I wonder if it's a reaction to the overabundance of manufactured sentimentality that comes with this time of year, or if I'm just naturally this jaded, but my cynicism seems to be nearer and nearer the surface. Perhaps it can't be helped when your country is in the midst of a federal election; it's an automatic defence mechanism that kicks in whenever a politician opens his or her mouth telling you they care.
Or maybe it comes from reading the newspapers. Politicians trying to make a connection between exploiting wildlife preserve and providing financial relief to people devastated by Hurricane Katrina does nothing to improve my opinion of the human race. The President of the United States supporting illegal wiretapping of American residents on the grounds of national security without revealing who the subjects were (shades of Richard Nixon's enemies list) leaves you thinking about all the ways that can misused. (If I were Michael Moore I would make damn sure I have a really good accountant for the audits he'll be undergoing for the next ten years)
Wherever it comes from it seems to be making me cast a jaundiced eye over just about everything that I see. Perhaps this goes a long way to explaining my reaction to all the hype surrounding Brokeback Mountain, or as I'm calling it in my head, Guys in Chaps. I know it's supposed to be this big breakthrough movie with two mainstream actors having gay love scenes and all that, but still something about it sticks in my craw.
A lot of it could be a reaction to Hollywood and its inability to accept that something has to be grandiose to appeal to people. Instead of a tale of unrequited love between two gay accountants in the early sixties it has to be two rugged he-men cowboys for them. They seem to forget that even today it takes a certain amount of courage to go public in mainstream society about your love for a person of the same sex.
Forget about all the hoopla surrounding celebrity unions like Sir Elton's and think for a second about life in the Midwestern United States or the Bible Belt. How many men and women live lives of quiet misery unable to ever admit their feelings for fear of shunning and potential injury to this very day?
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
1 - mark
There is something to what you are saying. Ther ehave been a few films that have not treated gayness as the centerpiece of identity ..the one with Peter Finch, Sunday, Bloody Sunday ..and another called The Killing of Sister George. All before the politicization of sexual orientation... which had much justification once and still does at times.
But I think you are confusing the reception of Brokeback with the film itself which is pre-Stonwall and pre-sexual identity focus in some rspects.
I have a new blog
2 - Chris Evans
This is not an ISSUE film. I think you're forgetting this movie is based on a short story that author Annie Proulx didn't even think would ever get published. This is a story about star-crossed lovers--possibly the oldest romance story ever told. This is not a film that was made to try to "break ground" or change anyone's mind or make a political statement. This is a story of two people who for whatever reason cannot openly be in love with each other (which if that isn't as normal a story as any, I don't know what planet you've been living on). How many times have we had stories about straight people who are in love that can't because their love if forbidden? Ever heard of this starving artist named William Shakespeare?
3 - jen
Nicely put, Chris.
4 - Mel
Indeed, nicely put, Chris :D
I often tend to believe that marginalisation of *anything* is in people's own heads. There have been people, stories etc since the beginning of time that have gone beyond what was accepted as the norm during their times, and have only been that much richer and more interesting/creative for it. And there have been "conformist" people, stories etc that have been there, as general "types" and themes, throughout the ages, as safe and relevant options at each point in history.
Eventhough this is a vague generalisation, I think that in this light such subjects should be clear to everyone and not cause any unnecessary frustration. The film in question is one I haven't watched yet (I probably will soon), but I wouldn't be worried by the theme or its reception by the public, or the reasons why it was brought out. Film watching is a personal experience, to be interpreted by anyone along the lines of how relevant it is to each member of the audience's priorities, interests, personality etc. There's films out there to speak to anyone - someone may NEED this story to be told, either for its "popularising of homosexuality by depicting it with famous actors" or whatever, or just for its timeless sub-themes - or even for its photography or acting or lighting or whatever...
Don't fret, and don't let what you believe might be "the reasons why they made the film" spoil your enjoyment of it. It's just a shame, for you.
If your problem is sociological - that people "use" the effect of homosexuality or similar themes for popular appeal - consider the reasons for this before you complain. Consider the fact that there are people out there who need this step to give them hope that, if they're showing it on screen, it might actually be accepted 100% by society at some point in the future. Maybe you accept it as "normal" already, but, regretfully, not everyone does yet. And if it's a first, it's a first, whether it should have been done earlier or not, and people will tend to treat it that way.
5 - Mel
Oh and, by the way, love the title anyway ;)
And the song it's referencing :P
6 - Alisha Karabinus
Gman, I get the sense that you haven't actually SEEN the movie... and you certainly didn't seem to know that it was based on a short story. I'm not really seeing how any of this has any basis in reality.
Now, I agree with your sentiment in general about a desire to see homosexual relationships normalized and just a part of life (as in your Two Weeks Notice example), but I think you're failing to look at this movie from a historical perspective, which is really very necessary when examining Brokeback Mountain. It's NOT set today. NOTHING is matter of fact about the relationship between these two men. They DO IN FACT suffer in silence.
And Chasing Amy hardly takes homosexuality as completely normal. It's the issue on which the entire film hangs. As a social issue? Yes, it's accepted. But several characters struggle with different elements of their sexuality, which just goes to show... even when it's accepted, it can still be hard to accept who and what you are. That hardly translates to everything being matter-of-fact.