Brokeback Mountain - the Jasun Review... **Major Spoiler Alert**

[Jasun]

Furthermore, it's important to note that not all of Lee's films follow this same trajectory. If you look at either The Wedding Banquet (his first "gay film"), it ends quite happily, and the characters do break out of their social constraints in the end.

Wow.. I came out of that with a total different spin on it...

that's a movie about a spineless guy who can't tell his parents to stop meddling in his life, and can't just live life for himself. he marries a girl, throws a whole sham of a party, gets drunk, has sex with a girl (which happens ALL the time ), and ruins his own life and betrays his own boyfriend becuase he can't tell his parents to bugger off.

oh, and he stays in the closet... and in the end, it turns out that it's all for naught, becuase Dad knew the whole time but was still too spinless on his own accord to tell his son "It's ok, i know you're gay".

his dad goes back to Asia without tellign his son this and the two continue to think the other one doesn't know what's up.

the end.


not exactly breaking out of social restraints.

Look. i know that a lot of people liked this movie. i didn't.. i didnt like the characters and I didn't really enjoy watching people who can't get over something not get over it.

I know that it's gay history, and I guess it's good to know where we came from, but I still thought this movie was a bore.

[Jasun]

You know what I mean. If we want to continue seeing movies that reflect our lives, then yes, we are obligated to go out and support them.

this movie does not reflect my life at all, though.

And honestly, it's kinda sad that if i'm to be a good gay man, i have to go racing out to spend my money on movies that bore me and don't really entertain me so I can see more movies that bore me...

kinda vicious circle.

I understand that there aren't many movies with gay characters and there are very few gay love stories out there, but fail to see how that means that when there's one that I know I'm not gonna like, I still have to see it to support.. um.. more of them.

I'd rather see Harry Potter again (which by the way, does NOT have a happy ending).

[XXXWriterDude]

how 'bout READ THE STORY?
From what i gather, the movie has been 'filled out' with narrative to build up the 'non gay' portion of the cowboys' lives. Unfortunately, the only thing this does is take the focus away from the core relationship that these two men have.

Actually, while it is true that the female roles have been fleshed out, the film never loses it focus on the two men and their relationship with each other. That remains to be the central focus of the movie.

It's worth seeing on the big screen, if for no other reason than to help turn the movie into a sleeper hit.

[XXXWriterDude]

Look. i know that a lot of people liked this movie. i didn't.. i didnt like the characters and I didn't really enjoy watching people who can't get over something not get over it.

NOW we're getting somewhere. I can see your point, but man, I'd hate to see how you'd treat a friend of yours who wasn't out to his family or to his friends. It seems you have absolutely no patience for anyone who doesn't live their life by your seemingly strict standards of courage and/or conviction. People make the choices they do, and I guess I have more compassion for these characters than you did.

I guess I look at it a different way. I just love movies that capture humanity, and this film captures humanity in a beautiful, graceful way. It's lyrical and evocative and gorgeous and surprisingly restrained considering the subject matter.

I can totally see how some might find the film a bore. You either like love stories or you don't. That's cool. If you dislike the movie for the same reasons you may dislike other movies that are similar, then that's fine. But I think it's unfair to hold the film up to different standards because the characters are gay. Where is it written that films featuring gay characters must have happy endings? Are we stuck in such a self-indudced pattern of victimization that we see everything featuring gay characters as an affront to our community if those characters don't end up fulfilling our expectations? To not like the movie because the gay characters don't walk happily hand-in-hand into the sunset is to pander to the gay community's insistence on portraying itself as victims. This is the biggest problem with most films made by and for the gay community.

Are the characters in this movie victims? Sure. But they are victims of their time. It makes sense that they made the choices they did. That's what makes it different from the myriad of other films in which gay characters were portrayed tragically. But the film is not encouraging anybody to stay in the closet and be a victim. Similar to Ibsen's play Ghosts (which was written in response to critics who lambasted him for letting Nora walk out on her husband in A Doll's House), the film is an indictment of the victimization that some have claimed it romanticizes.

Boring for some, maybe, but it's an incredibly important and bold film for our community. That's my point, and I'm sticking to it.

I just guess that means we won't be going to see any "chick flicks" together.

[XXXWriterDude]

this movie does not reflect my life at all, though.

And honestly, it's kinda sad that if i'm to be a good gay man, i have to go racing out to spend my money on movies that bore me and don't really entertain me so I can see more movies that bore me...

kinda vicious circle.

Well, only if you are one of those people who expects movies to bore you.

Once they start making more films with gay characters in them, the films themselves will be become more varied and diverse in tone and theme. That's the cycle that I think we should focus on. The more gay movies they make, the more chances that you'll like some of them.

[Jasun]

If you dislike the movie for the same reasons you may dislike other movies that are similar, then that's fine. But I think it's unfair to hold the film up to different standards because the characters are gay. Are we stuck in such a self-indudced pattern of victimization that we see everything featuring gay characters as an affront to our community if those characters don't end up fulfilling our expectations? To not like the movie because the gay characters don't walk happily hand-in-hand into the sunset is to pander to the gay community's insistence on portraying itself as victims. This is the biggest problem with most films made by and for the gay community.

But don't you get that it's not the happy ending that wasn't there?.. it's that there was no ending to speak of... just a begining and a middle.

I really hate movies where the characters don't ever learn anything and grow.. the just wimper until the credits roll.

And that's what I find all Ang Lee movies do.

the guys in this story had a big challenge to over come, and they didn't... they just went crashing..

[basschick]

i also don't care for ang lee - for the same reasons - and i hate chick flicks. i also don't feel just because there are important gay characters in a movie that the gay community is somehow required to like it. and the same applies to any group in a movie.

no one watching a commercial movie owes it to anybody to like it.

and might i point out that jasun's friend and temporary roommate is not out to his family. no problems on that horizon that i've heard of.

years ago, there was a tv series that everyone said was very female-empowering. this was probably enough to make me not watch it, but my mother loved it. i saw a rerun of the first one, and what i saw was the female character - a doctor - is taking most of her decisions from some half-breed (or maybe full) indian dude who had rebel and future-romantic-lead written all over him. it was the same disempowering crap but better disguised. you can imagine how popular i was for pointing that out to people.

jasun is entitled to his opinion even if it disagrees with our opinions AND our politics. ken, you've written things on this board not everyone agreed with, but no one chided you for it and made it seem like you didn't have a right to your opinions.

we all owe it to ourselves to BE ourselves or how can we be part of an honest community?

[XXXWriterDude]

jasun is entitled to his opinion even if it disagrees with our opinions AND our politics. ken, you've written things on this board not everyone agreed with, but no one chided you for it and made it seem like you didn't have a right to your opinions.

we all owe it to ourselves to BE ourselves or how can we be part of an honest community?

I'm perfectly fine with Jasun not liking the movie. My point is that if you're going to dislike it, dislike it for the right reasons. If you don't like it b/cuz it's a chick flick/love story and you don't think the characters learn anything, fine. I can accept that. But again, I think it's unfair to judge the movie more harshly b/cuz it features gay characters. That is predominantly my point.

I just think this is a very important film. Whether you like it or not is not really my concern. It's that the gay community support films that speak to the gay community's experiences. And yes, sorry, but I do think that if we want to see more of those movies, then we are obligated to go out and support them. Otherwise, they won't keep making them.

Now, if you don't care whether they make movies with gay characters, then don't go see it. I'm fine with that, too. Everyone is more than entitled to their opinion. But I just don't want to hear people complaining about the lack of films with gay characters or how Hollywood always gets it wrong when they don't do their part in supporting those films.

It's like voting. You can't complain about the government unless you participate.

[basschick]

there is no "wrong reasons" to dislike anything. we all dislike things for our own reasons.

and a lot of people would rather not see more closeted characters who end up gay-bashed. i, for one, would like to see movies with gay characters who are not killed and who live their lives - including their romantic and sex lives - as an affirmation rather than a taboo. secrecy is a lifestyle for many groups of people, but it's not a happy choice.

besides the wacky gay men of le cage, you don't see a lot of out men or women in movies who play the main parts without dying. funny, in real life, i see lots of men who are out and who have a full life without pretending to be straight. that's who i want to see in movies!

[tombarr]

You know what I mean. If we want to continue seeing movies that reflect our lives, then yes, we are obligated to go out and support them. If gay movies bomb, Hollywood will continue to say that they are not marketable. It's up to us to make sure that [IBrokeback[/I] and movies that depict gay life get the attention and respect they deserve. Otherwise, we have no right to complain that Hollywood won't make movies about our lives. That's my point.

Here, Here! Even if you are inclined to think you will walk out, buying the ticket now gives hollywood the rationale to want to allow distribution on more of these movies...good or bad. And, either good or bad, it will help carry the message of tolerance, understanding and hopefully growing acceptance of our community, thus perhaps more equality in the rights we seek.

[Jasun]

But again, I think it's unfair to judge the movie more harshly b/cuz it features gay characters. That is predominantly my point.

at what point did I suggest I was being harsher on it because of gay characters?

I said it was typical Ang Lee tripe... weak minded characters who learn nothing over the course of the film. I judged it as harshly as his other shitty movies, most of which have no gay characters. I think I was even nicer.. I said that this has some good performances.. there are no good performances to be found in "Hulk".

And really... if this is what main stream "gay cinema" is going to be... I think I'd rather see other movies with stronger characters who are straight.

Sorry.

[Jasun]

and a lot of people would rather not see more closeted characters who end up gay-bashed.

Well that's really it, isn't it?

I had hoped that we'd moved past the point where the gay character had to be miserable for the whole movie and then die at the end about 20 years ago.

[basschick]

gay men and women who have sex with multiple partners gotta die or reform or suffer for hollywood to make them the main characters in a movie

oh, sorry - unless we can laugh at their wacky antics or they are not main characters. pretty sad.

Well that's really it, isn't it?

I had hoped that we'd moved past the point where the gay character had to be miserable for the whole movie and then die at the end about 20 years ago.

[gaystoryman]

Interesting, and perhaps I shouldn't say much as I haven't seen the movies. I simply find that what comes from hollywood, good, bad, or indifferent is about how much money they can score, not what social redeeming value they might have or not.

That being said, I don't think that one should simply support something because it has gay characters, or native characters or whatever flavour. You support something because it sends a real message, and if images of men loving each other like any straight couple do is the image, then yes support it but if it is to enforce a narrow view of a group, then no I can't support that simply because its got gays in it.

As much as some might argue, what comes across on the big screen and the boob tube does influence people. To what extent is based on how the viewer's own stability is. Violence does beget violence, stereotyping people into being weak, snivelling, doesn't get that group sympathy or support when it comes to standing up for them.

I remember when I did a lot of international travelling, and often at the end of a trip, people would say they had no idea Canadians were so different than Americans, simply because their only clue was thru the media and all they saw was Americans. They knew Canada was a neighbour so assumed we would be no different. If people see things that are always re-inforcing the same stereo type, then that is what they believe until proof hits them in the face.

Goebbells made an interesting comment, tell the lie long enough, loud enough, and only the lie, and people will believe it.

Simply because the characters are gay is not, in my view, any reason to support anything. There is too many who go with the catch phrase of the day, and believe that any message is better than none. I'd rather someone not know what gays are like than believe they are all pansies, all weak, all deceitful, all snivelling whining shells.

But just my opinion.:coffee:

[basschick]

actually it's not just your opinion. can't i share?

But just my opinion.:coffee: