Brokeback Mountain: the Gay Cowboy movie

[walterick]

Come on, we've talked about every other major theatrical event up here. I'm amazed we haven't broached this one. Though it may be uncomfortable for some (I've heard a few people, er, MEN say say thay would never see this movie) I think it's a prime candidate for an OT discussion.

My take:
A+ film. The best I've seen in a while. The acting is superb, the pace and tone are appropriate without putting you to sleep (and I hate slow movies.) Cinemetography is great, though I imagine it's not too hard to make a beautiful film while shooting in the mountains of Wyoming. The subject was not too hard to digest. It is not a film about gay sex, or about sex at all really. It's a love story, and a very good one at that. It's mildly funny at times and obnoxiously upsetting at others.

The award goes to Heath Ledger, who in a very humble, quiet way, manages to carry the entire movie without ever attracting any attention to himself and not let you know he's done it until the final few minutes. Superb acting on his part. Jake Gillenholm (sp?) also does a superb job, though more complimentary imo. Look for other great performances especially from Michelle Williams (Dawson's Creek) and Anne Hathaway (Disney films) as the wives of the star-crossed men. I must admit, my eyes were wet the last 15 minutes -don't tell anyone that though.

Looking forward to other responses/heated debate on homosexuality.

Rick

[payn817]

Haven't seen it, but heard some controversy over it.

I like that you say it isn't about sex at all, but is about love. Sex is not necessarily about love and love about sex. Just because someone is gay doesn't mean that they can't have sex with a woman, or don't want sex with a woman. It simply means they can only LOVE someone of the same sex.

If this thread were to contain heated debate, wouldn't that be in violation of the rules though? Not to mention that someone may actually be offended, etc.. I don't think anyone here openly discusses it, but I would bet all I have that some from the gay community frequent here.

[mjs1973]

Interesting that you mention this movie. I haddn't heard anything about it until this weekend. I was reading a magazine or doing something else, while the TV was on, and an add for the movie came on. I didn't catch much of it, just enough to figure out it was a cowboy movie, and that I thought it looked OK. I was surprised to hear that it was already in theaters because that was the first time I had ever even heard of it.

Later that day I was on the net and came across the movie in a "Best of 2005 movies" list. There, I was able to read a short summery of the movie, and I must say, it was NOTHING like I had pictured from the preview I had half watched earlier. Not that their's anything wrong with that.

I don't go to many movies, so I dought I will see this one in a theater, but perhaps when it comes out on DVD.

[swmdrayfan]

I think if a movie is well written, acted, and directed, it should not matter what the subject is. There are probably a lot of people who are uncomfortable with the subject and won't go see it. Will I? I don't know--but it won't be because I'm homophobic--which I'm not. I venture to say it could not be any worse than 70% of the 'action/adventure' drek that's out there. That said, you are going to get your percentage of people who'll write letters to the editor of their local paper, protesting the showing of the movie--the same people who'll allow their children to watch every 'slice and dice' movie that comes out.

[adina]

If this thread were to contain heated debate, wouldn't that be in violation of the rules though? Not to mention that someone may actually be offended, etc.. I don't think anyone here openly discusses it, but I would bet all I have that some from the gay community frequent here.

I believe the off topic forum was created for these purposes. Not to offend people on purpose, but to keep discussions that may get heated (religious and political ones tend to quickly) from dominating the first page of the viewfinder section.

[adina]

Haven't seen this one yet.

I haven't heard much until recently. I had heard it was the gay cowboy movie, but just this past week or so, started hearing the awards buzz.

We'll probably see it on video, we don't get to the movies enough to see every one we'd like to see in the theater.

[srobb]

I don't think anyone here openly discusses it, but I would bet all I have that some from the gay community frequent here.

And you would be very correct, payn. I had kind of hinted at that in the thread on when we got started in photography. No one mentioned it, or seemed to pick up on it, so I never thought about it again. I don't believe in making it an issue because I know it may make others uncomfortable.

We are very interested in seeing it, but may wait for it to come out on DVD. If we went to the theatre, I would be the only one to see all of it. John would wind up going to sleep.

If I have caused any umcomfort with this post, I apologize. It's just time for me to "come out of the closet" where PR is concerned. ;)

[another view]

I believe the off topic forum was created for these purposes. Not to offend people on purpose, but to keep discussions that may get heated (religious and political ones tend to quickly) from dominating the first page of the viewfinder section.

Yup. Haven't seen the movie but I'll probably check it out on PPV or HBO.

[payn817]

Actually srobb, I did notice. My original response to that was something like:

Old drag queen? Anyone I would know? I use to do shows in Central Florida years ago.

Yeah, "coming out" here has had me wondering for awhile too, that is why I removed that response. I guess the fear was of being shunned, and possible damage to my rep regarding some clients, etc. I have never been ashamed, just don't feel I need to push it in everyone's face either.

As for being shunned or possible loss of business (what little i get ), I recently started thinking that if I loose some, there will be others, and I don't want to work for anyone like that anyway. The main client I am even slightly concerned about is a christian school that I do some yearbook stuff for. The bands probably wouldn't care, and I am out to the two interior decorators that buy some stuff, and they don't care, as long as I can produce.

Check this post out, srobb. It has a piece I did for a local pride group. It is titled Pride = Power.Abstract buttons

[srobb]

Actually, payn, I don't remember seeing that response. You may have removed it before I was able to see it.

Just so we don't clog this up and all, check your pm's. It's nice to know I am not by myself here.

[Michael Fanelli]

I have not seen the movie and probably won't. Not because of the topic, I'm just not a big fan of cowboy movies, gay or otherwise. OK, maybe old Clint Eastwood pics with lots of violence...!

I don't think that we will see a lot of heated debate here. Although we all disagree, sometimes quite a bit, the members of these forums are intelligent and highly unlikely to be hateful. In the general population, the crys of horror are from the small but very vocal minority that hardly represents, I hope, the general public.

[walterick]

Actually, Michael it was the Commander in Chief of the United States of America whose cry of horror came in the form of a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States that would have made homosexual marriages illegal. That's quite a yell for a "small, vocal, minority." He represents many of the scared christian conservatives who are terrified of having their ways of life challenged. If the bible tells them it is wrong, they will believe it. Funny, while we're busy trying to outlaw it, other countries are making it legal... hmm.

Payn and srobb, I missed any prior posts so let me congratulate both of you on "coming out of the closet" on pr so to speak, lol. I'm sure you guys will find lots of acceptance here we're a pretty accepting bunch, as I'm sure you both know.

[Michael Fanelli]

Actually, Michael it was the Commander in Chief of the United States of America whose cry of horror came in the form of a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States that would have made homosexual marriages illegal. That's quite a yell for a "small, vocal, minority." He represents many of the scared christian conservatives who are terrified of having their ways of life challenged. If the bible tells them it is wrong, they will believe it. Funny, while we're busy trying to outlaw it, other countries are making it legal... hmm.

Bush is a member of that small minority. Remember his buddy Ashcroft who was turned on by topless stone statues and had them covered? I doubt there are many who would do that. Its a group, hopefuly small, of simple-minded people.

IMHO (oh no, not again!) marriage of any kind should not be a matter of government anyway. Simple existing contract law solves all legal issues. Let all marriages be the domain of private groups who can hand it out using whatever criteria they want.

[adina]

Bush is a member of that small minority. .

Bush is a minority all on his own. C average students who get chosen to run countries.

[walterick]

The fact of the matter is, the only reason one could be anti-homosexual is if their religion or society taught them to be. Anti-homosexuality is not a natural occurance. It is taught. So the very notion of a federal ban on gay marriage comes from the bowels of scripture. There are certainly legal components to marriage, but its roots are in religion. If the government were going to be fair, it would be broadening the institution of marriage to include ALL people. As the rest of the world seems to be doing. I am embarrassed that the United States of America is not leading the charge to universalize gay marriage in the world. When in fact, we are going backward.

Michael, I do disagree with you that Bush is a member of a small minority. With the current partisan split in America, the conservatives have become entrenched in their self-righteous religious ways. There are many, many Americans who believed in him up until hurricane Katrina hit. There are many, many Americans who religiously believe that homosexuality is wrong. Even as their priests are raping little boys. They hold to the twisted stories of their bible to justify their opinions and tell the rest of the world their beliefs are fact. I don't buy it, not for a minute.

[walterick]

Whose fourth job as an adult happens to be President of the United States...

Job #1: Co-owner of the Texas Rangers.
Job #2: CEO of an unsuccessful oil company.
Job #3: Governor of Texas.
Job #4: President?

"Who get chosen to run countries" is the important phrase here. We all would do well to remember that We The People voted for Al Gore in 2000, and George Bush was chosen to run America. Go figure.

[mjs1973]

Here's something I found interesting. If you read my first post in this tread, I mentioned seeing the movie trailer and not knowing what the movie was about, because I was doing something else at the same time, and not really paying attention to it. Last night, that same trailer came on the tube, and I put my magazine down, and focused my attention on the trailer. When it was over, I realized that I hadn't missed the plot or story line the first time I saw it. There is NOTHING in the trailer that even hints at the main subject of the movie. Why not? The images were beautuful but all the voice over was talking about was that it was "movie of the year", "nominated for awards", "great performance by..." that kind of thing, with all these stunning images playing in the background. The add did it's job and peaked my interest in seeing the film, but after reading about it, and having a gerneral idea of the story line, it made me wonder why there wasn't a hint about it in the ad.

[Michael Fanelli]

Here's something I found interesting. ...The add did it's job and peaked my interest in seeing the film, but after reading about it, and having a gerneral idea of the story line, it made me wonder why there wasn't a hint about it in the ad.

Do you expect hints of heterosexual themes for other movies? Ads are designed to grab your interest, obviously that worked. For some bad films, the trailers are the best parts!

[adina]

Imagine the voiceover....


Nominated for 7 Golden Globes...including Best Actor...Best Picture of the Year....Best Gay Cowboy Movie of the Year...Best Director...

I think if you read any reviews or blurbs, it mentions that it is a love story between two cowboys, or something of that nature.

[walterick]

Heheh very funny Adina

MJS, I noticed the same thing recently. They are running new adds without the hint of homosexuality in it. When we saw the trailer for the first time in a theater, it was a little more obvious what the theme was. We saw it the week after it was released and the theater was still pretty crowded. Maybe they're trying for one last push at the box office with a more mass-appealing advertisement?

[Mig]

MJS - Here's the original trailer Rick is talking about. As Rick said, it was probably a push to appeal to a broader audience, but also sometimes the "this movie rocks and we've got all this proof" ads are more generic anyway.

Adina - you're too damn funny.

Danielle

[Photo-John]

If the bible tells them it is wrong, they will believe it.

That's not quite accurate. The Bible doesn't really tell us that much. And it's been changed who knows how many times over thousands of years. It's the way certain people interpret the Bible that causes the world so much trouble. There is so much non-Christian behaviour done using the Bible for justification. As much as the current conservative leadership in this country would have us believe that they're following "Christian" teachings, they're really more Old Testament followers.

[walterick]

John,

You're right. It is in large part the people who interpret the bible that create such a mess. The bible does have its fallacies though. Man was born first, then woman came from man. Woman is responsible for the downfall of humankind. We are born in "sin." All that metaphorical (and misinterpreted) rhetoric which people take as, well, gospel. But whether people are following the bible or the men (sic) that interpret it, the phenomenon here remains the same; people are simply following "orders" and not thinking for themselves. That's what gets me the worst. Don't be afriad to think people!

We're seeing it again in the blind faith that people place in the president! Only now are people begining to see the man for what he really is. After the patriotism and fear wear off.

[mjs1973]

A megaplex in Utah pulled the film form it's theaters. Here's a link to the news article.

[payn817]

That is really too bad. However, he does own the theater, and as far as I am concerned, it is his right. Does it hurt me, or anyone else? Well, I guess it depends on the person. Me, no. The teenager who is going through tough times because he is scared, yes.

That is the funny thing about these type of actions. People commit such acts in order to show their opinion, or to "keep america moral". In reality, they are making it worse for the future of America, especially confused and scared teens. I myself was very scared as a teen, scared of loosing friends, and being shunned by my family. If you read back in this post, you will find I still fear being shunned in certain areas of my life. Making all this worse are events like the Matthew Shepard story, and the like. Many studies have shown high suicide rates among teens confused about their sexuality. Why? Because they are so scared of the hate they believe it isn't worth the suffering.


However, all that being said. It is a "free" country, and he does own the venue. It is his right not to show the film, no matter what anyone thinks, and I respect his rights, and his decision to exercise them.