Brokeback Mountain

[Deckard]

So the the critic Michael Medved said on Good Morning America this week, "This is going to be a very tough movie to sell. For most American guys who are not gay, there's a 'yewwwww' factor to the idea of Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger getting too up-close and personal onscreen."

Hmmm.

The film's leading the pack with Golden Globe nominations, is receiving much critical acclaim, and seems mainstream in every other way.

Question for all the straight males on this forum - do you think the "yewwww" factor may put you off going to see this one?

[mmm skyscraper]

It makes me wonder what the reaction would be if it were girls instead of guys.

The fact that Heath Ledger is in it puts me off regardless of the content.

[GreenPea]

More than the gay stuff what turns me off is the cowboy setting

The girl in there is cute though.

[adam]

It doesn't interest me, exactly, but the acclaim it's getting will probably get me to go see it. There's less than two minutes of the making out in a 170 minute movie, apparently. (I might have those numbers off).

What I'm really curious about is that I'm wondering whether people are raving about it just because, like, "Look, we're praising a mainstream movie about homosexuals! Look how progressive we are!" I mean, I'm curious to see if it's as good as people are saying on it's own merits, or whether there are politics involved in liking it.

The New Yorker reprinted the short story that it's based on. I'm sure you can find it if you google it. I read it the other day...didn't really have much to say about it either way.

[grady]

I saw the film a couple days back and I was farmilar with Annie Proulx short story after reading it in a collection of her work a few years ago. Neither the homosexual nature (the 'yewwwww' factor Deckard) of the story nor the western aspect was a detraction from me seeing it.

Putting those two elements aside for a moment, the film is exquisitely made and the cinematography is beautiful, but I wasn't as WOWED by it as everyone else seems to be among the critical community. It is definently a good film, but not great in my opinion. Both Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal are very good in the film, but Ledger is definently stronger.

The sexual nature of the film is not really graphic in anyway aside from two men kissing and being in each others company sans clothing. It's amusing to hear how people are discussing the reaction to male audiences, but the film is really being marketed in the opposite direction, towards the female crowd. The film is more of a love story set in Wyoming than a gay cowboy romp like some make it out to be.

Are there some people here who will not see the film on the basis of it's subject matter?

[dubman]

seems allright. there isn't anything to be put off by with homosexualism.
people are gay, and people have jobs, and the sky is blue.

shouldn't be that wierd in a movie.

but since good morning america's only job is to keep the early viewers awake during their coffee, they're allowed to be really boring like that.

[adam]

Somebody around here made some weird homophobic comment once (can't remember who), but I think for the most part we're better than that.

[mmm skyscraper]

Originally Posted by grady

Are there some people here who will not see the film on the basis of it's subject matter?

Sure, but I don't really see any drama/love stories. I mean if it was any combination of gender/people, I would probably skip it. At least at the theater.

In the original story, aren't the two guys a lot less attractive than in the movie?

[grady]

Originally Posted by mmm skyscraper

In the original story, aren't the two guys a lot less attractive than in the movie?

I don't remember very much in the way of description of the two guys in the story. It seemed very sparse and simple.

[the mongoose]

So which one's the bitch?