Why did 'Brokeback' lose?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ade

Maybe Crash is actually a better movie than BB Mountain? Well I prefered it anyway. Yes BBM was daring and thought provoking but i found the story to be a bit flat. :coffee:

---

I loved Crash, but all the coincidences in the movie were just a little too convenient and the emotional resonance a bit too maniuplated for me. Crash was a movie that DEMANDED that you understand its message, whereas Brokeback was a movie that relayed its message through a much more subdued presentation. Crash smacked you across the face, hit you over the head and then ran you over on the street with its message. Brokeback simply delivered it through a simple, eloquent presentation of the events. Crash tried too hard, whereas Brokeback simply did its best. Obviously, for me, when it comes down to it, I'll take the movie that wasn't as arrogant in its declaration of its own importance over the one that trumpets how important it is any day of the week.

When it comes down to it, all of our friends and colleagues in the biz were onto Crash from the get go. We don't know anyone who voted for BrokeBack.

Good movies are fine but, great movies win Best Picture and Crash will live on as a great picture.

Too bad that the "everyone I know voted for..." concept didn't work in the last presidential campaign!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXXWriterDude

]Brokeback[/I] was a movie that relayed its message through a much more subdued presentation. Crash smacked you across the face, hit you over the head and then ran you over on the street with its message. Brokeback simply delivered it through a simple, eloquent presentation of the events. Crash tried too hard, whereas Brokeback simply did its best. Obviously, for me, when it comes down to it, I'll take the movie that wasn't as arrogant in its declaration of its own importance over the one that trumpets how important it is any day of the week.

---

Very interesting point, Youre probably right in your observation. Shame for BBmountain that the Oscars are ALL about trumpeting self importance and grandeur.

BB Mountain got its share of awards...not best picture...

I still haven't seen the movie. I only saw a short clip of Heath Ledger mumbling and I swear I wanted to go into my tv and choke him. I'll never last 5 minutes. OMG !

At this point, Brokeback Mountain is a different movie from what was showing six months ago. If you saw BB Mountain in October, you would have seen a minor film that was incredibly good, which nobody would have heard of.

If you have ever fallen in love with someone, but for whatever reason - school, college, career, life - pulls the two of you apart..... you'll be touched.

Now, news reports are already coming out about Samuel L Jackson in Snakes on a Plane... so maybe other people will be happy to see Hollywood getting back to the kinds of materials we are used to receiving year after year after year....


Steve

The lady who wrote Brokeback Mountain, Annie Proulx, wrote this commentary in The UK Guardian on the Oscars. It's a bit bitter, but also pretty spot on.

http://books.guardian.co.uk/comment/...727309,00.html

"The hours sped by on wings of boiler plate." ..... oh god how I wish I could write like that! -Steve

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A_DeAngelo

When it comes down to it, all of our friends and colleagues in the biz were onto Crash from the get go. We don't know anyone who voted for BrokeBack.

Good movies are fine but, great movies win Best Picture and Crash will live on as a great picture.

Too bad that the "everyone I know voted for..." concept didn't work in the last presidential campaign!

---

Great movies don't always win best picture, in fact. Wasn't it Chariots of Fire that beat Reds and On Golden Pond for the Oscar years back? And Shakepeare in Love beating Saving Private Ryan a few years back? Absurd. A lot of the times it boils down to a really good marketing campaign.

Crash did not snag the best picture award in virutally any other major awards ceremonies leading up to the Oscars. Hell, the Golden Globes didn't even NOMINATE it. Brokeback got virtually all of the top film honors. What's more, the reviews for Crash were decidedly mixed when it was released, with many expressing the same concerns: that the movie thought itself rather self-important and self-congratulatory. The reviews for Brokeback, on the other hand, were nearly glowing across the board. Apart from some of the gay community's apathetic reaction to the film, Brokeback was universally praised and considered to be the best film of the year.

And I would tend to agree. No other film released last year captured the universal truth of the heartbreak, longing and tragedy that comes from love in quite the beautifully realized and authentic way that Ang Lee's superb film did. Whether it was a "bloated chick flick" or not does not concern me. What does is how truthful and honest (and humble) the film's depiction of the human condition is. Crash, on the other hand, presented truth in the form of arrogance and superiority, shaking its sanctimonious finger in our faces as if we could all use a good scolding. When I first saw the movie, I, too, thought it was quite extraordinary, and I agree that it should have been nominated, but as good as the movie is and as closely as it mirrors the rampant racisms that still rules this country, I am hard-pressed to say that I find an ounce of "truth" in the actual filmmaking.

In the end, I really think that a lot of it boils down to an aggressive Oscar campaign and the fact that the majority of the voters live in Los Angeles, so Crash spoke to them on a more urban level than Brokeback did. Lastly, though others may disagree, I think there is definitely something to be said for the fact that the film presented love between two men as being a relatively matter-of-fact occurrence, and older voters were put off by that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by desslock

At this point, Brokeback Mountain is a different movie from what was showing six months ago. If you saw BB Mountain in October, you would have seen a minor film that was incredibly good, which nobody would have heard of.

If you have ever fallen in love with someone, but for whatever reason - school, college, career, life - pulls the two of you apart..... you'll be touched.

Now, news reports are already coming out about Samuel L Jackson in Snakes on a Plane... so maybe other people will be happy to see Hollywood getting back to the kinds of materials we are used to receiving year after year after year....

---

I think you're halfway right about this, but the hype over Brokeback started long before it was even released in theaters. Unfortunately, that hype has hurt the film, as people were already poised to find things about it they were not going to like. I honestly think a lot of people were actively looking for reasons to criticize it before they even saw it, as is evidenced in a lot of the "backlash" I've heard on the film -- especially from the gay community.

I just came across this review of the movie on Amazon.com, and this reviewer is dead-on in what he says about not only the movie, but how in all the hype a simple, lovely movie about societal oppression and the boundaries of love got lost among the screaming and yelling.

Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com
A sad, melancholy ache pervades Brokeback Mountain, Ang Lee's haunting, moving film that, like his other movies, explores societal constraints and the passions that lurk underneath. This time, however, instead of taking on ancient China, 19th-century England, or '70s suburbia, Lee uses the tableau of the American West in the early '60s to show how two lovers are bound by their expected roles, how they rebel against them, and the repercussions for each of doing so--but the romance here is between two men. Ennis Del Mark (Heath Ledger) and Jack Twist (Jake Gyllenhaal) are two itinerant ranchers looking for work in Wyoming when they meet and embark on a summer sheepherding job in the shadow of titular Brokeback Mountain. The taciturn Ennis, uncommunicative in the extreme, finds himself opening up around the gregarious Jack, and the two form a bond that surprisingly catches fire one cold night out in the wilderness. Separating at the end of the summer, each goes on to marry and have children, but a reunion years later proves that, if anything, their passion for each other has grown significantly. And while Jack harbors dreams of a life together, the tight-lipped Ennis is unable to bring himself to even consider something so revolutionary.

Its open, unforced depiction of love between two men made Brokeback an instant cultural touchstone, for both good and bad, as it was tagged derisively as the "gay cowboy movie," but also heralded as a breakthrough for mainstream cinema. Amidst all the hoopla of various agendas, though, was a quiet, heartbreaking love story that was both of its time and universal--it was the quintessential tale of star-crossed lovers, but grounded in an ever-changing America that promised both hope and despair. Adapted by Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana from Annie Proulx's short story, the movie echoes the sparse bleakness of McMurtry's The Last Picture Show with its fading of the once-glorious West; but with Lee at the helm, it also resembles The Ice Storm, as it showed the ripple effects of a singular event over a number of people. As always, Lee's work with actors is unparalleled, as he elicits graceful, nuanced performances from Michelle Williams and Anne Hathaway as the wives affected overtly and subliminally by their husbands' affair, and Gyllenhaal brings surprising dimensions to a character that could have easily just been a puppy dog of a boy. It's Ledger, however, who's the breakthrough in the film, and his portrait of an emotionally repressed man both undone and liberated by his feelings is mesmerizing and devastating. Spare in style but rich with emotion, Brokeback Mountain earns its place as a classic modern love story. --Mark Englehart

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXXWriterDude

I think you're halfway right about this, but the hype over Brokeback started long before it was even released in theaters.

---

Right, it was essentially marketed well to the gay community however, i think rather than the hype hurting the movie itself, it actually hurt the gay community more, once again it portrayed us a community of individuals that, if promised half naked men, flock to something like rabid dogs on heat.

The only reason the hype / marketing spin for Brokeback worked was because the gay community was used in a stereotypical fashion as sex crazed men and women out to further our own need to see 'gay' flashed all over the big screen along with the chance of seeing the two lead actors in the nude.

If Brokeback had starred say 2 middle aged guys, slightly balding and slightly overweight in the lead roles, i highly doubt it would have done as well as it has at the box office because, the gay community wouldnt have been all that interested in seeing 2 average looking guys on the big screen.

Most who went to see the movie in the gay community, did so because they wanted to see two guys, considered to be sexy by many, in the buff or, because the movie was billed as 'gay' not because of the movies artistic merits. Ultimately, THAT is why Brokeback didnt deserve best picture at the Oscars.

As much as we, as a community have moved forward in the past 10 years, i still cant help but feel we're still way behind in more important aspects, such as how eager many of our communtiy members are to be driven by the promise of sex.

I realize this is part of human nature but, when we were quite obviously used as a tool to make the movie company money, im wondering how any more times this is going to have to happen before the 'community' starts to realize we are, generally speaking, being used a puppets in nothing more than a marketing scheme that worked well for the people who instigated it.

Regards,

Lee

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee

I realize this is part of human nature but, when we were quite obviously used as a tool to make the movie company money, im wondering how any more times this is going to have to happen before the 'community' starts to realize we are, generally speaking, being used a puppets in nothing more than a marketing scheme that worked well for the people who instigated it.

---

OK, Lee, but how is this different from ANY movie made by Hollywood? Do you think that anybody would have gone to see, say, How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days or Failure to Launch or any movie that is marketed toward the straight community if they featured balding, older actors? To me, this argument doesn't hold up, because what you're talking about has nothing at all to do with Brokeback being a gay-themed movie, but has a lot more to do with Hollywood practices in general.

When Making Love was made, it featured two actors who were considered to be among the sexiest of their day, Michael Ontkean and Harry Hamlin. But I seriously doubt that any of the studio executives involved in that or in Brokeback said, "OK, since this movie is about the gays, we gotta make sure that we give America the hottest gays on the planet, 'cuz everyone knows we only cast ugly people in straight-themed movies."

??????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee

Right, it was essentially marketed well to the gay community however, i think rather than the hype hurting the movie itself, it actually hurt the gay community more, once again it portrayed us a community of individuals that, if promised half naked men, flock to something like rabid dogs on heat.

The only reason the hype / marketing spin for Brokeback worked was because the gay community was used in a stereotypical fashion as sex crazed men and women out to further our own need to see 'gay' flashed all over the big screen along with the chance of seeing the two lead actors in the nude.

If Brokeback had starred say 2 middle aged guys, slightly balding and slightly overweight in the lead roles, i highly doubt it would have done as well as it has at the box office because, the gay community wouldnt have been all that interested in seeing 2 average looking guys on the big screen.

---

Well, for one thing there wasn't nearly enough nekkid guys there, at least not to my taste ;) Seriously, I went to see this movie only recently, following all the media hype. I don't recall anyone in the media, at least here in Israel, mentioning anything about this being a movie "for gays" or appreciated specifically by gays. If anything they all went on about how this was a universal love story, the generic theme of unrequieted love, and how any sensitive person, no matter what sex or sexual preferences will love this movie.

You also need to take into account the historical and social background in the story. When you're talking about two gay men in cowboy land during the 1960's, it means love that can't be fulfilled and carried out openly, pretty much by defintion. So, yes, in that respect I knew what the theme would be and actually had little expectations of stormy love scenes and lots of skin, I
was looking forward to some emotional probing and it was there. I liked the fact that there was more implied in that respect than discussed. Left more for me as a viewer to think about and see how this connects to my own life and history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tigermom

You also need to take into account the historical and social background in the story. When you're talking about two gay men in cowboy land during the 1960's, it means love that can't be fulfilled and carried out openly, pretty much by defintion. So, yes, in that respect I knew what the theme would be and actually had little expectations of stormy love scenes and lots of skin, I
was looking forward to some emotional probing and it was there. I liked the fact that there was more implied in that respect than discussed. Left more for me as a viewer to think about and see how this connects to my own life and history.

---

Smart lady you are. Will you be my mom, too? :)

I think it's funny that many in the gay community are attacking the film for "not being gay enough." Looking back over the history of the community's problems with mainstream films featuring gay characters, one of the things often said was, "Why does it always have to be about sex?" This has been a cry from the community in general when it came/comes to gay rights. "Being gay is about a LOT more than having sex." Films depicting gay characters as being promiscuous were flogged for perpetuating the notion that we are all wanton sluts.

So along comes Brokeback, a movie that not only dashes the stereotype of the promiscuous gay man, but also one that places the emphasis on the very thing we've been saying is the most important aspect of our lives: love, not sex. What's more, it treats the gay relationship just as honorably as any other love story featuring straight characters. And the gay community shits all over it, saying it A) doesn't show enough sex, B) spends too much time dealing with the characters' LIVES instead of their sex lives, and C) features good looking actors portraying the roles -- as if that is any different than the casting process for any straight-themed movie. (I wonder how Titanic would have done at the box office if it had featured, say, Steve Buscemi and Kathy Bates as the lovers.)

Just goes to show that with the gay community, you just can't win for losing. :)

do you think we'll be seeing more big-budget (or at least medium-budget) gay movies - or cowboy movies - in the near future?