Brokeback Mountain

Status
Not open for further replies.
I REALLY liked it but had a few problems with it. The camerawork was too static and sometimes they'd just cut to random pretty junk in the wilderness for no reason. I think it was the New Yorker that wrote it looked like a bunch of postcards. It really did. Once they took the camera off the tripod, it really felt more visually alive to me. Still well shot.

You didn't know what to make of the cowboys' wives. Even though they're not the film's central focus and even though they're clearly victims, I felt their suffering was pushed to the side a bit, maybe unfairly.

Also, the stacatto pacing reminded me of Closer or something. I like that it took place over a long period of time, so I guess that's inevitable, but it made it a little less engrossing than it could have been.

But it's pretty good for sure.
 
Policar said:
I REALLY liked it but had a few problems with it. The camerawork was too static and sometimes they'd just cut to random pretty junk in the wilderness for no reason. I think it was the New Yorker that wrote it looked like a bunch of postcards. It really did. Once they took the camera off the tripod, it really felt more visually alive to me. Still well shot.

You didn't know what to make of the cowboys' wives. Even though they're not the film's central focus and even though they're clearly victims, I felt their suffering was pushed to the side a bit, maybe unfairly.

Also, the stacatto pacing reminded me of Closer or something. I like that it took place over a long period of time, so I guess that's inevitable, but it made it a little less engrossing than it could have been.

But it's pretty good for sure.
Click to expand...

Policar, your comments really made me think. It is rare that I see a film that stays with me long after I leave the theatre, and this is one of those films. As Isaac said, it is one of those few films that actually stays with me.

Regarding the wives, I thought that Ledgers wife (can't remember her name) had a huge amount of focus. A great example is as he is leaving on a trip and she asks him if he is forgetting something and he grabs the case and then that long shot on her sitting there crying. I think it is the moments like these where Lee allows the image to speak rather than using words or movement, just the actor emoting is what really stuck with me.

I loved the pacing, but find it interesting that you compare it with Closer. Until you said that I never thought of it that way, but I think that you are right. It is like Closer, but it is fully realized. I personally loved the editing and I really think that the long takes are comparable with a Hitchcock film. I'm not bothered by the lack of handheld, the massive pans, and no dolly and crane shots. I just loved how this film is the perfect combination of a love story, great acting, beautiful images, quiet natural sound, and the drama of a true human love story.

I loved this movie.

One thing that did bother me though, and this has nothing to do with the movie itself, but there was a group of 17-20 year olds in the theatre who looked like they had just left the latest Vin Diesel movie and the moment that the two actors first get together (which is one of the most emotional, honest, and revealing examples of forbidden passion revealed on film) they started making all this noise.

With the media exposure on this film, there are no secrets about it. You knew you were going to see a love story about two men. Actually, according to most of the press, you're going to see a gay cowboy movie. Why do these people even bother to see it? That's the only thing that bothered me.

Finally, this is not a gay cowboy movie, that was a misnomer. This is a brilliant love story.
 
Have to wait for the DVD, because I no longer go to theaters.

But, since I'll be ordering it, I might as well order Shampoo, too. Make it a double feature: gay cowboys and straight hairdressers.
 
Yankee...I also agree with you that this is not a "gay western," which is how the media seems to be regularly referring to it. Maybe the studio clung to the "western" moniker so as to make squeamish segments of the audience (i.e., straight men) feel more comfortable that they were going to see a 'masculine movie' (i.e., a western). In fact, Brokeback has absolutely none of the criteria for a western. As you say it's a love story. A really original, unique and compelling love story. But certainly NOT a western: it's not set in the "wild west," for starters, which is pretty much necessary for a western. Brokeback is set in the early 60's and onwards. It has nothing to do with a man in a black hat riding to town. No tension between "good and evil." No gun-slinging. Yes, there are a couple scenes where they're on a horse, and they do wear cowboy hats on occasion, but that's because the story is set in a RURAL area. Again, not the western frontier by any stretch. Anyway, the movie just dug its claws into me and didn't let go. After leaving the theatre, I immediately wished I had NOT seen it--because it was just so powerful I felt like I'd been hit by a truck. Several weeks later, unable to stop thinking about it, I'm going again.

As for the "static cinematography," it reminded me of Japanese filmmakers actually, like Takeshi Miike. And yes, directors like Miike can "over-use" the static image and bore me a little...but with Brokeback I became so involved in that world and the characters I stopped noticing anything about camera movement. Swinging jibs and speeding dollies would have added nothing to the experience for me.

There is one "postcard" shot I remember. A transition of clouds in the sky. It took me out of the movie a moment. I just put it down to needing a transition in post, and finding they didn't have anything except a "beauty shot."

I'll say it again. A freakin' work of art. I'm envious of anyone who could have been involved with a masterpiece like this. I should be so lucky!
 
Oh, and I just gotta ask those on DVXuser who don't wanna see "a movie about two dudes"...are you filmmakers or not? Here is a significant movie in movie history. You can't deny that. Not just because it's about two dudes (there have been HUNDREDS of movies about two dudes). But because this is one of the most original, compelling movies about two HUMAN BEINGS, regardless of gender, ever made. How can a cinephile, or filmmaker, or anyone else interested in the craft and art of storytelling on film not try to see what works and what doesn't? It's like saying I will NOT see the Godfather cuz I don't like wops, or I won't see Star Wars because girls with buns on the side of their head annoy me. Brokeback is going to be a cultural touchstone, and a filmmaking touchstone for sure. Filmmakers will have to see it or suffer a serious gap in their knowledge of the craft of effective storytelling/filmmaking. I'm afraid it's just a fact. It doesn't mean you have to like it (though I have to question the emotional depth of anyone who isn't at least SOMEWHAT moved by it)--I mean, I had to see Citizen Kane, even though I thought it was the most freakin' boring movie ever. There, all you knee-jerk film buffs can lose respect for me now--I call it like I see it is all. :thumbsup:
 
John_Hudson said:
I know I am going to sound shallow; but do we need to see a movie about 2 dudes ?
Click to expand...

Wow, John. I've seen you scold the younger members on this board because they act like they have life all figured out -- John is older and wiser and knows life inside and out. You can't even open your mind long enough to see that a valid love story between "two dudes" can have a place in the movies. Do you think that hetrosexual love is the only valid form of love on this planet? Are you new to this planet? So much for wisdom with age. I haven't seen this film but I'm not so shallow as to dismiss it as just a film trying to be hip (it won four Golden Globes, perhaps there is a reason for this, John; perhaps it is a good film). If you don't want to see this film, fine, but to say "do we need to see a movie about 2 dudes?" is just moronic. You can't stomach this film? You can stomach a bloodfest movie such as The Devil's Rejects but you can't handle a love story? Says a lot.
 
Pen Cap Chew said:
Wow, John. I've seen you scold the younger members on this board because they act like they have life all figured out -- John is older and wiser and knows life inside and out. You can't even open your mind long enough to see that a valid love story between "two dudes" can have a place in the movies. Do you think that hetrosexual love is the only valid form of love on this planet? Are you new to this planet? So much for wisdom with age. I haven't seen this film but I'm not so shallow as to dismiss it as just a film trying to be hip (it won four Golden Globes, perhaps there is a reason for this, John; perhaps it is a good film). If you don't want to see this film, fine, but to say "do we need to see a movie about 2 dudes?" is just moronic. You can't stomach this film? You can stomach a bloodfest movie such as The Devil's Rejects but you can't handle a love story? Says a lot.
Click to expand...

Relax Pen Cap

Say's alot? Say's what cowboy ?

Are you on a crusade because of my singular opinion ? You guy's can start pissing and moaning about it all you wan't. No, I do not wan't to see it. The subject matter is a turn-off to me. Can I have that opinion ? Can I ?

It may not be politically correct but I have the ball's to say it. I must have struck a chord with you because you're practically going into meltdown over it and running your mouth at me. Allow me to have my opinion without the personal attack, yeah ? Let me know if you can't. Cause I can make it real personal if you wan't.

I don't care how well it is filmed, how good the acting is, how great the score is, how compelling the human drama is; I don't wan't to see it. Do I care in the Grand Scheme what people do? No. Do I wanna hear about it? No.

Sue me.

I never said I had lifes answers figured out and do not proclaim to. So before you start attacking me and putting words in my mouth; take a step back and take a chill dude.

It's just an opinion. So please, relax. And think twice before attacking me for it.

Say's alot. You don't know me bro. Cause I don;t wan't to watch a Love Story about two cowboy's I'm the big asshole suddenly ? Now that's moronic.

---
 
I actually agree with Hudson across the board. Suggesting that someone see a movie is one thing. Comparing the film to other movies is one thing, but a personal attack is a complete other thing.

John, I understand why you don't want to see the film, but I think you'll enjoy it and it will be worth a rental for you.

Pen Cap, your post is out of line.
 
Hell, I don't want to see it because it looks extremely boring to me. If it was a movie about hetero cowboys, I still wouldn't see it. If it was a hetero love story, guess what... I wouldn't see it. If it had a guy in a mask killing the cowboys, it might stand a chance with me.
 
Homeboy's reply was waaay out of line.

I can dig it Yankee.

Ironically, I'll probably rent it on DVD when it comes out. Still doesn't mean I am dying to see it.

Ya know Pen Cap, to clarify; I hold no reservation towards gay's or lesbian's or wherever it is you think your implying about me; it doesnt mean I need to watch a film about it. I have ZERO issues with any person's sexuality but the subject matter is 'Bleh...' to me.

So what.
 
Well, I don't think Pen Cap Chew's comments were out of line. No more than many, many posts that express "opinion." Pen Cap said about Hudson: "You can't even open your mind long enough to see that a valid love story between "two dudes" can have a place in the movies. Do you think that hetrosexual love is the only valid form of love on this planet? Are you new to this planet?" Hardly the harshest words one could have chosen. Seem pretty benign to me. Okay, they are critical words...but Hudson...(sorry it has come to this, but perhaps a discussion of this movie inevitably will)...your comments are just plain homophobic. That's how they come across. You say the subject matter just turns you off. That pretty much sounds like: "two dudes kissin' grosses me out." And that does make you sound new to the planet. Then again, your opinion is probably the majority opinion. Which is exactly what the movie is about (yes, it does have something to say, cowboy)--the movie tells us that it is the "majority's opinion" that pretty much ends a decent human being's life, and destroys many others. That's what it's about.
 
Ha ha ha ha. I really laughed out loud. Didn't just type it. Do you care enough to research these opinions? I don't even know what "homosexuality prevailing" means? When it's accepted? Sort of like it might be in Canada? Or Holland? Or California? I guess I'll just wait for the sky to fall. (Damn, I've been baited into this conversation...and now I'm out...I suppose DVXuser is supposed to be about filmmaking, not politics or human rights or human decency.)
 
Niec of you sean90291, to leave out the best parts.

It was this part '.... John is older and wiser and knows life inside and out.... Are you new to this planet? So much for wisdom with age...... Says a lot.'

Homeboys post was very condesending and definately abrasive and makes assumptions and accusations that are way off base.

----

Homophobic ?

I'll make it clear right now in case anyone is wondering; I am not homophobic. I do not care what your sexual orientation is or whether or not you are gay or bi or whatever'

The movie subject matter is not anything I want to watch a film about. Yes, it makes me 'Bleh, shudder, heeb out..' So what. Sorry. Oh well. Get over it.

Since when did I have to openly accept anything ? Open minded ? I opened it and it said 'No, I dont want to see it'.

Big deal.

'John doesnt want to see a movie about two dudes in love. He must be an asshole and a rotten person.'

No, I just dont care to see a movie about two guys in love with eachother.

Any other assumptions or questions ?
 
John, I'm sure we could have a beer, and talk about cameras, and have a good laugh. But at least just admit you're talkin' out both sides of your mouth, my friend. You can't say you're not homophobic, when everything you type says otherwise. Like I said, you're not alone. Your club is way bigger than mine. Just say it out loud: I don't like them people doin' nothin' with no other dude anywhere within my sight.
 
Sean, let it the **** go! If you want to have a conversation with someone do it through PMs but this is not the place to get into **** like that.

Look, everyone has their right to an opinion. The Notebook for example holds no interest for me because it is just that chick flick that crosses the line in my opinion. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I think that Horse made a valid point and honestly, John's point is valid too. I think that everyone needs to mellow out and get back to just discussing the film.

Here's my question, did anyone pay any attention in Gyllenhal's family kitchen at how harsh the white light was?
 
Yup, and I expressed my opinion. The film is about gay love. Inevitably the subject matter would prompt a discussion of people's opinions in this regard. The way that subject matter is treated is certainly part of what makes the film powerful. And the emotional reactions people have to that subject matter will certainly be part of their reaction to the movie (even if they haven't seen it).

And I didn't notice the weird light in the kitchen at all.
 
sean90291 said:
John, I'm sure we could have a beer, and talk about cameras, and have a good laugh. But at least just admit you're talkin' out both sides of your mouth, my friend. You can't say you're not homophobic, when everything you type says otherwise. Like I said, you're not alone. Your club is way bigger than mine. Just say it out loud: I don't like them people doin' nothin' with no other dude anywhere within my sight.
Click to expand...

Watch it buddy

Homophobic implies predjudice. I am not and suggest you don't imply that conclusion again.

'them people ' ? Dude.

Look. I can only say it so many way's and have already said it twice. I figured I'd get a ration of **** for saying it in the first place and did. The manner in which I said it was wrong and I apologize for upsetting anyone.

Admittedly I have no desire to see it purely for the fact it's about 2 guy's. I don't hate homosexual's I just DONT WANT TO WATCH A ****ING MOVIE ABOUT IT.

I agree with Yankee; Mellow out. If you have any further issues with me or my opinon PM me if you're looking for a fight
 
I will see this movie because of what Yankee, Bob, Isaac and Policar said about it. Otherwise I probably wouldn't bother as the subject matter holds no interest for me. Not being homophobic. Just not interested... in two dudes' story... really, nothing else against it.

When I hit "reply" this thread will most likely have a few more posts above mine so this might not be relevant anymore, but what's up with all the jumping on Hudson here? I mean, damn, it's almost like messing with Jarred himself.
If you wanted to piss him off, you could keep it in one post by saying something like:

Here's a fact I don't know whether you know or not. Sicilians were spawned by n...

Ugh I'll just shut up...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top