Brokeback Mountain - with spoilers

[London_Calling]

Well, they marched a few thousand sheep up a hill and they marched them back down again (very prettily, of course: Director, Ang Lee), and, in between, discovered something that the bleeding-heart liberal Academy voters will love i.e. each other. It’s not, however, Malboro Man meets Divine; it’s more substantial.

Saw it last night and it’s kind of growing on me. Early thoughts: few – if any – distractions, just the no-nonsense, conventionally structured main theme of two men, their 20-year love affair, and the cost and consequences of it for them and their families in a hostile environment in even less understanding times.

In terms of the storyline, I suppose you could substitute pretty much any combinations of colour and creed through history (West Side Story, Madam Butterfly, Romeo and Juliet, etc, etc), so perhaps the real story here is mainstream Hollywood looking straight in the face of homosexuality in the context of a rural Midwest setting, and dealing with the subject without copping out, and while showing just a tad of copping off.

At the mo, I’m thinking the main success of the film was in the depiction of the duality (the ‘living the lie’) of their lives, and depicting equally – and with some subtlety, I felt - the cost and consequences for everyone of that duality. I suppose the two leads can be seen as representatives of unknown millions, with the way their lives unfolded – aging and alone with memories, or murdered – echoing equally though history.

In particular, I liked the way distinctions were drawn between the two; one, while a married father, more instinctive and (relatively) unbridled in his sexuality, the other repressed and caught between deeply ingrained responsibilities towards family, and the lure of the love that dare not speak its name. Lives of quiet desperation, indeed.

I also liked the raw simplicity of less knowing, less complicated, less affected times; these two men were feeling their way (ooh er) almost without influences; in times when not a limp wrist or lisp could be seen or heard via the media.

The structure was uncluttered and clean, the landscape beautiful, everything around the main theme added context not distraction. It felt like a film made intelligently.


– what say ye, you crazy understanding metropolitan types ?

 

[Leica]

Thanks for this. I've not seen it yet.

 

[Ms T]

I saw it last night and absolutely loved it. I can't stop thinking about it, to be honest.

The cinematography was simply stunning, and Heath Ledger's performance was a complete revelation. If he doesn't win an Oscar there's something seroiusly wrong.

I cried at the end.

Not much time at the moment but more thoughts later.

 

[London_Calling]

You’re right, of course, it’s – in major part - an old-fashioned love story of forbidden love where the lovers didn’t live happily ever after - you’re supposed to cry at the end !! And God knows, Ang Lee worked hard enough for it.

Fwiw, I liked the ending because it wasn’t yer usual American caked-in-sentimentality dross; it pointed up the cost of the relationship through his alone-in-a-trailer lifestyle, and how he’d distanced his daughter(s) through the years, but now (after the death of his friend) felt able to give more to them. For me, that in turn triggered thoughts of all the other costs the lovers and their loved ones also paid over the decades.

But re the end: Thank feck Taiwanese Lee laid off the crescendo of orchestral strings, soft focus, moving to long shot, etc,etc, bullshit.

Also, I suppose if you haven't thought about how difficult life was (for homosexuals) before, well, now even, you'll find an awful lot to think about.

Given the subject, it must have been a very tricky journey to plot and navigate, but, imo, the writers and Lee did manage to avoid the treacherous ground of over-sentimentality, of invoking politics, or preaching – they stuck to the simple, very human story, and that's, imo, what makes it work as well as it does.

Given that it’s mainly funded by Hollywood and its main market is the USA, that seemed to me to be a pretty sizeable achievement.


Hi Leica - happy new year.

 

[Leica]

Hi... Happy new year. I'm off to see it this afternoon.

 

[Reno]

I feel like I'm the only person on the planet who was a bit underwhelmed by Brokeback Mountain. Maybe that has to do with me growing up during a time when gay characters in films were nearly always ashamed of their sexuality (which wasn't great for a gay teenager coming to terms with his ownn sexuality) or maybe I just can't relate to Ang Lee's ongoing fetishisation of repression. I find his films tasteful, sensitive and restrained to the point of them being lifeless and I never felt the passion between the two guys and was left dry eyed by the end. Boys Don't Cry, which won Hilary Swank her first Oscar a few years ago, treats very similar subject matter with considerably more fire, passion and much needed anger.

I also felt the female characters were neglected at the expense of making the men victims of circumstance, when really their behavior is often extremely selfish. Michelle Williams gives a touching performance, but gets to do little more than suffer silently and Anne Hathaway's characters gets a lively introduction and then becomes an increasingly ridiculous looking caricature of herself as the film goes on. Which brings me to the unconvincing ageing the characters go through. The guys get joke shop worthy stick on moustaches or some gluey stuff around their eyes to suggest wrinkles and the girls look like the rummaged through their mums old attic to go to a fancy dress party. It's a problem with a film that takes itself so incredibly serious.

I can see why it's considered a breakthrough film within mainstream Hollywood, but for me it's all a bit too little too late and very tame indeed.

 

[Maltin]

I feel like I'm the only person on the planet who was a bit underwhelmed by Brokeback Mountain.
...
I find his films tasteful, sensitive and restrained to the point of them being lifeless and I never felt the passion between the two guys and was left dry eyed by the end.

I've just seen the film and you're not the only one who was underwhelmed by it or did not feel the passion between the two lead characters.

With so many critics groups in the US naming this their best film of the year, I was hoping for so much more.

 

[Leica]

I don't know if the intention was to grant equal weight to the two main characters, but for me the balance in the film was clearly cast on the side of Ennis. The portrayal of Jack was not deep. It didn't help that Jake Gyllenhaal's acting and mannerisms reminded me at some points of a cross between Ross from Friends and a bad Nick Cage. A good mention goes to the excellent use of cowboy hats as vehicles of gazes and as props, especially by Heathcliff Ledger.

Although the intention must have been to present their relationship as solid, in reality it was not depicted as such. They walked around looking stern as if they were carrying the whole world on their shoulders. Their dialogues were neither as convincing nor as intimate as you would expect them to be in a twenty-year-old relationship. It is also not good that this relationship was not shown to be developing in time. It was rather built on that first summer.

Ennis and Jack are both longing to go back to the weeks they spent together in their first summer on Brokeback. This is underlined by the postcards they exchange that often have pictures of mountains on them. This longing is also underlined by the only flashback in the film, in what turned out to be their last goodbye, when the shot of Ennis leaving on horseback is followed by the shot of Ennis leaving in his truck. Brokeback Mountain is where they keep going back for their meetings and they spend their time riding horses and sleeping in a tent just like the first time. In a way the mountain, a space outside society, is the only place where they can be together. The mountain is also the place where outlaws usually head for in westerns.

The blood stained shirt works well as a symbol because (a) it is a tangible link to their first summer, (b) it is a reminder (an index rather than a sign in this case) of the nosebleed scene, a scene which was powerful in the film but also seemed to be significant for the two characters, and (c) the way the shirt is handled by both represented the balance of power in their relationship. Jack Twist held on to the shirt and kept it hidden inside his own shirt in his old room. When Ennis finds it he leaves it inside Jack's shirt, and in the final scene he buttons Jack's shirt over it, an action that shows both affection and his wish to be protected by Jack which Jack did not carry out. Therefore in a sense the final scene drops the curtain as Ennis in the absence of Jack realises his hope himself.

Ennis is the stronger character and I find it a bit frustrating that Jack never has the courage to realise his desire to be with him beyond the mountain. Ennis keeps waiting until the end for Jack to protect therefore enable him to be with him. I am not sure what is the point of the whole Mexico thing, to me it left a faint hint that perhaps Jack was more drawn to the sexual aspect of their relationship. He also says at some point when they argue that he is missing it so much that he is forced to look elsewhere.

I have already typed a lot so I will skip my thoughts on the female characters, I'll just say that I hoped Alma would have been more understanding, especially since she had always known, and that she wouldn't have done the stereotypical thing of getting together with her boss.

 

[sovietpop]

I loved it, I loved the silence of the film and the slow unfolding of the story.

 

[Leica]

Actually on second thoughts there's two more flashbacks - one when Ennis was a kid and one when Jack's wife talks to Ennis on the phone.

Reno, at least it wasn't as restrained as for example the Remains of the Day where they hardly exchanged any words for years and emotions were so repressed you even start to doubt they were there.

But, to sum up, yes despite the visual appeal of seeing two cowboys against the landscape there are at least two problems with this film: (a) the two characters seem so tied up to the past that they are almost immobilised - this is an easy way out for a hollywood film because if they weren't immobilised they would be doing something to improve their situation, and (b) their relationship is not presented or discussed as such, other than through how it affects their lives.

 

[janeb]

Actually on second thoughts there's two more flashbacks - one when Ennis was a kid and one when Jack's wife talks to Ennis on the phone.

The scene where we see Jack's wife on the phone to Ennis, and the death of Jack, caused most discussion in the pub after the film with the group of people I was with. I saw this scene as a flashback, as his wife remembering what had actually happened but sparing Ennis the truth, but others saw it as Ennis's imagination hearing the truth from Jack's wife (that it was an accident) but belieiving it to be a homophobic attack.

No consensus was reached, but my view is the flashback one. Any thoughts?

BTW, I loved the film, the pacing was superb, scenery amazing, love story compelling and acting excellent

janeb x

 

[sovietpop]

But, to sum up, yes despite the visual appeal of seeing two cowboys against the landscape there are at least two problems with this film: (a) the two characters seem so tied up to the past that they are almost immobilised - this is an easy way out for a hollywood film because if they weren't immobilised they would be doing something to improve their situation, and (b) their relationship is not presented or discussed as such, other than through how it affects their lives.

And these two things are I think part of why I felt the film was realistic- especially the fact that there wasn't much discussion of the relationship.

 

[D]

I saw it about two weeks ago and found it tremendously sad.

I absolutely loved the use of the medium - the landscapes, the texture of the pictures, the sheep - that's what Lee does best. I had the feeling, "this is why we have filmmaking - so we can do shit like this" while I was watching it.

I couldn't help wondering whether I would have been as absorbed by the beginning if I hadn't known where it was headed.

***

I thought the point of the Mexico hustler scene was to establish that Jack was a 'practising' homosexual in contrast with Ennis and, yes, to provide a backdrop for Jack's comments to Ennis. I found the whole "I don't want to know about your encounters with other men" exchange quite striking (and resonant with the experiences of a lot of people I know).

***

I can certainly understand *hoping* that Alma would have been more understanding of Ennis's relationship with Jack; but it would have been a really bold and unexpected choice to make her so and would have changed the story. I was pretty surprised by Jack's mother at the end - I didn't really know what to expect from the scene with the parents.

***

I think the thing I found most compelling about Ennis was the idea of feeling safer alone than in the company of others, even others whom you love and from whom you desire intimacy. The whole lonely childhood thing and the fierceness with which he clung to the comfort of disconnection was very engrossing.

 

[Ms T]

@ Leica

The whole point of the film is that their relationship cannot develop because Ennis is in denial about what he is -- at one point early on in the film he says "I'm not a queer" and I think that he really believes that. Also, he is completely emotionally crippled by his childhood. Jack is the only person he has really connected with, and even then it is only on his terms. Strangely, that is what seems to draw people to him -- the second woman (the one from ER), for example.

The film also reminded me that it was relatively common in the sixties and seventies for gay men to get married and have children (with women) -- something which seems inconceivable now. I remember meeting two gay guys in Miami who were so obviously gay -- toned bodies, tight T-shirts, reasonably camp -- and it turned out that they were both in their late forties, and had done the whole marriage and children thing because that was what you did in Texas. One had managed to be friends with his ex-wife, the other had not.

 

[Reno]

The film also reminded me that it was relatively common in the sixties and seventies for gay men to get married and have children (with women) -- something which seems inconceivable now.

It's far from inconceivable now and still happens a lot, especially in smaller less tolerant communities. I've met quite a few gay men who are closeted and married with children.

In non-Western societies (any predominantly Muslim or Hindu coutry) it's the norm for gay men and women to get married. In many Middle-Eastern countries men and woman still get executed by the state for being gay, not getting married would endanger their lives.

 

[Jenerys]

Saw the movie at the weekend. Very male outlook on love - ie, they really cared about eachother deeply, but would you know it to look at them?

Typical men

 

[London_Calling]

I thought Philip French in the Observer yesterday made some interesting points.

I can see why it's considered a breakthrough film within mainstream Hollywood, but for me it's all a bit too little too late and very tame indeed.

I'd agree it's not going to set the metropolitan world alight, but will it reach the parts other films with this theme haven't . . .

I saw this scene as a flashback, as his wife remembering what had actually happened but sparing Ennis the truth, but others saw it as Ennis's imagination hearing the truth from Jack's wife (that it was an accident) but belieiving it to be a homophobic attack.

No consensus was reached, but my view is the flashback one. Any thoughts?

Fwiw, I saw it as a flashback to what actually happened (a homophobic murder) - obvioulsy, neither she or Ennis was present; she might even have been in denial and was reporting to Ennis what she chose to believe.

I thought the point of the Mexico hustler scene was to establish that Jack was a 'practising' homosexual in contrast with Ennis and, yes, to provide a backdrop for Jack's comments to Ennis. I found the whole "I don't want to know about your encounters with other men" exchange quite striking (and resonant with the experiences of a lot of people I know).

I saw that similarly. In Mexico, Jack was ‘unfaithful’ to Ennis, perhaps Ennis felt he wasn’t “queer” at all except with Jack. Jack, though, couldn’t resist (or repress) the sexual aspect as Ennis could, and felt compelled to the physical aspect more often than a couple of times a year. Hence (to my mind) the desire to live with Jack, and his pursuit of other sexual encounters.

But, to sum up, yes despite the visual appeal of seeing two cowboys against the landscape there are at least two problems with this film: (a) the two characters seem so tied up to the past that they are almost immobilised - this is an easy way out for a hollywood film because if they weren't immobilised they would be doing something to improve their situation, and (b) their relationship is not presented or discussed as such, other than through how it affects their lives.

I saw them more as emotionally illiterate – neither could express their feelings (they were no diff with their wives), far less understand their natural yearnings for each other. Just a couple of uneducated manual workers.

As asides, Philip French mentions the turkey carving at Thanksgiving in 1977, but I also liked the use of vehicles to illustrate the relative growing affluence of the pair.

Deserves an Oscar just for Best Use of Sideburns to Depict Time Passing

 

[Leica]

@ Leica

The whole point of the film is that their relationship cannot develop because Ennis is in denial about what he is -- at one point early on in the film he says "I'm not a queer" and I think that he really believes that.

I didn't see it like that. When Ennis says "By the way I'm not queer" Jack replies "I'm not queer either". The relationship is not allowed to develop in the film because they are both shown to be stuck on the past. Ennis is not in denial, he is being honest and straightforward every time he talks to Jack, e.g. about why he can't see him. This is one of the reasons why I think that Ennis is a strong character. It is clear to him that he wants to be with Jack but Jack never takes the necessary steps to enable them both to do that.

Regarding the second part of your post, I have grown up in a society that is different from (and less advanced than) the British/North American and there for a man being gay and married with a family is quite usual. In many cases the fact that the man also has a boyfriend is known and tolerated by the wife and sometimes also by the immediate environment. Regardless of how it may be judged, this situation is not a contradiction and does not necessarily mean that it will lead to a divorce. By the way there's a French film about a gay married man but I can't remember what it's called right now.

 

[Ms T]

I didn't see it like that. When Ennis says "By the way I'm not queer" Jack replies "I'm not queer either". The relationship is not allowed to develop in the film because they are both shown to be stuck on the past. Ennis is not in denial, he is being honest and straightforward every time he talks to Jack, e.g. about why he can't see him. This is one of the reasons why I think that Ennis is a strong character. It is clear to him that he wants to be with Jack but Jack never takes the necessary steps to enable them both to do that.

I didn't see it like that at all. Ennis is unable to be honest about his sexuality and come to terms with it. Jack asks him to come and live with him but Ennis refuses because he knows it is unacceptable in the society in which they live. He remembers as a child seeing a gay man killed and dragged along by his penis because of his sexuality. Given what happens to Jack in the end, he may well be right to be afraid.

Exactly what steps could Jack have taken to enable Ennis to be with him?

I don't agree that Ennis is a strong character, I see him as being repressed and inarticulate.

 

[Leica]

Ms T - you say "Jack asks him to come and live with him but Ennis refuses because he knows it is unacceptable in the society in which they live."

How does that show that Ennis is in denial and that he is unable to be honest? On the contrary, he was being realistic and honest to admit that he was concerned about the attitudes in his small town. He is also honest to admit his emotions every time he is confronted by others. What did he have to do to prove that he is not in denial in your opinion?

Jack is the one who always initiates contact, for whatever reason. I got the impression that Jack is in some way making a promise to protect Ennis but he always starts and stops, and never carries the promise to the end. I have no idea what steps he could have taken, perhaps some actions that fought Ennis' hesitations, but I thought that Ennis did as much as he could on his part and he was waiting for Jack. This position I think is quite mature because he comes across as being aware of his limitations, and genuine in expressing his intentions.

The above is of course an opinion based on my own personal understanding. I will stop here because I am conscious of a danger to read too much into the film, in particular since I have already said that I didn't think the portrayal of the characters and their relationship went very deep.

Finally, I don't think they had a very bad deal because for a few weeks every year they were able to live the way they wanted to be, which is more than many people can do.

 

[London_Calling]

You two are talking about personalities and characters over a 20+ year span. Fwiw, I think Ennis changes through that period from a kind of denial to acceptance. Anyway . . . I came across this. It sums up a lot, for me anyway:

Jack Twist: Tell you what, we coulda had a good life together, fuckin' real good life! Had us a place of our own. But you didn't want it, Ennis! So what we got now is Brokeback Mountain! Everything's built on that, that's all we got boy, fuckin' all. So I hope you know that if you don't never know the rest! You count the damn few times we have been together in nearly twenty years and you measure the short fucking leash you keep me on, and then you ask me about Mexico and tell me you'll kill me for needing somethin' I don't hardly never get. You have no idea how bad it gets! I'm not you... I can't make it on a coupla high-altitude fucks once or twice a year! You are too much for me Ennis, son of a whoreson bitch... I wish I knew how to quit you.


Ennis Del Mar: Well why don't you? Why don't you just let me be, huh? Because of you, Jack, that I'm like this. I'm nothing... and nowhere.



- hmmm, amongst much else, I tend to think that had Ennis not met Jack, he'd have lived his life as a reasonably contented family man.

 

[Leica]

Have you seen the new Woody Allen film?

 

[Reno]

Have you seen the new Woody Allen film?

Not sure who the question was put to, but I have. Unlike many British critics I rather liked it:

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=146381

 

[Leica]

Thanks, I hadn't noticed that thread. The question was addressed to anyone reading, but it's good to see what you think.

 

[London_Calling]

I'm hoping to see Match Point at the Ritzy this weekend.

Got to keep up as I think Good Night and Good Luck (and others) are just around the corner . . .

 

[Leica]

I know this sort of apprehension. I'm nowhere near the Ritzy but hoping to see this in the next few days.

 

[Rohen]

In the book it is the imagination of Ennis that Jack got hit with a tyre iron and was beaten to death.

The book ( the short story is true to the film infact the film fleshes out the book much better than some films of books)

Very sad and rings a cord with any unfulfilled love or tragedy when you havent been able to actualise your feelings towards someone before its too late.

 

[treefrog]

Read the story by Annie Proulx here .

 

[marty21]

saw it tonight, agree with the idea that ennis wouldn't have loved another man if jack hadn't come along, he'd have probably lived his life in a conventional hetrosexual way unaware that he might have led an alternative lifestyle..

it wasn't the tearjerker i was expecting, although to some of the audience at the rio in dalston, it definitely was a tear jerker

got slightly frustrated with the devices used to show the passage of time, putting the year up seemed laboured, the aging of the children was sufficient...

heath ledger was excellent, surely he'll get a nomination and probably an oscar...the female characters were weak, thought the michelle williams character could have had more of a confrontation with ennis...

very moving at the end, at jack's parent's house and in the trailer...

 

[dynamicbaddog]

it was a lovely film, visually stunning and very moving. The cinema i went to see it in was nearly full, and judging by the shocked gasp that went up went Ennis's wife first saw him kissing Jack from the window everyone else was really caught up in it too . This film will stay with me for a very long time i think