Well, I did not see the movie either.
By time you read this, Brokeback Mountain will be the winner of Best Picture, along with many other awards and (unlike many years) I will not be able to completely judge the film based upon my prejudice concerning its subject matter and agenda.
What? You thought I was an open-minded guy with a stereotypically liberal outlook on life. So why would I be against a sensitive portrayal of the tragic story of star-crossed lovers unable to live together because of societal norms? Why would I buy into the hype that this is another part of Hollywood's agenda.
Because it is. Hollywood's agenda is to cram down our throats overwraught maudlin tragic love stories. It is Hollywood's agenda to give us beautiful stories with beautiful stars saying beautiful words with a beatific sense of the tragedy unfolding because of their love.
This same old story has not been worth anything since Scorsese did it right with The Age of the Innocence. Call me insensitive because I have little desire to see Out of Montana, The Cowboy Patient or Titanic Mountains. Just because it has gay characters and I have an open mind, do I really want to see the same story I have hated numerous times before? Suddenly the whole thing changes because the same story is now relevant?
I say stand against what the movie is selling. Lest you think the gay subject matter offends me, understand I will take Capote, The Crying Game, My Beautiful Laundrette, My Own Private Idaho, Longtime Companion, Angels in America or The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert (all good films). But, the typical Oscar-baited gay themed movie like Philadelphia (don't get me started) and Brokeback Mountain can call on someone else to watch them.
Okay, yes I will probably watch Brokeback Mountain sometime in the future and find it beautifully tragic like I am supposed to when it pulls out all of my emotional strings. But, I will not enjoy the experience. Yes, I know Ang Lee is a brilliant filmmaker. I am sure it is a wonderful film. I just get tired of the hype because the plot is among my least favorite thematically.
9 comments:
Bro, do you really think "Hollywood has an "agenda"?
The Passion of Christ??? Remember how evangelcals were thinking it was going to save the church. Agenda? They had banners, books, bible studies, they made Mel Gibson a billionaire because of their agenda.
I blame the American people for the crap they digest. America keeps buying whatever is put in front of them. I am being serious. Look at the sales job that happens in politics... that is an agenda and America swallows it.
I think most of the stuff that comes out of Hollywood is garbage in that it is like McDonalds fast food that the masses consume. For example, America is the fatest nation on the planet because its own gluttounous addictions-- thats not McDonald's fault. I'm not so sure we can blame Hollywood for having an agenda any more than one can blame McDonalds for America being fat...
I haven't seen Brokeback. I have no opinion. I do not think it is some Hollywood gay agenda any more than Ellen show is some gay agenda in daytime talk.
Look at the crap published by zondervan books that evangelicals are buying in bulk... all the emergent stuuf, Purpose Driven Life... you know who owns Zondervan? Evangelcals are lining the pockets of the corporation who produces soem of the greatest trash on the planet.
I guess my point is, we're all full of shit. We just swallow the shit disguised as something we like.
BTW, my favorite movie of the year was CRASH, that was some great shit.
Peace
I did see the movie last weekend. I wanted to see what all the hype was about.... It's just that hype. It's just Romeo and Juliet with two cowboys and the acting is actually pretty bad. I think Hollywood is all google eyed because it challenges social norms. But this movie does not deserve best Picture. By the way, on production values, the Passion of the Christ has it beat hands down.
Rick-
Did I ever mention gay agenda? Did you closely read what I wrote?
Did I fail so miserably at my attempt at sarcasm?
The agenda which apparently I failed at making obvious is crappy overblown self important movies, not gay agendas or anything like that, just movies with the same recycled (which as an Environmentalist I should be happy with) story lines.
Actually, you want agendas? See the overblown, self-important crap that just actually WON the oscar. It was a mindless exercise in white liberal guilt that had absolutely no connect with anything particularly genuine in human relations.
Brokeback, on the other hand, was beautiful. I loathe the p.c. crap as much as anybody, and the preivew makes it look just like that- throwing scenes into slow-mo that aren't that way in the picture, scoring the whole thing to this swelling string section that just isn't in the film. The movie itself is subtle beyond belief-- to the point that some people found it emotionally cold, distant. It isn't. it's astounding.
Start talking shit about films that you've seen, first. It does you no good at all to make opinions just because you find them "edgy" or "uin- p.c.". The problem with being p.c. is a mindless, moronic attunement to anything one might find politically advantageous. The problem with you is pretty much the same thing. Stop being an idiot and go see the thing yr attacking, OK?
i love anonymous posters.
well, it didn't win. i would say that i let out an audible gasp when jack announced crash, but that would mean admitting that i actually cared. and i don't.
can we just get to next year and hope that something, ANYTHING, comes out that is outstanding?
this year (best actor race aside) was a snooze-fest.
and btw rick, i totally agree with your feelings on the hype surrounding brokeback but do think you will enjoy it when you do see it many many years down the road.
cheers.
I would want to respond to the insane and incoherent ramblings of the spelling and grammer challenged coward who calls himself anonymous. But since he is either unable to properly enter his name into a computer (if he is able to spell his name), I will not respond.
From the sheer stupidity of the comment I can only assume the person failed the reading comprehension section of standardized tests, has no life, uses the word PC to describe anything he does not agree with and has a basic misunderstanding of not only blog etiquette, but also has no understanding of film genres or appreciation (I have a hard time this person would understand subtly unless it bashed him on the back of the head- hey anonymous- this is called sacarsm).
I don't respond to cowards that hide behind an anonymous cloak so they can flame people.
They are equal to the Detroit Pistons fans that throw beer from the stands at players because they think they will not be caught.
They are equal to the kids who moon others from a crowded bus, hoping to God the principle does not find them out or stalkers seeking young girls on the internet by changing their identity (but this guy is not smart enough for that - that takes some savvy I assume).
They are the kind of gutless cowards that ask for others to fight and die for them in war, but sit back in their recliners never lifting a finger to help a veteran.
They are the dregs of society.They have no guts, should not be trusted and should be banished to the 3rd level of Hell.
right on rick. i'm glad that you've learned to hate anonymous posters as much as the rest of us do. i realize that hatred is unbecoming of Christ-followers, but i don't think that Jesus' love ethic applies to blog comments: )
plus that first paragraph about Crash was almost verbatum from an NPR comentary...
I saw Brokeback in large part in reaction to a post made by Bart Campolo at his blog and the challenge of another commentor there.
I didn't care for it. I liked the cowboy stuff, except for Gyllenhaal's character. But afterwards, it was sad. It made a simple point about a complicated issue, one I fear will become a wedge issue in the upcoming elections.
Here's what I wrote about my root fear about Brokeback.
dlw
Post a Comment