'Brokeback Mountain' - A Review (Unmarked Spoilers)

[innerSpaceman]

Well, I could be forced to surrender my gay card for having waited till the second weekend of release, but I finally saw "Brokeback Mountain." I liked it far better than I expected to.

It turns out that a short story is the perfect literary form to adapt to a movie ... because with the addition of perhaps three scenes, and deletion of as many from the source ... it turns out that laying out a story that spanned 30 pages in writing takes just about two hours to unfold on screen. As such, it was just about the most perfect literary adaptation that I’ve seen.

This is a tale where the sense of connection between Ennis and Jack comes from the lovers being apart, not from their original time together on Brokeback Mountain. It’s a dramatic structure that many have complained about, but it’s one that accentuates the sadness and poignancy of the story.

A lot of people also fail to recognize that it’s a period piece - - running from 1963 to 1983 and taking place in Wyoming and Texas. Attitudes about coming out, and confusions about bisexuality all have to be taken in context of the time and place. A time and place which I believe were very consciously chosen to coincide with the last bastions of intense homophobia in this country, thus pointing a subtle finger at the centuries of deadly persecution faced by homosexuals which only came to an end, for the most part, in the 60's and 70's when the story takes place. I think this adds something to the film’s thesis that gay love is just love ... nothing more, nothing less ... not to be excoriated or denied or hated.

In a perverse way, I found it refreshing that the tragic death of a gay character was not because of AIDS, but resulted from the far more time-honored method of lynching and bludgeoning.


I credit the fine script and the able directing for making me feel that the slowness and deliberateness of the storytelling was meant to inspire thoughtfulness, and to fill the silences with meaning and purpose arrived at by the viewer’s contemplation. That the film was also blessed with fine performances and beautiful cinematography argue for a finely crafted film. That I found it touching and dramatically moving makes it, in my opinion, simply a fine film all around.



(Oh, and though Heath Ledger’s performance was amazing, it’s still all about Jake, Jake, Jake for this particular g.b. What a hottie!)

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

In a perverse way, I found it refreshing that the tragic death of a gay character was not because of AIDS, but resulted from the far more time-honored method of lynching and bludgeoning.

Time-honored methos of lynching and bludgeoning?! Oy gevalt. But, I must say, I do agree with you...it is refreshing... I can't believe I'm saying that... I mean, how many gay films end with someone dying or getting AIDS. Bleh.

But I must add that how Jack died is up in the air. At least to me. In the book and in the movie, Jack's death by bashing was in Ennis' head. Ennis is very gloom and doom about being together. He felt their relationship would end in tragedy like the man in the ditch. The delivery of how Jack died by his wife does not give us any indication if she's lying or not. She was lukewarm about him towards the end of their relationship anyway. It seems like she was over the idea of she and he being perfect for each other... That's my take on it...

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

I credit the fine script and the able directing for making me feel that the slowness and deliberateness of the storytelling was meant to inspire thoughtfulness, and to fill the silences with meaning and purpose arrived at by the viewer’s contemplation.

There was a terrific zen feeling to this film. Lots of thoughtful spots for your own feelings to be inserted. Nicely done, imho.

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

(Oh, and though Heath Ledger’s performance was amazing, it’s still all about Jake, Jake, Jake for this particular g.b. What a hottie!)

On that note, here's a shot from the film I don't remember:

It may be a behind the scenes shot. But it is from the 'Brokeback' set... Now, that's hot.

Honey, I don't know about you, but Jake's nice to look at, but hmmm, that macho cowboy thang Heath had going on made me melt. I'd be center to Heath's quarterback any day ...

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

But I must add that how Jack died is up in the air. At least to me. In the book and in the movie, Jack's death by bashing was in Ennis' head.

I know this is me beating a dead horse (horse, cowboys, get it?), but I just read this in my issue of The Advocate that showed up today. It's an interview with the writers of the screenplay.

Ennis is convinced that Jack was murdered with a tire iron. I don’t necessarily believe it.
McMurtry: It’s what Ennis is feeling at the moment. But Lureen’s explanation is just as good. A lot of tires blow up and kill people.

Do people hope Jack wasn’t murdered? What do they believe?
Ossana: We’ve been asked that [in every interview]. You can’t believe the things we’ve heard—for example, did Lureen’s father have him killed? A reporter walked up to me and said, “What really happened? I need to know.” I said, “What do you think?” He told me, and I said, “Well, if that works for you, then good.”

Oh, that’s the most hateful writer answer.
Ossana: But even Annie will tell you it’s ambiguous to her. When you see that [flash] on the screen, we tell people that [we don’t know] what actually happened to Jack. But it’s what Ennis thinks, and he’s been set up to think that by his entire past. This was his biggest fear, that something would happen. And the tragedy is multilayered. If Jack was killed that way, the guilt that Ennis must feel—maybe if he’d taken him up on it, this wouldn’t have happened. But also the fact that he’s not sure. What is more tragic than not knowing how your loved one has died?

Source

I know, I'm simply obsessed with this film...

[innerSpaceman]

Yeah, I was reading a piece about the screenplay in today's Variety, and the writers (Larry McMurry and Diana Ossana) are quoted as saying that they worked really hard to maintain the feel of the original story all the way to the finished film (success, according to me), and that the way Jack died was left for the viewer to discern.

I must say that I felt the movie was far more decisive about that element than the story was. It showed Jack being bludgeoned (time-honoredly) and did not show an alternate version of him getting hit with a tire rim by accident. In film, seeing is believing. Further, if the bludgeoning shots followed a shot of the wife vs. following a shot of Ennis, there's not even film language presented for it all being in Ennis' head.

I'll have to see it again, but of course I will give them the benefit of the doubt that the Jack death visuals followed a shot of Ennis, not one of Lureen. But regardless, I found Lureen's delivery of the death story so cold and creepy that she could easily be lying, and the visual of Jack's death just seems to confirm - to me - what really happened. I concede that, technically, it's open to interpretation.


I'm still busy interpreting much of the rest of the movie. Like G.C., I'm still thinking about it 24 hours later. That's a good sign of a good film.

[Alex]

Unfortunately the trend isn't looking good for a huge success when it goes wide.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/...ckmountain.htm

In it's wider limited relesae, the per screen average is down almost 75% after a week into the very modest $12,000 range (over the weekend) so apparently it wasn't the event in the new cities that it was in the first weekend cities (LA, SF, NYC, Chicago, I think).

I'm still torn. I really want to see it because of Ang Lee (I pretent that Hulk didn't happen) but I really don't want to see it because of Jake Gyllenhaal and I can't stand him (perhaps if they had replaced him with his sister, but then the story wouldn't quite be the same) and his dopey hangdog expressions.

[Gemini Cricket]

Interesting info...

Who's afraid of a couple of gay cowboys? Not moviegoers, who helped "Brokeback Mountain" post the highest per-screen average over the film-flush holiday weekend.

The Ang Lee film, which follows the 20-year forbidden romance between two roughneck ranch hands, earned $13,599 per theater, compared with $9,305 for weekend winner "King Kong" and $8,225 for "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe."

The big question is whether "Brokeback" can maintain its momentum as it moves from selected cities, where audiences are receptive to the subject matter, to suburbs far and wide, where that might not be the case.

Source

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

Source

I like this bit:

Ted Baehr, who reviews films for the Christian Film & Television Commission, called the film "abhorrent" and "twisted, laughable, frustrating and boring neo-Marxist homosexual propaganda" in a review on the Commission's MovieGuide Web site.

Oh, Ted. You say the kindest things.

[SacTown Chronic]

But was it manly, Ted?

[innerSpaceman]

I wanna see it again, but - get this - my gay boyfriend doesn't want to see it with me. Can't he be drummed out of the family for that?

Whatcha wanna bet he doesn't want to see either New World or Munich (aka Munch) or Match Point this weekend either? Grrrr, we have different movie tastes. But we're both so gay, how can one of us not want to see Brokeback? I don't get it.

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

But we're both so gay, how can one of us not want to see Brokeback? I don't get it.

I think maybe Mr. pppop wants to see something more upbeat? Less sad? That would be my take on it.
I need to see it again. However, we both want to see 'Narnia', 'Syriana', 'Munch' and 'The Producers' too.