Brokeback Mountain

[Lex]

You care to elaborate on that or are you just trolling?

 

[xtrathickdick]

It's not a movie about gay love. To call this a gay love story is twisting it way out of context. It's a movie about 2 married men, having an affair with each other. Nothing earth shattering about this. People do it all the time. That's why we have adult bookstores and saunas at Bally's. So married men can go off and get their rocks off, then toddle off back to their families. If you set this story in an adult bookstore or a Bally's gym, everyone would be denouncing it. But make the characters cowboys and sanitize the story so you ignore the fact that their cheating, and suddenly everyone get's all weepy. Bottom line is they're still married to other people and hurting them. I personally am offended that people think that these are gay characters. They're mixed up bi-sexual mean what are fucking tearing their families apart. I couldn't give a shit about the two male characters, cause what they're doing is very predictable. Putting it in a beautiful setting doesn't change anything.

I know dozens of men in this same situation. Nothing romantic about it at all. In fact, I think married bi-sexual men who cheat are terribly uninteresting and very predictable.

I hated Bridge Over Madison County for the same reason. That movie was about a woman who, the minute her husband and kids left for a long weekend, fuck the first gay to drive up into her farmyard. Yep -- that's real romance!

Everyone's been brainwashed by watching too much Oprah.

P.S. Alan Alda and Ellen Burstyn did this movie 30 years ago and it was called Same Time Next Year. It was terribly boring then, too.

Also, I'm gay and have had the same partner for 15 years. So, I'm not exactly homophobic. But I am getting tired of having movies about straight or bi-sexual men cheating being labeled as a gay love story. Puhlease!

 

[invisibleman]

After seeing the movie yesterday, I thought that it was a little different from the short story. I liked the movie better in a way. The short story was good though. I think that it was a gay (near) romance story-wise. I liked the movie the way it illustrates how forced societal paradigms such as "marriage" or "having a relationship with somebody" doesn't necessarily mean undying happiness and devotion. That could've been anybody (gay or straight--male or female). I agree with X-TraThick about people who normally have these affairs on the side while coupled--they are predictable.

Even though I thought the movie was good, I hated the situation content. I felt it was a sad, sad story. Aren't there any gay relationship type movies where there are really bad situations but end up on a really optimistic note?

I think what I got out of the movie is to always take care of your emotional business. Be very, very honest in your relationships. Don't ever get involved with someone else's love! Don't fall in love with people who aren't able to love you the way you want. If you are prone to be flighty, don't ever marry or be coupled ( or have people convince you to) or have a steady. Be honest in that.

 

[invisibleman]

It's not a movie about gay love. It's a movie about 2 married men, having an affair with each other. Nothing earth shattering about this. People do it all the time. That's why we have adult bookstores and saunas at Bally's. So married men can go off and get their rocks off, then toddle off back to their families. If you set this story in an adult bookstore or a Bally's gym, everyone would be denouncing it. But make the characters cowboys and sanitize the story so you ignore the fact that their cheating, and suddenly everyone get's all weepy. Bottom line is they're still married to other people and hurting them. I personally am offended that people think that these are gay characters. They're mixed up bi-sexual men who are fucking tearing their families apart. I couldn't give a shit about the two male characters, cause what they're doing is very predictable. Putting it in a beautiful setting doesn't change anything.

I know dozens of men in this same situation. Nothing romantic about it at all. In fact, I think married bi-sexual men who cheat are terribly uninteresting and very predictable.

I hated Bridge Over Madison County for the same reason. That movie was about a woman who, the minute her husband and kids left for a long weekend, fuck the first gay to drive up into her farmyard. Yep -- that's real romance!

P.S. Alan Alda and Ellen Burstyn did this movie 30 years ago and it was called Same Time Next Year. It was terribly boring then, too.

Also, I'm gay and have had the same partner for 15 years. So, I'm not exactly homophobic. But I am getting tired of having movies about straight or bi-sexual men cheating being labeled as a gay love story. Puhlease!

Amen to that. I agree to what you're saying. This movie and story could've been placed anywhere, with any gender, with any sexual orientation and you couldn't call it a "romance". I think that the appropriate term would be "erotic once-in-a-while trysts with a confusion of amorous limerence".

 

[Lex]

It's not a movie about gay love. To call this a gay love story is twisting it way out of context. It's a movie about 2 married men, having an affair with each other. Nothing earth shattering about this. People do it all the time. That's why we have adult bookstores and saunas at Bally's. So married men can go off and get their rocks off, then toddle off back to their families. If you set this story in an adult bookstore or a Bally's gym, everyone would be denouncing it. But make the characters cowboys and sanitize the story so you ignore the fact that their cheating, and suddenly everyone get's all weepy. Bottom line is they're still married to other people and hurting them. I personally am offended that people think that these are gay characters. They're mixed up bi-sexual mean what are fucking tearing their families apart. I couldn't give a shit about the two male characters, cause what they're doing is very predictable. Putting it in a beautiful setting doesn't change anything.

I know dozens of men in this same situation. Nothing romantic about it at all. In fact, I think married bi-sexual men who cheat are terribly uninteresting and very predictable.

I hated Bridge Over Madison County for the same reason. That movie was about a woman who, the minute her husband and kids left for a long weekend, fuck the first gay to drive up into her farmyard. Yep -- that's real romance!

Everyone's been brainwashed by watching too much Oprah.

P.S. Alan Alda and Ellen Burstyn did this movie 30 years ago and it was called Same Time Next Year. It was terribly boring then, too.

Also, I'm gay and have had the same partner for 15 years. So, I'm not exactly homophobic. But I am getting tired of having movies about straight or bi-sexual men cheating being labeled as a gay love story. Puhlease!

Okay--I am going to pick this apart. Forgive me.

1. I am a married, bi-sexual guy. My wife okayed me having a BF.Is it easy for any os us? No. But we are, all three of us, committed to making it work. I love my wife and my BF and take great exception to your saying that there can not be romance involved in a situation like this.

Google "Mixed Orientation Marriage" for more.
Are you saying that these two men don't love each other? I mean, really?

2. These guys were NOT married when they met and fell in love. Did you see the first 45 minutes of the movie? Society tells men (even today) that the only true acceptable chocies are to marry and have kids.

3. The AUTHOR has said that Jack is gay and Ennis is homophobic. Jack prefers men; Ennis prefers Jack. Being gay does not mean you can never and will never have sex with someone of the opposite sex. Many gay men and women have come out of marriages or have children. They are not confused. They are from an era and a place where they had no way to even fully comprehend what happens to them. They are trapped in a place and time where.

4. Your simplistic view of love and realtionships is rather alarming. This separation of gay-bisexual people is what hurts me more. As a man who is unfortunately energized by both men and women, it disheartens me to feel that I am looked upon as "confused" by people who consider themselves gay. I know there are men who can't imagine pussy and women who can't imagine dick. There are MANY of us, however, for whom this is not the case. Why must we be these 3rd class citizens. I know what I need and I know what I want.

Anytime two people love each other, it can be called a romance. The author has not called it a romance. Critics have.

 

[B_Hickboy]

Okay--I am going to pick this apart. Forgive me.

1. I am a married, bi-sexual guy. My wife okayed me having a BF.Is it easy for any os us? No. But we are, all three of us, committed to making it work. I love my wife and my BF and take great exception to your saying that there can not be romance involved in a situation like this.

Google "Mixed Orientation Marriage" for more.
Are you saying that these two men don't love each other? I mean, really?

2. These guys were NOT married when they met and fell in love. Did you see the first 45 minutes of the movie? Society tells men (even today) that the only true acceptable chocies are to marry and have kids.

3. The AUTHOR has said that Jack is gay and Ennis is homophobic. Jack prefers men; Ennis prefers Jack. Being gay does not mean you can never and will never have sex with someone of the opposite sex. Many gay men and women have come out of marriages or have children. They are not confused. They are from an era and a place where they had no way to even fully comprehend what happens to them. They are trapped in a place and time where.

4. Your simplistic view of love and realtionships is rather alarming. This separation of gay-bisexual people is what hurts me more. As a man who is unfortunately energized by both men and women, it disheartens me to feel that I am looked upon as "confused" by people who consider themselves gay. I know there are men who can't imagine pussy and women who can't imagine dick. There are MANY of us, however, for whom this is not the case. Why must we be these 3rd class citizens. I know what I need and I know what I want.

Anytime two people love each other, it can be called a romance.
The author has not called it a romance. Critics have.

some folks just AIN'T gonna get it, bud. Some do.
What I think of when I read somebody else's claptrap is this: God save me from my own half-formed opinions. If I am that ignorant about a topic, please let me keep my nasty mouth shut until I understand.

 

[invisibleman]

I wanted to apologize for my previous posts about the movie, "Brokeback Mountain". (I didn't have such a great date with me at the movie yesterday. The date didn't end so hot. I guess I was a little pis*ed and this was a movie I shouldn't have seen with this guy.) Hehehe.

I want to apologize to Lex if I may have come across as a big A*s. I don't hate bisexuality at all.

 

[Lex]

I appreciate that, invisibleman.

We're all we've got, really. Remember that.

EDIT: I am, however, now curious about your date. Seriously. What happened?

 

[B_HungSpermBoy]

I'd be interested in hearing about the experience of guys who think of themselves as straight, but who have had a love relationship with another guy. I think this is more common in college. The guys in "Brokeback Mountain" definitely fell in love when they were quite young, so I'm wondering if some guys have another male as their first "love object"? I can see this could be possible, especially in the situation of two guys who are clearly orphaned. Again what I'm asking is that certain people,whether they're guys or girls, are connected by a special love that maybe can't be explained by psychology? Like I've said before, maybe it's just a "force of nature".

Okay--I am going to pick this apart. Forgive me.

1. I am a married, bi-sexual guy. My wife okayed me having a BF.Is it easy for any os us? No. But we are, all three of us, committed to making it work. I love my wife and my BF and take great exception to your saying that there can not be romance involved in a situation like this.

Google "Mixed Orientation Marriage" for more.
Are you saying that these two men don't love each other? I mean, really?

2. These guys were NOT married when they met and fell in love. Did you see the first 45 minutes of the movie? Society tells men (even today) that the only true acceptable chocies are to marry and have kids.

3. The AUTHOR has said that Jack is gay and Ennis is homophobic. Jack prefers men; Ennis prefers Jack. Being gay does not mean you can never and will never have sex with someone of the opposite sex. Many gay men and women have come out of marriages or have children. They are not confused. They are from an era and a place where they had no way to even fully comprehend what happens to them. They are trapped in a place and time where.

4. Your simplistic view of love and realtionships is rather alarming. This separation of gay-bisexual people is what hurts me more. As a man who is unfortunately energized by both men and women, it disheartens me to feel that I am looked upon as "confused" by people who consider themselves gay. I know there are men who can't imagine pussy and women who can't imagine dick. There are MANY of us, however, for whom this is not the case. Why must we be these 3rd class citizens. I know what I need and I know what I want.

Anytime two people love each other, it can be called a romance. The author has not called it a romance. Critics have.

 

[panthera]

Whatever one may think of Brokeback Mountain as story or film, it certainly has moved many people to think about relationships, love and, yes, what men can and should feel for other men.
I have never yet seen multiple, simultaneous romantic relationships work out. This does not mean I am fundamentally against the concept; I have just seen too many gay men and straight women be hurt, badly badly hurt, in such constellations.
If anyone can succeed in such an undertaking, then Lex. His compassion and intelligence / sense of humour (to me, the two always go together) seem much more important ingredients for success than the bitterness I often feel.
Matthew Shepard was tortured and died an easy 20 minutes walk from where I am now writing this. Anyone who casts stones at gay men who are too afraid to live their lives should, perhaps, take the mentallity of such killers as live out here into consideration before they make such blanket statements as some have done in this forum. My freedom to be openly gay came at a heavy price; if I had not had my parents behind me I could have easily ended up like Enis. I don't think his behaviour toward Jack was right; I don't think his behaviour toward his wife was right - the character was a homophobic homosexual. But he did his best to take care of his children. And the tears at his lost chances, were genuine. Not a nice man, but for me a very real synthesis of many men I have met from out here in the west.
This is already too long, so I will close - but I, too, think there are often "loving relationships" which don't fit conventional standards. Jeremy Irons had a very interesting comment on this when he was disscussing Merchant of Venice a few years back...anybody remember it?

 

[B_Stronzo]

Interesting note about the movie:

I am MORE than impressed by these guys. Will Smith had the opportunity to truly play a gay love interest in "Sex Degrees of Separation" and was counseled by many, including Denzel Washington, to NOT kiss another man onscreen for fear that it could ruin his career. Smith admitted a few years ago that he regretted not doing it, saying that a true actor gets totally into his role, especially given all the money they are paid and that it would have been a wonderful growth oppotunity for him.

This is intersesting to me Lex. I recall that business with Will Smith and "Six Degrees..." He actually boasted about not kissing another male on "The Tonight Show". I was offended then.

I've had a rather uncomfortable feeling about D. Washington ever since he played that part in "Philadelphia" and was just a bit too convincing in his homophobic stance early-on in that movie. Perhaps that, too, was simply "good acting" but I don't think so somehow.

 

[B_Stronzo]

I thought this movie was a piece of middle class crap. I'd rank it with Forrest Gump as one of my least movies.

Gak!!!!

I agree with you about Forrest Gump but less so about Brokeback Mountain.

Indeed I was not as blown away by this movie as many appear to have been. It has its moments often but by-in-large I think it's "slice of life" kinda stuff and the homosexuality piece is pretty much a sub plot. And unlike many films with a homosexual theme (for instance "The Talented Mr. Ripley") I didn't find myself greatly sympathetic to the plight of the Ennis and Jack characters.

In "Ripley" I found that I could sympathize with the lead actor. Conversely I didn't feel much sorrow for Ennis DelMar in that final trailer scene.

However, what I truly like about the phenomenon of this film is that it makes the "fundies" and the self-named "Religious Right" pissed off since it's attracted a broad mainstream audience. Between this movie and the new NBC tv series "The Book of Daniel" there are strides being made to combat that nasty virulent undercurrent of homophobia so present of late in the States.

For that alone Brokeback Mountain is worth its weight in gold.

 

[RideRocket]

However, what I truly like about the phenomenon of this film is that it makes the "fundies" and the self-named "Religious Right" pissed off since it's attracted a broad mainstream audience. For that alone Brokeback Mountain is worth its weight in gold.

I would hardly consider a film 'attracting a broad mainstream audience' that after 6 weeks in theaters has only grossed $32,074,517.

 

[B_Stronzo]

I would hardly consider a film 'attracting a broad mainstream audience' that after 6 weeks in theaters has only grossed $32,074,517.

'Six weeks in theaters'?? Not here. It came out to limited release to Boston audiences on January 8th.

Allow me to be more succinct since you appear to take exception to my premise.

I like the fact that the press over it alone seems to get under the skin of straight homophobes. And given that fact that even here in "liberal old Masschusetts" one must bascially hunt to locate a theater that isn't playing two versions of The Chronicles of Narnia and no showing of Brokeback Mountain I'd say those numbers "ain't too shabby".

There. Hope that clears up my meaning.

 

[RideRocket]

Allow me to be more succinct since you'd appear to have it otherwise.

I like the fact that the press over it alone seems to get under the skin of straight homophobes.

There. Hope that clears up my meaning.

It does, and I would agree with you on that point. But I also think that part of the reason that it gets under the skin of so many people is because of the disparity in the amount of press the movie is receiving versus the amount of money it has made. I think it comes across to many people that hollywood and the media are 'forcing' the movie on them.

 

[B_Stronzo]

It does, and I would agree with you on that point. But I also think that part of the reason that it gets under the skin of so many people is because of the disparity in the amount of press the movie is receiving versus the amount of money it has made. I think it comes across to many people that hollywood and the media are 'forcing' the movie on them.

If so, high time.

We've had "Cheaper by the Dozen" and its ilk force-fed us for generations. It's a freaking pity if the poor old general public has to "suffer and endure" a gay storyline in a rather mediocre movie. They'll live. We (gays/homosexuals) have had whitebread America 'forced' on us in the guise of subliminal heterosexual messages for most all our lives.

If the press is a trifle too much for you and those who don't think you need have it 'forced' on you? I suggest you imagine what the nature of the political climate today and its effect feels like to your gay and lesbian brethren here in the States these days.

You wanna talk 'forced'? Now we're talkin' 'forced'.

 

[RideRocket]

If so, high time.

We've had "Cheaper by the Dozen" and its ilk force-fed us for generations. It's a freaking pity if the poor old general public has to "suffer and endure" a gay storyline in a rather mediocre movie. They'll live. We (gays/homosexuals) have had whitebread America 'forced' on us in the guise of subliminal heterosexual messages for most all our lives.

If the press is a trifle too much for you and those who don't think you need have it 'forced' on you? I suggest you imagine what the nature of the political climate today and its effect feels like to your gay and lesbian brethren here in the States these days.

You wanna talk 'forced'? Now we're talkin' 'forced'.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for equal rights. I do object, however, to minority issues constantly being pushed by the media contrary to public opinion while portraying the majority as 'evil' or 'intolerant' or 'hateful'. I just think the media tends to immediately jump to those type conclusions without a meaningful discussion on the issues. I'm not saying we should blindly stick our heads in the dirt and ignore important issues though. In a democracy the majority rules, but minorities are given a voice.

 

[B_Stronzo]

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for equal rights.

Good to know.

I do object, however, to minority issues constantly being pushed by the media contrary to public opinion while portraying the majority as 'evil' or 'intolerant' or 'hateful'.

I don't recall any credible individuals or group 'portraying the majority as evil or intolerant or hateful'. I believe I referred to extremists in our society. If that was unclear in my last response I'll reinforce my meaning now.

I just think the media tends to immediately jump to those type conclusions without a meaningful discussion on the issues.

I'm not sure what you mean here.

I'm not saying we should blindly stick our heads in the dirt and ignore important issues though. In a democracy the majority rules, but minorities are given a voice.

Agreed. But what, precisely to you, do you mean by an American 'majority' I'd ask? I'm curious to know your definition of 'majority' as it applies to these United States.

 

[RideRocket]

Agreed. But what, precisely to you, do you mean by an American 'majority' I'd ask? I'm curious to know your definition of 'majority' as it applies to these United States.

As far as American 'majority', if you look at most polls and surveys, a majority (majority being more than 50%) of Americans do not favor gay marriages, but do favor legal rights. Along religious lines, a majority feel Christianity is under attack.

With regards to my media comment, I think the media tends to blindly support the minority issues while not giving equal time or respect to the majority opinion.

 

[Matthew]

It does, and I would agree with you on that point. But I also think that part of the reason that it gets under the skin of so many people is because of the disparity in the amount of press the movie is receiving versus the amount of money it has made. I think it comes across to many people that hollywood and the media are 'forcing' the movie on them.

I think it gets under the skin of many people because they hate faggots. In terms of success, Brokeback Mountain is showing in far fewer theaters than any other in the current top 15, and I would hope that the amount of money a film makes does not determine how much press or critical acclaim it receives. Large numbers of people, including a "majority," can believe or like all kinds of bullshit. Happens all the time. But "forcing" the movie on them? Please!!! Don't see it if you don't want to. It's that simple.

FWIW, Ride, I'm not trying to get after you in particular. I simply do not believe that the discomfort about Brokeback Mountain among the 'general public' has to do with anything other than plain, old-fashioned gay-hating.