Brokeback Mountain

[Jennpurr]

I'm excited to see this. I'm not counting on a happy ending. I'll be happy if it has one, but the story in and of itself, looks promising. Has there ever been a story about gay cowboys before?

What do you guys think about this?


Brokeback Mountain

Synopsis

From Academy Award-winning filmmaker Ang Lee comes an epic American love story, Brokeback Mountain, the winner of the Golden Lion Award for Best Picture at this year's Venice International Film Festival. The film is based on the short story by Pulitzer Prize-winning author Annie Proulx and adapted for the screen by the team of Pulitzer Prize-winning author Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana. Set against the sweeping vistas of Wyoming and Texas, the film tells the story of two young men -- a ranch-hand and a rodeo cowboy -- who meet in the summer of 1963, and unexpectedly forge a lifelong connection, one whose complications, joys, and tragedies provide a testament to the endurance and power of love.

Early one morning in Signal, Wyoming, Ennis Del Mar (Heath Ledger) and Jack Twist (Jake Gyllenhaal) meet while lining up for employment with local rancher Joe Aguirre (Randy Quaid). The world which Ennis and Jack have been born into is at once changing rapidly and yet scarcely evolving. Both young men seem certain of their set places in the heartland – obtaining steady work, marrying, and raising a family – and yet hunger for something beyond what they can articulate. When Aguirre dispatches them to work as sheepherders up on the majestic Brokeback Mountain, they gravitate towards camaraderie and then a deeper intimacy.

At summer's end, the two must come down from Brokeback and part ways. Remaining in Wyoming, Ennis weds his sweetheart Alma (Michelle Williams), with whom he will have two daughters as he ekes out a living. Jack, in Texas, catches the eye of rodeo queen Lureen Newsome (Anne Hathaway). Their courtship and marriage result in a son, as well as jobs in her father's business.

Four years pass. One day, Alma brings Ennis a postcard from Jack, who is en route to visit Wyoming. Ennis waits expectantly for his friend, and when Jack at last arrives, in just one moment it is clear that the passage of time has only strengthened the men's attachment. In the years that follow, Ennis and Jack struggle to keep their secret bond alive. They meet up several times annually. Even when they are apart, they face the eternal questions of fidelity, commitment, and trust. Ultimately, the one constant in their lives is a force of nature – love.

[dorksrcool]

I think it looks really good. I love Ang Lee's directing style. I'm sure it does have a depressing ending though....as do most good movies about gay people. Basically, I think this movie will be really hot! Who wouldn't want to see those two actors getting it on?

[Kieli]

I saw the trailers for this movie and it looks like it's going to be one of those emotional wringers. Kudos for them bringing Michelle Williams from Dawson's Creek in. I heard that Heath Ledger and Jake Glynenhall were quite comfortable with kissing each other in the movie and what not. I'd go see this mostly out of curiousity.

[cbrymm]

Well my favorite gay boy has asked me to go see it with him as soon as it hits the area. Apparently he "cried during the preveiw." So, I'll be seeing it.

[Gatito Grande]

"Kudos for them bringing Michelle Williams from Dawson's Creek in."

Was Michelle Williams w/ Heath Ledger before this movie, or is this where they hooked up?

GG Though I'm not into guy-on-guy in an, um, visceral (erogenous) kind of way, the ROMANCE appeals: kind of like, if the world is safe for boys to love each other, then the world is SAFE! Out

[Jennpurr]

Has nobody seen this yet?


A fist ramming into your gut and tearing it to pieces, is what it felt like to see this movie. Don't get me wrong, this was a beautiful love story, a story that shouldn't have ended in the fashion that it did. I've seen alot of movies. Alot. None of them have ever affected me this way though, except for Passion of the Christ, which I still haven't watched again. I can't bring myself to put the DVD in. In no way am I comparing the subject matter to PotC, but Brokeback was just as painful to watch.

The lack of more intimate scenes was disappointing, but I understand why there weren't more. It's not about the sex, it's about the love these two characters have for each other. The actors make the characters what they are. There is severe chemistry between them. They did an excellent job at making it believable. I didn't see any chemistry between the men and the women, but maybe it's written that way for a reason.

The scenery was breathtaking. I don't know where this movie was filmed, but they should definitely film more movies there.

If the movie isn't depressing enough, the soundtrack adds to it. It's beautiful and moving, but it's painful to listen to as well because I can't keep the images from the movie out of my head while I'm listening to it. I don't like Willie Nelson, but, "He Was a Friend of Mine," is a lovely song. I really like the opening music as well.

I have to say, along with a very rough day in general yesterday, seeing the movie didn't help. I'm glad I saw it, but it left me depressed last night and most of the day today. It's an ache. It's a feeling of what if that were to happen to me? I'm just glad I'm fortunate enough to not have to hide the love I feel inside or that I don't have to sneak away to a place where no one will find me to show the woman I love how much I want to be with her and how much she means to me. It's sad, but in a way, to many gay youth, the internet is their, "Brokeback Mountain." I hate the fact that if two women or two men want to hold hands out in public, they are taking a risk of getting the crap beat out of them. It's not fair that things are still the way they are.


On a lighter note: This is funny. The movie had started and was about 5 minutes into it when this older couple, a man and a woman, walked in. They sat in front of us. I looked at my g/f and smirked. She leaned over to me and said, "I don't think they know what the movie's about." Well... as soon as the first intimate scene started, the woman leaned over to whisper something to her husband and a second later they stood up and they walked out of the theater. They probably went to go get their money back and at the same time, muttering something about, "Queers," under their breaths. It was hillarious.


What I'm about to say next will ruin the movie for you if you highlight the text, so do it at your own risk.

[spoiler]Probably the best scene out of the whole movie is towards the end, after Jack is killed, and Ennis is holding his shirt close to his body.[/spoiler]

Now if that doesn't make you cry, I don't know what will. I want to see this again before it leaves the theater because I missed a few things, but I'll definitely buy the DVD when it comes out. I hope it's not a very long wait.

Go see this movie. It will make you cry, but you'll be happy that you did go.


Jen

[jago]

Ah well, another gay movie I won't be watching. Pity.

[cbrymm]

*sigh* I was hoping to bring my favorite gay boy to see this but unfortunatly its not showing anywhere near by. I hope the movie does well enough to be released in more theatres. Everyone.. If this movie is playing in your area go see it or at least buy the ticket so it gets released here.

[SySnootles]

To answer a few questions...

It was on this set where Heath Ledger and Michelle Williams "hooked up."

The film was shot in Alberta, Canada, where it is actually that pretty. (Been there, can't wait to go back.)

The source material is as heart-wrenching as the film made from it. I wouldn't hold anything against the filmmakers for how anything happens in the film. Blame the author, E. Anne Proulx.

[Jennpurr]

*sigh* I was hoping to bring my favorite gay boy to see this but unfortunatly its not showing anywhere near by. I hope the movie does well enough to be released in more theatres. Everyone.. If this movie is playing in your area go see it or at least buy the ticket so it gets released here.

Sorry it's not showing in your area. I had to drive almost an hour just to go see it because it's not playing but in Houston, here. Kinda sucks. I had to do the same thing when I saw Latter Days. It was only playing in one theater though. Talk about selectivity.

I hope you get to see the movie.


Jen

[Candleshoe]

Went to see this tonight. Bawled my eyes out. Realised again that "alone" doesn't mean "safe" - it just means, well, alone.

Now I just have to find me someone who will put up with an overworked, non-scene, cynic.

[FineyMcFine]

Gene Shalit apparently gave a defamatory review of Brokeback Mountain on the Today show, calling the character of Jack a "sexual predator." Here is the email about it from the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation:

GLAAD ALERT:
January 5, 2006

Gene Shalit Offers Defamatory 'Brokeback' Review on NBC's Today

On Jan. 5, NBC News' Today show featured Gene Shalit's review of Brokeback Mountain on his regular "Critic's Corner" segment. Rather than focus on the merits of the film, Shalit — who has been a Today show regular for 31 years — used the occasion to promote defamatory anti-gay prejudice to a national audience.

In the piece, Shalit refers to Jake Gyllenhaal's character, Jack, as a "sexual predator" who "tracks Ennis down and coaxes him into sporadic trysts." Shalit's bizarre characterization of Jack as a "predator" and Ennis (Heath Ledger) as a victim reflects a fundamental lack of understanding about the central relationship in the film and about gay relationships in general. It seems highly doubtful that Shalit would similarly claim that Titanic's Jack (Leonardo DiCaprio) was a "sexual predator" because he was pursuing a romantic relationship with Rose (Kate Winslet).

Shalit does offer a kind word for Ledger's performance and says Brokeback Mountain does have a few dramatic peaks" before calling the film "wildly overpraised, but not by me."

Shalit has every right as a film critic to criticize Brokeback Mountain. But his baseless branding of Jack as a "sexual predator" merely because he is romantically interested in someone of the same sex is defamatory, ignorant and irresponsible. And it is equally irresponsible for NBC News to have given Shalit a platform for his gratuitously offensive comments.

NBC's Today staffers have not returned GLAAD's calls to discuss our serious concerns about Shalit's remarks on the show.

TAKE ACTION NOW! GO TO THIS PAGE:
http://www.glaad.org/action/alerts_detail.php?id=3849
AND CLICK ON "TAKE ACTION" AT THE TOP RIGHT OF THE PAGE.

Please watch the video at http://www.glaad.org and write or call the Today show, asking that both the Today show and Mr. Shalit apologize to viewers for his defamatory anti-gay remarks.

The Today Show
30 Rockefeller Plaza
Room 380 E
New York, NY 10112-0002

Telephone:
212-664-4602 [If the viewer comment mailbox is full, ask to speak to someone else.]
Fax 212-664-7209

Email:
today@nbc.com

[Gatito Grande]

Thank you, Sally McF.

GG Angry email off in the ether... Out

[Jennpurr]

Did you guys know that Mr. Shalit has an openly gay son?

[Candleshoe]

Jennpurr just gave me the biggest laugh of my day so far! I guess dinner will be tense in that house for a while!!

ETA: Of course, I meant 'laugh' in an isn't-life-ironic way, not in a not-taking-it-seriously way. Just clarifying....

[Jennpurr]

His son is physician Dr. Peter Shalit, author of "Living Well, the Gay Man's Essential Health Guide."

[jago]

So he thinks his son is a sexual predator or the victim of a sexual predator? Wow. What a wonderful guy.

[SySnootles]

I think that's a pretty far-fetched inferrence.

[jago]

Possibly, but reading this:

his baseless branding of Jack as a "sexual predator" merely because he is romantically interested in someone of the same sex

I wouldn't be surprised if he feels the same way about all gay relationships.

[maudmac]

My two cents:

Gene Shalit is no homophobe. GLAAD had a knee-jerk (over)reaction and should have taken a moment to think about it before they made a big ol' stink about this.

Peter Shalit writes to GLAAD about his dad

Gene Shalit may not have liked Brokeback Mountain, but he loves his gay son and is not homophobic—so says Shalit's son Peter in an emotional letter to the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation dated Monday.

"It is precisely because my dad is not homophobic that he felt free to criticize the movie as he saw it," wrote Peter Shalit, a gay physician and author who lives in Seattle and is a longtime supporter of GLAAD.

Shalit said he felt GLAAD's press release about the NBC Today show review, broadcast on Thursday, was a "mischaracterization" of his father. The GLAAD release urged viewers to write to NBC to complain about Gene Shalit's characterization of the Jake Gyllenhaal character in Brokeback Mountain as a "sexual predator."

By suggesting Gene Shalit was homophobic, GLAAD had "defamed a good man, by falsely accusing him of a repellent form of bigotry," Peter Shalit wrote to the group's entertainment media director, Damon Romine, and president, Neil Giuliano.

"Incidentally," Shalit added, "I loved the movie."

The full text of Peter Shalit's letter to GLAAD follows:

Dear Damon, and Neil,

Peter Shalit here—Gene Shalit's son. I have been a member-supporter of GLAAD for years. I assume you were not aware of that, but I am disappointed that you did not do a little background research on my dad, or try to contact me, or attempt to reach my dad through me, before issuing your press release this past week calling him homophobic because of his review of Brokeback Mountain. I did notice the "editor's note" which mentioned that he has a gay son, i.e. myself.

By way of background, I am a gay man, a physician, serving a mostly gay patient population in Seattle, and author of Living Well, the Gay Men's Essential Health Guide, which is a guide to gay health for gay men. I frequently comment to people that I can't imagine having another job that would immerse me in the gay community as much as the one I have. The gay community is my life.

I say this because it's important background for understanding that my dad has always been completely loving and supportive of me, my life, my partners, and my choices. He wrote a piece about me in 1997 for The Advocate (currently posted on their home page)—and agreed to have his picture on the cover of the magazine—because what the piece says is true about how he feels and how he has always acted.

I spoke with my dad yesterday about the issues with his review. He had no idea that his review of a movie, and his reaction to a particular character, would be seen as homophobia. Of course he is not homophobic. Actually the truth is the opposite. Agreed, he didn't particularly seem to like Brokeback Mountain, and he found the character of Jack unsympathetic. But his negative response to a particular character is not "defamation" and had nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the character. The interpretation-generalization of this as "homophobic" is unfortunate and incorrect. It is precisely because my Dad is not homophobic that he felt free to criticize the movie as he saw it, and not anticipate that he would be accused of homophobia for doing so.

(Incidentally, I loved the movie—and it sure isn't the first time I have disagreed with my dad about one of his reviews. I was sorry he didn't like it, but hey, these things happen. I have always felt that he was entitled to his opinion and I leave it at that.)

When I first saw your press release a few days ago my reaction was "goodness, this is silly" and I decided to sit tight and hope it would blow over. But it hasn't, judging by the e-mails I have received from friends, and the buzz I have seen online. People are concerned about these accusations about my dad, and some bloggers are talking about him as if he is an enemy of gay people. I decided to contact you because there could have been better ways to handle this situation, and I am hurt by your mischaracterization of my father, a man who does not have a molecule of hate in his being. It does not speak well for GLAAD, and it is not helping our community.

We are all really on the same side—you, my Dad, me, my family, our community. The gay community has enough enemies that we should not be attacking or alienating those who, such as my Dad, are part of our family and are our true friends. We may disagree with his opinion of a movie and his interpretation of a particular character, but that is his job as a critic to give his opinion. He may have had an unpopular opinion of a movie that is important to the gay community, but he defamed no one, and he is not a homophobe. It is you who have defamed a good man, by falsely accusing him of a repellent form of bigotry. It is ironic and sad that an organization whose mission is to combat defamation has committed such an act itself, an act which amounts to character assassination with so little consideration of the repercussions.

I am happy to discuss this further with you by e-mail, or you can feel free to phone me...

Sincerely, Peter Shalit

See also:

Today show reviewer regrets Brokeback comment

[SySnootles]

Trying not to get this thread off topic, I held my tongue about the whole review issue until today. But thanks to Maudmac for pointing out that GLAAD doesn't always think things through before making judgements and accusations (an issue I have with many other organizations as well). Sometimes there's more to a story than what is on a web page. It's usually better to have most of the facts before passing judgement.

[FineyMcFine]

I fall on the side of thinking that GLAAD was appropriate in issuing its alert. Gene Shalit said in his follow-up statement, which maudmac linked to:

"In describing the behavior of "Jack" I used words ("sexual predator") that I now discover have angered, agitated, and hurt many people."

His original comments on the Today show included a statement that the character of Jack was a sexual predator who tracked Ennis down and lured him into sporadic trysts. I think leaving a statement like that out there, unchallenged, would have been harmful to the GLBT community. For the type of people who are not sure quite what they think about gays, who aren't likely to see the movie but do watch the Today show, a statement like that is likely to reinforce negative stereotypes. Stereotypes that the extremist groups like Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council and the American Family Association and Concerned Women for America are trying to present as fact all the time - that gays are sexual predators, that we recruit children, etc.

Whether or not a person has an openly gay family member that they're supportive of doesn't excuse a poor choice of words - even well-intentioned people can phrase things in a way that they don't realize what effect it will have or what baggage the particular phrase or word carries with it. It seems like that is what happened here. It's not about what Gene Shalit thinks, feels, or who his son is - it's about what he said.

ETA: I read Peter Shalit's letter three times and then looked at GLAAD's original alert, and unless I'm missing something, GLAAD's original alert never said that Gene Shalit was homophobic, or called him a homophobe, as Peter Shalit's letter seems to imply. They said that his comments were defamatory, ignorant, and irresponsible - but they didn't say homophobic or call him a homophobe. That just struck me in rereading Peter Shalit's letter so I thought I'd edit the post...

Anyway, about the movie - I saw the movie and thought it was very clear that the attraction and love between Ennis and Jack was mutual, and there were no elements of coercion involved. And for what it's worth, I think that Gene Shalit is probably a lovely person who truly does support his gay son and is not a homophobic person, and did not intend for his words to have the effect they did.

[Gatito Grande]

I think there was an over-reaction, alright: Dr. Peter Shalit's, in writing a public letter to protest GLAAD, instead of (quietly) calling his dad and saying "I know you're not homophobic, but you've left a gross misimpression out there, by use of your word 'predator'. Take it back and apologize on the next Today Show, and all will be well."

GG To tell you the truth, I thought BM was a little over-rated also---but that doesn't mean it wasn't an honest-to-goodness LOVE story. Not merely "something unexpected happened---they had S*E*X", as (Gene) Shalit said (to say nothing of the offensive/insane "predator" comment!) Out

What can I say? I thought Kong/Ann were a cuter couple!

[jago]

I think there was an over-reaction, alright: Dr. Peter Shalit's, in writing a public letter to protest GLAAD, instead of (quietly) calling his dad and saying "I know you're not homophobic, but you've left a gross misimpression out there, by use of your word 'predator'. Take it back and apologize on the next Today Show, and all will be well."

It's a pity Gene Shalit didn't explain more fully why he used the term predator or taken in back but I happily take back what I said earlier. I've read some pretty negative opinions about GLAAD here at the Kitten Board in the past so probably shouldn't have automatically assumed they were in the right.

[GayNow]

It's a Golden Globe winner!

Moving on to the Oscars!

[billy]

Could anyone tell me if the ending is as unrelentingly depressing as it sounds? Is there anything even a little upbeat? I might go to see it but at the moment I think I'd rather rewatch Latter Days or Big Eden.

[Jennpurr]

Um... Well... the ending is depressing, yes. It leaves you basically with no closure, but:

Highlight below at your own risk. Don't read it if you want the ending spoiled.

[spoiler]The ending shows Ennis looking at Jack's shirt tucked inside his own. His last words are, "Jack, I swear..." The camera pulls out and zooms in on the land outside of his window. That's how it ends.

My own personal conclusion I found to Ennis's words were, "Jack, I swear... I'll never forget you." Even though Jack's life has ended, Ennis is swearing never to forget him, in my own opinion anyway. I don't know if that's closure or not, but that's all that can be expected.[/spoiler]

I don't know if that answers your question or not, but I would recommend you seeing the movie anyway. It's a beautiful love story.


Jen

[cbrymm]

I am happy to say that I got to see Brokeback Mountain today. I, along with two friends, traveled many miles away from our small hick town to see it in the "big city," Portsmouth, NH. I liked it. There were some moments when it seemed to be dragging on forever.. but for the most part it was good. Very depressing.

[Jennpurr]

For those who have seen this movie, I have a question for you.

[spoiler]What do ya'll think Ennis meant at the end when he says, "Jack, I swear..." I'm curious to hear other opinions.[/spoiler]

Thanks.

Jen

[billy]

I don't know if that answers your question or not, but I would recommend you seeing the movie anyway. It's a beautiful love story.

Thanks, Jen. That's what I wanted to know.