love -- innate, unbidden, unchanging and unwavering, not "chosen," but hard-wired into people everywhere -- that it will change hearts and minds. Because it has cast two A&F type actors, who give unstintingly to the emotional totally homosexual demands of the story (and be fair -- by the end, there is no cop out about straight male love), it may well be the Bush era love story that defines the era. Wouldn't that be amazing?

Updated On: 12/27/05 at 10:34 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 10:50pm

Yep, that would be. And I hope the people whose hearts and minds could be changed by a film see the film. But really, what would the odds be of that?

I went into the movie with a "show me" attitude, but rarely do I not have a "show me" attitude with any movie or stage show.

People talked for quite a long time in these threads about the movie, but I didn't even click on one until I saw it. Hadn't read the short story.

I didn't actually think the movie demonstrated that people are hard-wired or unchangeable. But that's just what I came away with.

[roquat]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 10:57pm

Oh, well.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 11:00pm

Again, roquat, I was talking to Auggie. Now back to the kids table, okay? Skoot!

[roquat]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 11:02pm

Or what? You'll try out one of your increasingly infantile fantasies on me? I don't think so.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 11:04pm

I rest my case.

[roquat]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 11:07pm

And nice avatar, by the way. Really sums you up.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 11:16pm

Namo, I'm surprised you haven't read the story. I feel sure you'd have a very different sense of the overall integrity of the project if you had.

The economy and concision of Annie Proulx's writing is sometimes breathtaking. There is not a wasted word, not an extra syllable. The emotional power comes from the understatement, which mirrors Ennis's inability to articulate his deep and surprising emotions.

The film captured that in the direction, the cinematography and most of the performances.

Not surprisingly, the "excesses" of the movie come in the moments that were not in the original story and had to be invented out of whole cloth. The character of Jack's wife for instance (and her hairstyles) is virtually absent from the story except for the final phone call, which is emotionally powerful and ambiguous as to what really happened to Jack.

But all the excesses don't outweigh the power of the movie or the effect that it is having (and already has had) on the culture.

All this carping reminds me of the story of the Broadway producer who came down with the flu and couldn't use his tickets to the opening night of Oklahoma so he gave them to his longtime costume mistress, a theatrical veteran of over 40 years who kept the costumes maintained on every show he had ever produced.

The next morning, he read all the papers, which raved about how Rodgers and Hammerstein had changed theatrical history, and hobbled into the office, eager to hear of her firsthand experience.

He found her laughing among her colleagues and asked the costume mistress what she thought of Oklahoma.

"Seams!" she snorted derisively. "You call those SEAMS?"

Updated On: 12/28/05 at 11:16 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 12/27/05 at 11:47pm

Well, see, I came to the movie with no prior experience of it. Which I think gives me a perspective that some people raving about it lack. Kind of like when I was dragged to The Lion King right after it opened having never seen the feature film.

At intermission I said to my friend, "God that woman in the African native make-up at the beginning was working my last nerve and it really seems racist to me?" and my friend replied, "You mean the monkey?"

My reply was, of course, "You're sh****ng me. She's supposed to be a MONKEY?"

I'm a bit off-kilter in the discussion of this movie because I didn't read any of the threads until I saw it and when I started I saw things that I really disagreed with. Like how it so "perfectly captures" things I thought it missed by a mile.

The CONTEXT with which I should have framed my discussion to begin with is:

Why this movie, why now, at this particular cultural moment in the US? Why is it "clicking" with so many gay people? Why do so many hope it will be some sort of object lesson that can turn the tide of homophobia? Why BBM being embraced and talked about and not, say, the Hedwig movie, which ultimately I think had a lot more to say and said it better? What market forces, what political forces, what cultural forces are contributing to this moment with this movie that we find ourselves in right now?

It's hard to have that discussion, and I wonder why?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 12/28/05 at 12:01am

Because Hedwig was transgressive. As such it can only play to a niche audience.

Annie Proulx wrote something that was subversive but not transgressive.

As she said so eloquently in the AP article linked in one of these threads, "It's a love story and there's hardly much love around these days. I think people are sick of divisiveness, hate-mongering, disasters, war, loss and need a reminder that sometimes love comes along that is strong and permanent, and that it can happen to anyone."

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 12/28/05 at 12:11am

"It's a love story and there's hardly much love around these days."

Oh, come on, Annie.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 12/28/05 at 12:52am

Sure Namo, just dismiss an answer to the very questions you were posing.

PalJoey's right; wonderful as HEDWIG AND THE ANGRY INCH is, like most gay films it could only hope to appeal to a small niche. BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN is the first serious (non-AIDS) gay movie to come out of Hollywood, with an A-list director and high-profile leading men. It's a relief that the movie is as artistically accomplished as it is, and a perfect antithesis to the flaming fairy minstrels that represent the whole of the gay experience in the American media.

[Peter]

Posted: 12/28/05 at 3:19am

I saw the film a second time tonight (Tuesday) with a mixed/conservative Orange County, CA audience (the first time was in LA). When I first walked in there were only a few people there, but by the time the film started, it was FULL. An encouraging sign, since its also playing in another theatre about 10 miles away from this one. Amazingly enough, there was no nervous giggling or bolting for the doors during the sex scenes. Only one couple walked out and that was close to the end. No clapping at the end, but I overhead several saying they liked it.

If its at all possible, it was even more powerful the second time. Jack's death is still ambiguous, but a little less so to me. So many factors point toward Jack dying in a hate crime. First of all, the "accident" sounded pretty far fetched. Secondly, and I believe this scene is crucial, after Thanksgiving when Ennis's wife erupts, he asks Jack if he thought his wife or anyone was suspicious. Now outside of Ennis's wife witnessing Jack and Ennis kissing, Ennis was pretty good at keeping his secret. But his wife witnesses Ennis's one and only lapse. Its clear that Ennis never picked up other guys and only went fishing with Jack a few times a year. On the other hand, Jack picked up Mexican guys, tried to pick up the rodeo clown, and apparently started an affair with another guy. He was far less careful. Jack tells Ennis that he didnt think his wife was suspicious, but you get the impression that Jack doesnt have a clue, since he doesnt have Ennis's paranoia. Also, Jack does say that he doesnt have a real marriage. Everyone Ennis encountered after Jacks death had the same kind of telling, sneering coldness. The way Jacks father snickered about Jack planning to take over the ranch with another guy...who was going to leave his wife...made it clear to me he knew Jack was gay. His final refusal to follow his son's wishes is another indicator. Jacks wife's father didnt like him. Too many things point in the direction of Jack dying in a hate crime.

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 12/28/05 at 3:24am

Did anyone else find it far fetched that these two outdoorsy guys would never have fished on these dates? I mean, come on. They are in the middle of nowhere with nothing to do but screw and fish...and they can't screw 24/7! I don' t care how horny they are there has to be SOME down time.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 12/28/05 at 8:28am

Eeeeeeew. Fishy fish.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 12/28/05 at 8:45am

indeed, sueleen. very fishy indeed.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/28/05 at 9:52am

Bluewizard picked up on something that bears noting. How the film takes us away from the prevailing gay step n'fetchit syndrome, Jack McFarland and the Fab Four. By simply showing unbidden, passionate, irrevocable love as a defining trait, rather than someone obsessed with window treatments and white parties, the story and film deconstruct the easy idea of people "choosing" to be gay to enjoy a chip urban "lifestyle," a word that should be banned.

I'm the first to say: let's not dis the sissies, or the Hedvigs. But Manoula Darghis, who put it on her NY Times top 10 list, says this about BROKEBACK in her masculinity essay:

"...In the pop culture fantasy of assimilation, gay men and lesbians are little more than fabuous accessories for straights ..."

Amen. In 2005, accommodating those "fabulous accessories" passes for tolerance and acceptance. And that's why I am personally tired of "tolerant" people giggling at Jack and the Queer Eye Five and pretending they embrace gay people as complex human beings.

Yes, yes, keep queer eye. Keep Jack. It's a big "community," as diverse as every single man or woman in it. But we have been overdue for an irony-free show of genuine feeling among men. What BROKEBACK portrays is a lifetime defined by a commitment of the heart. Surely gay men are worthy of such treatment.

Updated On: 12/28/05 at 09:52 AM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 12/28/05 at 9:57am

"fabulous accessories"

hmmm, i thought i was the only one who thought of you and namo (among others) as my bags.