Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
aimnyamer

Brokeback Mountain

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I haven't seen the film, and probably won't -- I like my cowboys rustling dogies of one sort, and not another -- but from what I've heard, all the attention is on the gay aspect of the story. I find it strange that none of the attention is on the cheating aspect. Two cowboys periodically cheat on their wives. In Hollywood-ese, that's "shockingly courageous".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen the film twice (as part of the runup to my annual Oscars Review, which I will share here shortly after the noms are announced on the 31st), and without giving too much away (wait for the Oscars Review!), the story is more about two cowboys who consistently cheat on each other instead. It's an excellent film, and anyone who can should try to see it, but don't go expecting to see heroic characters and a happy ending. It is not a movie about gay cowboys. It's a cautionary tale about what happens when people decide not to pursue their values. For a full review (with spoilers) wait for my Oscars Review in early Feb.

-Q

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to see any movie where one guy kisses (or anything else) another whether or not it has cowboys, shepards, or any other profession in it.

Why is Hollywood trying to make everybody gay? Alexander the Great--let's make him gay; Abraham Lincoln on the History Channel--let's start rumors that he was gay; Cowboy's that probably removed some Indians from "their land"--gay.

It's the lefts way of attempting to destroy the value of history's heros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't want to see any movie where one guy kisses (or anything else) another whether or not it has cowboys, shepards, or any other profession in it.

Why is Hollywood trying to make everybody gay? Alexander the Great--let's make him gay; Abraham Lincoln on the History Channel--let's start rumors that he was gay; Cowboy's that probably removed some Indians from "their land"--gay.

It's the lefts way of attempting to destroy the value of history's heros.

Literarily it is great basis for an intriguing story. We accept a Quasimodo, a Gwinplaine. Freaks make for good characters, because it isolates the volitional character. On the premise that gayness is non-volitional, it is obvious atmosphere for tremendous social obstacles, moral, and social. It is a basis for a hero, despite this thing that most of these "freaks" are afraid of and ashamed of.

Look at what gayness did to a genius like Wilde. What a story?

It may not be good ground work for an Objectivist story, unless the author is himself gay, but it can definately make for good romanticism and romantic-realism.

An obvious theme: My sexuality does not make me who I am--that I kick ass as a prosecutor or jet plane fighter or boxer or hockey player or oil man--does.

But I am disturbed by sudden trend of gay characters. Most stories are not good enough. But I want more gay stories out there as a slap in the face at those damn Christian Religionists. I love to hear them speak from the bible, so amusing, and almost so pitiful.

To all, use your literary principles, as best you know them, and in your own mind outline a story with gay characters--can it not be intriguing, interesting, and serious?

Junius Junius.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is Hollywood trying to make everybody gay? Alexander the Great--let's make him gay; Abraham Lincoln on the History Channel--let's start rumors that he was gay; Cowboy's that probably removed some Indians from "their land"--gay.

It is the lefts way of saying "Hey look, gay people can do important things to."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the movie last month in Atlanta and plan to see it again when it comes to my local theater. It's the best movie I've seen in the past year.

I couldn't get the movie out of my head and thought about it for days. I also downloaded the Annie Proulx short story upon which it is based. The short story is available for free on Proulx's website.

It is a great movie on many levels--for the photography, the direction, the acting and the romanticism. Above all, it tells an engaging story. The two main characters, Ennis Del Mar and Jack Twist are ordinary and conventional men caught up in extraordinary circumstances. The viewer wants very much for them to find a happy resolution to their dilemma. Jack is the one who tries hardest to find a resolution, but Ennis, hampered by fear is the tragic figure.

An engaging morality tale--fight for your values and your happiness. Don't miss it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a great movie. I've seen it twice. JohnWBales and Qwertz are right: it's about the importance of pursuing values. The gay element is not tacked on or unimportant; it provides the conflict that in classic literature might have been achieved by making the two protagonists from different social classes. A story about "impossible love" is hard to do believably these days. And even here, it had to be set in the west and in the 60s.

Edited by mwickens

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the movie and walked away quite disapointed. The story is boring, not much going on there. Parts of it are overly sentimental for my taste. In the end it gives me an empty and helpless feeling. I wanted to yell: "NO, it should not be like this!" Besides, for an R rated movie, there isn't nearly enough nude scences! ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't want to see any movie where one guy kisses (or anything else) another whether or not it has cowboys, shepards, or any other profession in it.

Why is Hollywood trying to make everybody gay? Alexander the Great--let's make him gay; Abraham Lincoln on the History Channel--let's start rumors that he was gay; Cowboy's that probably removed some Indians from "their land"--gay.

It's the lefts way of attempting to destroy the value of history's heros.

How does being gay destroy someone's value?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have a complete lack of moral worth. Just by the act of choosing to be "gay" they are destoying their life as a proper man (or woman) should live it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't want to see any movie where one guy kisses (or anything else) another whether or not it has cowboys, shepards, or any other profession in it.

Why is Hollywood trying to make everybody gay? Alexander the Great--let's make him gay; Abraham Lincoln on the History Channel--let's start rumors that he was gay; Cowboy's that probably removed some Indians from "their land"--gay.

It's the lefts way of attempting to destroy the value of history's heros.

Whoa...I don't think homosexuality makes a person any less (potentially) heroic or noble. All it describes is one's sexual preferences.

How can you make that connection?

They have a complete lack of moral worth. Just by the act of choosing to be "gay" they are destoying their life as a proper man (or woman) should live it.

That is just plain bogus. Where is your evidence for this assertion? Since when does one's achievements base themselves on one's sexual orientation? How is virtue contingent on staunch heterosexuality?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently saw this movie with a friend, and I loved it. I won't reveal many details, to avoid spoiling anyone else's experience, but this story is a great example of what can happen to people who chose to avoid reality. Much of the characters' pain (and not just the two men) come from their attempts to deny the obvious, and from their refusals to live for their own sake. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW! Brokeback is indeed the frontrunner in this year's Academy Awards, leading with 8 nominations...

Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role

Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role

Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role

Achievement in Cinematography

Achievement in Directing

Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures (Original Score)

Best Motion Picture of the Year

Adapted Screenplay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a sentimental film - it purposefully plays on the viewers emotions.

it is a conventional film - forgetting that the love is between two men - it follows the basic love-story convention of one character loving one more than the other, of this love being unable to resolve itself, and then one character being left alone at the end.

And it is a beautiful film - the scenery and the imagery are beautiful.

Most of us lead sentimental lives (that is to say, a life with emotion) and most of us lead conventional lives (we like to think we don't). Few of us lead beautiful lives.

I doubt most cowboys were gay - the West would not have been won if the pioneers had been fussing over table arrangements. But on a law of averages I think it is safe to say some of them must have had homosexual relations.

I do not think the film condones adultery either - one of the saddest moments of the film is when the wife of Heath Ledger's character finds her husband with his lover.

The characters DO NOT choose to be gay. Jack Twist (Gyllenhall) certainly leads Ennis del Mar (Heath Ledger) into the first encounter, and they do embrace the happiness they find together but from thereon they do all they can NOT to be gay. The final meeting they have results in a fight because Jack Twist reveals that he cannot fight it, and he wishes he hadn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it is a conventional film - forgetting that the love is between two men - it follows the basic love-story convention of one character loving one more than the other, of this love being unable to resolve itself, and then one character being left alone at the end.

Boy, you watch some depressing movies. When I think of the basic love-story, it always ends with, "And they lived happily ever after..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boy, you watch some depressing movies. When I think of the basic love-story, it always ends with, "And they lived happily ever after..."

Larry David Article

I think this article is true for a lot of people (probably some of you). But I don't think watching the movie is empowering at all, as some people claim. I've seen it and I think it's overrated. A lot of people like it for the same reason that they laugh extra loud at New Yorker cartoons - so that everyone knows that they're tolerant, intellectual and that they "get the message." There IS some beautiful scenery and it IS a unique love story, but it's not what it's hyped up to be.

One aspect of the story that I did think was valuable was its ability to differentiate sexual preference from social constructs. The line between masculine and feminine is becoming less and less concrete as we progress.

They have a complete lack of moral worth. Just by the act of choosing to be "gay" they are destoying their life as a proper man (or woman) should live it.

I don't understand your logic. As an Objectivist, you should embrace homosexuality as the ultimate ideal. I'm not gay, nor am I an Objectivist, but if you are an Objectivist, it seems to follow that, 1.) having children is an altruistic act to further the human race, 2.) by not having children, one is able to pursue their own, pure, self-interest, without the burden and responsibility brought on by having them, 3.) the function of heterosexuality is to have children, 4.) therefore, heterosexuality, for the purpose of having children, lacks any kind of self-interested value (and only holds value as a selfless act). If you're not heterosexual for the sake of having children, then there's no reason for heterosexuality. Of course, at the same time, there's no reason for homosexuality either, but that just makes them rationally equal. If you argue that it's in ones nature to pursue the opposite sex then 1.) reality seems to indicate otherwise, 2.) isn't that an argument for determinism?

I didn't know which topic to include this in, but since I was replying to 2 comments under this topic, I thought I'd leave it here and led a moderator move it to another folder if they thought it was appropriate (I apologize for the inconvenience).

(Mod's note: The discussion on having children has been added to an existing thread.)

Edited by softwareNerd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I saw this movie last night.

It was very pleasing to see such masculine men love each other with such passion. The scenery was beautiful and brought nostalgia for an old fantasy of mine to make love under the mountain stars.

But better stories about gay men can and should be written. I promise I will.

The story of Brokeback is not meant to be a happy one where the two live happily ever after. The message I got from it is how people wreck their lives and their chance at happiness if they don't apply their courage and take the opportunities when they come, especially so early in life. How many men suffer the same tragedy that Ines (Ledger) faces. It is about the importance of, yes, pursuing one's values.

I was surprised to find that the affair lasted so long. I had expected that it would be a one time thing that the two would have to deal with. That they did it for so long and the way they did was amazing. Ines's wife was too weak, though her weakness is crucial for the affair to last.

But a question I kept on asking is why not just go to California or New York and be happy? I have very little sympathy for their tragedy. I hate it when gay men can't face it and hide it and are not comfortable with it. Some don't come out because they want to be famous. Others won't engage in a loving relationship now because they want to have kids at some point. Others are just repressed. It's sad. But there is a legitimate fear to be open about it as there are people who will kill for just looking at them the wrong way, let alone, exposing one's homosexuality. One has to keep one's eyes open, I guess.

Culturally the movie is important. It opens the gateway for movies with gay central characters. Many of the stories I will write will have them. I don't like "gay" stories where the characters are hiding it. I like situations more like the Will and Grace (sitcom) type where the characters' sexuality is taken for granted and the stories are about how interesting life is. I'm not saying that using homosexuality as a technical device in the writing process in regards to the plot, is bad; that can work quite well and I would enjoy to see that. But stories about ethics and stuff, with the sexuality being taken for granted at the outset, is better than the story of Brokeback; it was too obvious, too easy.

Lastly I would like to say that it was a huge treat to see Heath Ledger so rugged and so gay. I've loved him since The Patriot and A Knight's Tale. Seeing him as I write this on a re-run of The Screen Actors Guild Awards is quite pleasing.

Jose Gainza.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do these characters actually do any "gay" things in the movie, such as kiss, love scenes, etc. I just want to know in case someone has the movie playing one day and I stop and watch out of curiousity, I don't want to end up sick to my stomach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...