Brokeback Mountain
 

CNN Review

Quad and I went Monday - actually, we got to go a SAG screening of it with Heath Ledger, Anne Hathaway, Michelle Williams, and Ang Lee for a Q&A afterwards. I was amazed. Just amazed. This is going to be a real career-changing move for Ledger, and only to the good. It doesn't hurt that he's adorable, but mainly it's the acting. Wow.

The part that was the most impressive to me is the handling of the physical intimacy - it felt REAL. There wasn't anything showy about it, like you might see in the average hetero sex scene. And they didn't flinch, either - they displayed real, raw emotion, and they went for it. It was wonderful to see this, I really enjoyed it so much.

Seen it yet? Thoughts/opinions? If you happen to be gay/non-hetero, how do you feel about the sex scenes and the relationship as it was depicted? Was it real enough? Actually, it would be interesting to hear those opinions from everyone.

If you haven't put it on your list of movies to see.... do that.

i'm really looking forward to this. i have to admit that the previews have made it look pretty terrible, but i find the concept of gay cowboys endlessly exciting.

I was going to take one of my friends to see it tonight, as her Christmas present, but it's not playing anywhere around us. :(

It's not playing here yet either....it better not be because of the conservative nature of the area or I"ll be fairly upset :(

Is this supposed to be sarcasm? Don't get me wrong, I like Jake Gyllenhaal and I like Ang Lee (I think I may be the only person who liked the Hulk), but I just have no desire to see man love on screen. If this movie fails, its not because people think homosexuality is wrong and America is too conservative. It will be because they don't want to see a story about two men falling in love and simulating physical intamacy.

For all those who see it, I hope you enjoy it thoroughly. I might get it when it comes out on DVD, this way I can just fast forward through any parts I don't feel like watching. :D

I must be living in a cave. I was wondering what the cartoon "Boondocks" was talking about this week. I think I'll wait to hear more reviews before I go see it.

I can't wait to see it. Besides the fact that 2 hot men are being intimate...I think it just looks really good.

It's a LOVE story - why wouldn't people want to see that? Conservative people don't like love stories? There's nothing tasteless in it, it's really well done, and very emotional.

And yes, veruca, it is also hot. :D

I haven't seen it, and I probably never will. Like Xiangsu said, I have no desire to see man love on screen. Also, I just don't believe in the premise or the statement the film is trying to make. But, it IS a movie - a lot of people don't believe in the premise behind "The Matrix" or "Star Wars" or "Back to the Future". However, I am interested to hear the opinions of those who do see it.

Love stories tend to be a little dull... and boring...

though this movie got a ton of golden globe nominations today

http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Movi...bes/index.html

It really was good? it sounds like a movie that would be seen on lifetime...

Yes, actually, I really thought it was great. The acting was top-notch, it wasn't preachy, it was just a good story. Highly recommended!
:thumbsup:

I probably won't see this movie but I bet these two guys would give it a big thumbs up. :)
http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/images/KevinGilvear/ILC2.jpg

So we got gay cowboys... Any eating pudding?
/south park reference.

Yeah, but I'm pretty excited for this movie. I'm upset to see gays portrayed as overly flamboyant in the media, maybe this'll kinda of... even it out.

Can't wait to see this movie, although I don't know who I'll go to watch it with. My friend who did want to see the movie found out that there was an intimate scene between the two cowboys and is unsure whether she wants to see it now. This would be because she is uber conservative and christian and just sees homosexuality as wrong, as does a lot of people. I, however, don't share the same beliefs, and am very excited at the thought of a well publicized movie that involves two guys. I think that the idea of two men being intimate is much more taboo than two women because some guys find the idea of two women together hot.

Anyways, I'm glad to hear some good reviews of it.

I believe they gave "snaps up"... sometimes even in "Z formation."

I miss that show.

-Mikey

Now, I'm not sure that I'll actually go see it, being that I HATE Ang Lee and love story's don't usually do it for me. On the other hand, I don't see why this is so strange because all love story's need some sort of tension. I don't see why it's such a problem that they're gay when not many people complained about Fight Club which also had an unfulfilled gay love. I might add that I do find the media hype really funny when the front page of the New York post had something to the effect of "Interview with the stars of Gay Cowboy Movie!!!" As if there's another type...

I'm not really into sex that involves guys, period, but I love a good romance well told. We'll definitely be seeing it.

Gilda

I won't see it till it comes out on DVD but I don't go to theaters anymore. When it comes out, we'll probably watch it. I don't get why two guys kissing and simulating sex is such a big deal to people. It's not like its gay porn or anything. If that is all that is stopping you from seeing it you should grow up.

My wife and I saw this yesterday. It's very well done and we both enjoyed it, though I don't think it's quite the revelatory movie it's been made out to be.

A couple of quibbles:

I never quite got their initial attraction to each other, and think they consumated their relationship too soon. Spoiler: Their first night sharing the tent?
I understood Jack's motives, but not Ennis'. This undermined the authenticity of their early passion for me. I found the film much more satisfying, when it explored their later lives, both together and apart.
That said

Not interested in seeing two men kiss, sorry. That'll be it for me. I'll go see Kong and Narnia. . .

Just saw this.

Way overated. It felt real, very real, which made it dull, very dull. The acting was good but not great mainly because of plot and character restrictions.

Oh, and there is nothing steamy or sexy between the two cowboys. It man sex baby. Ape love.

If you wan't to see drama, intresting plots and hot gay sex watch L World.
Jenny and Marina - yummy!

Oh, and what's with this new trend in false endings. Damn you Jackson!\

Rent it if you really wish to see it. Not worth the price of admission.

We saw this movie in theaters a while back... I really liked it. I am still amazed at how well Heath Ledger acted it... frankly, I was a bit surprised at how good he was. You could really feel the longing and the hurt. Jake did well also, but his character didn't require quite as much depth, as he was more comfortable with expressing emotions than Heath's character was. As far as people saying they don't want to see two guys going at it, well, the sex scene is all of about 20 seconds, so big freaking deal.

I don't really get what all the fuss is about, besides the sheer novelty of it being a homosexual relationship that's depicted. I don't expect I'll be watching it, to be honest. I don't really find love stories all that interesting in and of themselves, and I'm not so freaked out by the concept of man-on-man that I'm really that bothered either way.

I guess I was just surprised - with all the hullabaloo, I wasn't expecting a well-done love story. Most of them suck nowadays. That's the cool thing about it - a well done love story AND it's pissing off limited thinkers! Pretty good for just a love story. :p

Speaking of limited thinkers: http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Movi....ap/index.html

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah (AP) -- A movie theater owned by Utah Jazz owner Larry Miller abruptly changed its screening plans and decided not to show the film "Brokeback Mountain."

The film, an R-rated Western gay romance story, was supposed to open Friday at the Megaplex at Jordan Commons in Sandy, a suburb of Salt Lake City. Instead it was pulled from the schedule.

A message posted at the ticket window read: "There has been a change in booking and we will not be showing 'Brokeback Mountain.' We apologize for any inconvenience."

Cal Gunderson, manager of the Jordan Commons Megaplex, declined to comment.

The film, starring Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal, is about two cowboys who discover feelings for one another. The two eventually marry women but rekindle their relationship over the years.

The movie's distributor, Focus Features, said that hours before opening, the theater management "reneged on their licensing agreement," and refused to open the film.

Gayle Ruzicka, president of the conservative Utah Eagle Forum, said not showing the film set an example for the people of Utah.

"I just think (pulling the show) tells the young people especially that maybe there is something wrong with this show," she said.

Mike Thompson, executive director of the gay rights advocacy group Equality Utah, called it disappointing.

"It's just a shame that such a beautiful and award-winning film with so much buzz about it is not being made available to a broad Utah audience because of personal bias," he said.

****************************************************************
I haven't seen it yet, and when I do go, my choice of theater will be limited. There are two, yes TWO movie theaters showing this film in Salt Lake City. There are dozens of theaters in the area, and only two have the spine to show it. There are no theaters showing it in Provo, which is the home of Brigham Young University and the most Mormons per capita than anywhere in the world. Provo is the second or third most populous city in the state. I'm disgusted and embarassed to be a Utahn.

Sorry if this is the wrong place to post...but I just had to vent :)

I'll rent the DVD of it for a buck in a few months....no desire to sit in an audience and feel uncomfortable. I think it's been waaay over hyped and that always disappoints me.

My girlfriend said that she read in the paper that the White House held a special screening of the movie. According to the paper "George Bush was especially excited to view the film because he thought it would feature cowboys clearing bush and living the ranch life that he enjoyed in his younger years." Apparently they abruptly stopped the film partway through one of the love scenes. According to a White House spokesman "We feel more comfortable with our choice of (some other movie) for next week's screening."

Nice to know we have such a mature and open-minded individual pulling the world's strings. This is what I don't get, and I'm surprised to see a few TFPers expressing basically the same thing.

Why can't you abstract the love act up and outside of gender boundaries? Why would it make you uncomfortable to see two people - people, mind - making love on screen? How is it different to a male/female or female/female act? It's not there to titillate you, it's there to advance the story.

I find it especially amusing, because I'd lay even money on those who say they're 'uncomfortable' with 'man-on-man' thinking lesbians are 'hot'.

JustJess: Glad you enjoyed it. I was just saying this isn't really my genre, love stories have never really bothered me, unless they're a sub-plot in a movie with wider concerns. Just my cup of tea. :)

Way too much focus on the gay sex in discussion about this film (to be sadly expected I suppose) What is it that people are finding 'uncomfortable' about the depiction of Gay love making - it won't be pornographic, I can only assume it will force you to confront ideas that just sit comfortably in the back of your head unchallenged for the most part.

I just got back from seeing it and I absolutely loved the movie. I'll be honest, it took me a second to get comfortable with the love making scenes, but after that I was fine and could appreciate the movie for what it was. Loving someone and not being able to fully express it. It honestly moved me to tears.

I just got back from it, and I loved it. The acting was excellent, the scenery was breathtaking, and the story was great. Hubby even liked it...a lot. I was very surprised by Heath Ledger; hubby and I both dislike him as an actor and we were both very impressed. The only quibble that we had with it is Spoiler: the storyline with Ennis' daughter. It seemed kind of thrown in and never really led anywere...

On a side note....the show was nearly sold out, which surprised me. It gives me a little new hope that the state I live in doesn't completely suck, after all.

Watching this movie made me think back to an underrated movie with a similar theme, that I also enjoyed and would like to recommend:

Love and Death on Long Island (1997), starring John Hurt

Imdb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119574/

this movie is only getting attention because its about homosexuals...

I feel like you're saying that without having seen the movie, as the movie has a lot of virtues that are not related to its fairly controversial bottom line.

The cinematography, script, directing and acting are all very good and, I expect, you'd see plenty of discussion about it if it were about a straight relationship based on those grounds than just because it happens to be based on a gay relationship.

If you didn't like the movie, that's your choice, but I think it's patently wrong to write off the attention this movie has gotten as only due to its controversy. There have been a lot of movies that did things with homosexual relationships or graphic depictions of straight relationships that only got buzz because of those elements. This movie, both from what I've read and from what I watched, is not one of those.

Sorry, I have not seen the movie. I have absolutely no desire to watch a movie based on the relationships of gay cowboys. That is not what I would call "entertaining". This is not the type of movie I would ever see in the first place, not at all. I enjoy movies that are funny and entertaining, not ones that are artistic and political. Whatever virtues it talks about, I really don't care, it's a chick flick. I don't learn my virtues or values by what I see on a theater screen, the virtue of any movie is moot as long as it has some entertaining value. Watching man on man sex is not entertaining.

Then go and enjoy "The Cable Guy", as that seems to be about your level... your only level. No thinking required. I particularly enjoy the fact that you have such a strong opinion, and no basis for it.

For the record, this wasn't a chick flick.

If I wanted an enthralling, well thought out plot that requires "thinking", i'd go read a book. If I wanted entertainment for a few hours i'd go watch a movie.

I'm sorry if I dont agree with your opinions of this movie, even if I haven't seen it. I have no desire to watch a lovestory with gay cowboys.

Rudel, we're reacting to your comment that, "[T]his movie is only getting attention because its about homosexuals..."

You can watch and enjoy whatever movies you want. I couldn't care less what you do to entertain yourself. It's very much one thing to say that you don't want to see this movie because it's in a genre and of a type that is of no interest to you or to say that you saw it, thought it was a trite chick flick and wouldn't recommend it. It's quite another to come into a thread and drop an uninformed, provactive blanket statement just to cause trouble.

What is so unique about this movie that has never been done besides the gay cowboy thing? Any movie can have cool scenes and what not, but what is unique besides the homosexuality that makes this movie stand out above all the other movies its winning awards over?

Brokeback Mountain isn't political. It deals with non-mainstream sexuality, which is sometimes made into a political issue, but that doesn't mean that anything having to do with homosexuality is necessarily political.

I'm a lesbian, I really have no interest in man-on-man sex. It's fortunate, then, that that's not what this movie is about. The sex isn't gratuitous or even very graphic, and constitutes maybe two minutes of a two hour film.

It's about being who you are in the face of adversity, about finding something in yourself that you didn't know was there.

I gotta disagree. I am an afficianado of chick flicks. I have Where the Heart Is on dvd and I've seen it a half dozen times. This isn't a chick flick. Nowhere near the formula.

I think you mean morals here, and I don't really disagree with you. I think movies can help you to empathize with people you'd never otherwise have the opportunity with which to interact, and thus can help you to vicariously develop the ability to empathize with others, but it probably does require a receptive mind to have that effect.

You know, I really couldn't agree more with the sentiment, though your wording could use some work. Sure, it's obvious that you're expressing an opinion based on the cocept of what is or isn't entertaining being entirely subjective, but it can be a bit off-putting to present your opinion as a statement of fact. Try softening it with an "I" statement and you're less likely to provoke offense.

Any sex involving a man in any way is something I don't want to be a part of. A loving relationship based on trust, however, is. Brokeback Mountain--and I'm absolutley serious here--has more in common with Romeo and Juliet than it does with gay porn.

And you know what? That's cool. That it isn't to your taste is a good reason for not seeing a movie. I like Chow Yun Fat gun fu movies with the good guys and bad guys firing thousands of rounds at each other and racking up a body count in the hundreds. My wife thinks they're stupid beyond belief. She doesn't, however, go out her way to criticize movies she hasn't seen, she just doesn't see them.

However, I would point out that one can be entertained and challenged at the same time. It's possible to like both The Iron Ladies (the true story of a transvestite volleyball team that won the 1996 Thai national championships; an unambitious formula sports movie) and something more thoughtful like Brokeback Mountain.

You don't want to see it? That's cool. But criticizing it without having seen it is arguing from a position of ignorance.

Gilda