The W
Views: 97645097
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
24.7.07 1518
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - The Hollywood Agenda: BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN (contains film spoilers)
This thread has 2 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 Next(165 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (45 total)
Lexus
Bierwurst
Level: 82

Posts: 767/1807
EXP: 5201989
For next: 7260

Since: 2.1.02
From: Stafford, VA

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
#21 Posted on 15.1.06 1250.51
Reposted on: 15.1.13 1250.52
On an off note, some of my friends and I knew a guy who we called gay cowboy. I wrote a song about it, but due to the fact that this is a current events board and it being tasteless, I won't.

I will say that Hollywood has also made films that depict children being far smarter than adults (Home Alone), that depict old people as venerable yet wacky (Cocoon), and that depict my cellular structer as being a really wild town (Osmosis Jones). Homosexual acts have been in Hollywood for years, such as Sparticus, Deliverance, and at the risk of sounding crass, any of those overly faggy Bing Crosby/Bob Hope movies. They called them 'romps' for a reason, after all. The Hollywood Agenda, you say? Last I checked they had one agenda, to make a wad of cash off of general public, aka the huddled masses. So they take a story that includes a hot button issue, like they have before thousands of times, and push it out onto the big screen. Next thing you know, millions are talking about it because it contains a hot button issue in some context, and now you have a high dollar film.

The biggest thing in this country is that people can not draw a distinct line between homophobia and being strait. Why is that? I would find it reprehensible to rub my genetalia against another man for the same reason I'd find it reprehensible to rub them against a cactus, a Ford Pinto, a ficus tree, a lamp, or my dog. Frankly, my penis doesn't go there because I have no desire, not because I dislike gay people. Hell, I love my dog, I like my lamp, I'm fond of my ficus, and get a kick out of it whenever I see a Pinto, but that doesn't mean I'm going to whip my tallywhacker out and attempt to make myself climax with their aide. I'm not a homophobe because I don't want to simulate sex with a man; after all, nobody says anything when I don't simulate sex with many other things I wouldn't normally have sex with.

Now you must excuse me for not sighting any of my gay friends, because I'm not writing this for them. This goes out for the sake of common sense. And I leave you with a question, just to avoid offending people.

What's the difference between a fag and a gay man? A fag would never answer the question, so there must be a difference.
Cerebus
Knackwurst
Level: 108

Posts: 1559/3451
EXP: 13242395
For next: 278148

Since: 17.11.02

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 18 hours
#22 Posted on 15.1.06 1441.35
Reposted on: 15.1.13 1441.35
    Originally posted by Lexus
    What's the difference between a fag and a gay man? A fag would never answer the question, so there must be a difference.


Funny, I've asked this same question before and I did get an answer.

A few years ago, I can't remember why I was with him, but my friend Chris had to go to the courthouse for a reason I can't remember now; but there were some gay protesters outside with signs and all chanting 'We're queer, we're here...' et al. and were dressed rather idioticly as I remember wearing extrelemy bright colored clothing that was too small for them. Chris stopped me once we got inside and said "I'm gay, THOSE were fags, don't ever forget this."
Stilton
Frankfurter
Level: 56

Posts: 753/793
EXP: 1380187
For next: 17998

Since: 7.2.04
From: Canada

Since last post: 3093 days
Last activity: 3092 days
#23 Posted on 15.1.06 2024.25
Reposted on: 15.1.13 2025.00
    Originally posted by El Nastio
      Originally posted by Stilton
      If people weren't homophobic they wouldn't bring it up in the first place,


    I disagree. If you're opposed to something rather strongly, it makes sense to speak up about it.


Dude, being strongly opposed to homosexuality is the freakin definition of homophobia. The Ku Klux Klan are opposed to black people rather strongly, and they speak out against them, and by gum the KKK are still a bunch of bigoted assholes.

    Originally posted by Lexus
    What's the difference between a fag and a gay man? A fag would never answer the question, so there must be a difference.


Gay people used the word "fag" the same way black people use the word "nigger" amongs one another in hip hop culture, as a way to reclaim the bigotry they face every day.

(edited by Stilton on 15.1.06 2217)
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 211

Posts: 7227/16100
EXP: 138702127
For next: 29739

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#24 Posted on 15.1.06 2143.35
Reposted on: 15.1.13 2143.41
    Originally posted by Stilton
    Dude, being strongly opposed to homosexuality is the freakin definition of homophobia.
Dude... I believe it's actually something like "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against dictionary definitions."

    The Ku Klux Klan are opposed to black people rather strongly, and they speak out against them, and by gum the KKK are still a bunch of bigoted assholes.
And I now believe we have now moved far, far astray of the original subject...whatever it was.

Perhaps we all could start reconsidering whether it's really worth it to extend this thread. In return, *I* will reconsider MY decision to not say anything after your FIRST post in this thread.
Lexus
Bierwurst
Level: 82

Posts: 769/1807
EXP: 5201989
For next: 7260

Since: 2.1.02
From: Stafford, VA

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
#25 Posted on 20.1.06 0511.44
Reposted on: 20.1.13 0512.06
    Originally posted by Stilton
    Gay people used the word "fag" the same way black people use the word "nigger" amongs one another in hip hop culture, as a way to reclaim the bigotry they face every day.


Right. And I, as a white person, use Honky, Cracker, or White Bread on a consistent basis to describe other caucasians. Reclaiming bigotry sounds just plain idiotic to me, maybe you could explain that one. After all, designating certain words as acceptable for some but not for all infringes on my (American) Civil Liberties.

A fag is a cigarette, and a faggot is a bundle of sticks to be burned on a fire (I know, just like a dude is one who is inexperienced). I'm not sure what your definition of a fag is, but I commonly associate it to somebody who is a coward. I commonly associate queer with somebody who is homosexual, but TV even says that's okay (ahem, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy). I can not say that all gay people are cowards, thus I can't say that all gay people are fags.
raygun
Chorizo
Level: 27

Posts: 133/142
EXP: 112028
For next: 4132

Since: 24.7.02
From: winnipeg

Since last post: 2941 days
Last activity: 486 days
#26 Posted on 20.1.06 1325.15
Reposted on: 20.1.13 1325.28
You want real anti-film sentiment? Just wait until May when the DaVinci Code hits theatres . . .
Parts Unknown
Lap cheong
Level: 80

Posts: 1416/1703
EXP: 4759320
For next: 23669

Since: 2.1.02
From: Darkenwood

Since last post: 22 days
Last activity: 21 hours
#27 Posted on 20.1.06 1541.24
Reposted on: 20.1.13 1541.36
Okay. This is the first time I've said anything about the movie to anyone, but I'm just going to be totally honest:

I'm sick of people saying "it's not the fact that this is a gay cowboy movie that bothers me." I'll go ahead and be the first (and only) person I know that will be truthful: I am bothered precisely because this is a gay cowboy movie.

Am I homophobic? I guess so. But it doesn't bother me because I see no sense in homosexual activity. To me, it is disgusting and stupid. I won't apologize for how I feel. I think a lot of people feel the same way. When i was in the theater and first saw a trailer for Brokeback Mountain, nearly everyone in the theater loudly groaned when it became apparent this was about gay cowboys.

I am sickened by the image - and even thought - of men kissing or doing other things with each other. I am traditional. It is not because of some religious hangup; I simply like women. Some would say it only bothers me because DEEP DOWN, I'm truly GAY and just won't admit it.

All that being said, I choose NOT to see this movie, yet I somehow feel guilty about my decision not to see it. I am a movie fanatic and I feel almost pressured to go see it, like I'm not a real movie fan or I'm a hateful Nazi or I'm old-fashioned or I'm stupid because I won't go see it. Or maybe I just fear having my preconceptions challenged.

Either way, homosexuality makes me want to puke. But if you do it, that's fine; I just don't want to have to watch you kiss another man. And if you want to see this movie, fine. Go ahead. It does not offend me that this movie exists.

I guess you could say I have all the same conflicts the majority of Americans have about this film.
Leroy
Andouille
Level: 91

Posts: 665/2249
EXP: 7194445
For next: 274496

Since: 7.2.02
From: Huntington, NY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 2 hours
#28 Posted on 20.1.06 1922.27
Reposted on: 20.1.13 1922.34
    Originally posted by Parts Unknown
    I simply like women. Some would say it only bothers me because DEEP DOWN, I'm truly GAY and just won't admit it.


Well, here's something to consider:

University study of homophobia

    Originally posted by from the APA Press Release

    Men in both groups were aroused by about the same degree by the video depicting heterosexual sexual behavior and by the video showing two women engaged in sexual behavior. The only significant difference in degree of arousal between the two groups occurred when they viewed the video depicting male homosexual sex: 'The homophobic men showed a significant increase in penile circumference to the male homosexual video, but the control [non-homophobic] men did not.'


    ......

    When asked to give their own subjective assessment of the degree to which they were aroused by watching each of the three videos, men in both groups gave answers that tracked fairly closely with the results of the objective physiological measurement, with one exception: the homophobic men significantly underestimated their degree of arousal by the male homosexual video.


So, not only was the homophobic group more likely to be aroused when exposed to homosexual porn, but they were also more likely to LIE ABOUT IT.

Now, this is a complicated issue. And while I think there are some interesting conclusions one could make from this, I don't think this should be interpreted in such a way as to suggest that all or most "homophobes" are gay.

What I think it DOES suggest is that sexuality is a complicated matter. And that most homophobes have a completely irrational and emotional response to something they don't understand.

If you are willing to admit that you are "repulsed" because you don't understand homosexuality, that's one thing. But if you are "repulsed" because you "hate gays", well, then I've wasted a whole lot of my time...

(edited by Leroy on 20.1.06 1730)
Stilton
Frankfurter
Level: 56

Posts: 764/793
EXP: 1380187
For next: 17998

Since: 7.2.04
From: Canada

Since last post: 3093 days
Last activity: 3092 days
#29 Posted on 20.1.06 2300.10
Reposted on: 20.1.13 2300.34
    Originally posted by CRZ
      Originally posted by Stilton
      Dude, being strongly opposed to homosexuality is the freakin definition of homophobia.
    Dude... I believe it's actually something like "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against dictionary definitions."


So, like, then, in other words, in this context, since there is no rational reason, then, literally, "strongly opposed to". Thanks for clearing that up, Noah Webster.

Well, I just saw Brokeback Mountain tonight and I'm still reeling from it. This is by FAR the best, most powerful film I've seen in the last 12 months, if not longer. I feel sorry for those who either can't or refuse to appreciate its greatness because they're "strongly opposed" to cowboys, or whatever. Ang Lee delivers again. If you liked The Ice Storm and The Hulk.....

Love thy neighbor.

Cheers.

(edited by Stilton on 21.1.06 0001)
Nuclear Winter
Boudin rouge
Level: 47

Posts: 283/524
EXP: 750098
For next: 16111

Since: 9.11.03
From: Bedford, Michigan

Since last post: 115 days
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
#30 Posted on 21.1.06 2238.01
Reposted on: 21.1.13 2238.04
    Originally posted by Stilton
    Well, I just saw Brokeback Mountain tonight and I'm still reeling from it. This is by FAR the best, most powerful film I've seen in the last 12 months, if not longer. I feel sorry for those who either can't or refuse to appreciate its greatness because they're "strongly opposed" to cowboys, or whatever. Ang Lee delivers again. If you liked The Ice Storm and The Hulk.....


I think you may have just hurt your own argument by talking about how powerful Brokeback Mountain is, then putting it on the level of Hulk.
Stilton
Frankfurter
Level: 56

Posts: 767/793
EXP: 1380187
For next: 17998

Since: 7.2.04
From: Canada

Since last post: 3093 days
Last activity: 3092 days
#31 Posted on 22.1.06 0549.54
Reposted on: 22.1.13 0550.49
    Originally posted by Nuclear Winter
      Originally posted by Stilton
      Well, I just saw Brokeback Mountain tonight and I'm still reeling from it. This is by FAR the best, most powerful film I've seen in the last 12 months, if not longer. I feel sorry for those who either can't or refuse to appreciate its greatness because they're "strongly opposed" to cowboys, or whatever. Ang Lee delivers again. If you liked The Ice Storm and The Hulk.....


    I think you may have just hurt your own argument by talking about how powerful Brokeback Mountain is, then putting it on the level of Hulk.



Now now.. I was just trying to be populist. Check out the "Print" section on this site. Most W's would rather read the funnies than the short stories of Annie Proulx.
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 1901/2093
EXP: 6481432
For next: 169258

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 3 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
#32 Posted on 24.1.06 1319.15
Reposted on: 24.1.13 1319.15
This movie was the EXACT SAME PLOT as EVERY Hollywood romance. Name me ONE Hollywood Romance who's basic plot isn't "Our souls were meant to be as one but the cruel realities of the world we live in somehow conspire to keep this mystical, magical connection from ever happening as it should." That plot has been done 1000 times with a man and a woman. It's probably been at leats a dozen times with straight cowboys. It gets done ONCE with two gay cowboys and all of a sudden Hollywood's agenda is to make everyone think the Marlboro Man is gay. There's a GAY RODEO CIRCUIT. Hollywood's BEHIND the times on this one.
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 1516/3336
EXP: 13011352
For next: 80001

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#33 Posted on 24.1.06 1344.21
Reposted on: 24.1.13 1344.43
    Originally posted by MoeGates
    This movie was the EXACT SAME PLOT as EVERY Hollywood romance.


I agree with you 100%. 100%. So Why is THIS film the greatest film of our time, why does this tired old plot get every award.

Oh. Yeah.
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst
Level: 103

Posts: 2182/3059
EXP: 11457760
For next: 13685

Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1896 days
Last activity: 1830 days
#34 Posted on 24.1.06 1350.01
Reposted on: 24.1.13 1351.51
Whoa whoa whoa. Who the fuck is calling it the greatest film of our time?

And it's winning every award going because it's exceptionally well-made, well-acted and deftly handled. Was Gladiator a unique story? Was Titanic? Was Braveheart? Do people stop awarding new productions of Romeo And Juliet because we've seen it all before?
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 1902/2093
EXP: 6481432
For next: 169258

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 3 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
#35 Posted on 24.1.06 1743.09
Reposted on: 24.1.13 1743.35
Other than "Before Sunset," this was the only halfway decent straight romance (I mean not romantic comedy - no pun intended) that Hollywood's done in a while - really since Shakespear in Love. The straight romance is a little bit of a lost art.

This Movie's a legit Oscar contender, which is may or may not deserve. It hasn't swept the Oscar's. It's not being mentioned in the same breath as "Casablanca." I can't really think of 5 better movies in 2005, but I haven't seen that many.

This is basically a debate between "You only think it's so good because it's about Gay Cowboys" and "You only think it's overrated because it's about Gay Cowboys." We are as a society, unfortunately not really at the point where it can be judged solely on its merits quite yet.
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 1517/3336
EXP: 13011352
For next: 80001

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#36 Posted on 24.1.06 2013.05
Reposted on: 24.1.13 2013.16
    Originally posted by MoeGates
    This is basically a debate between "You only think it's so good because it's about Gay Cowboys" and "You only think it's overrated because it's about Gay Cowboys." We are as a society, unfortunately not really at the point where it can be judged solely on its merits quite yet.


Exactly, Moe. We don't agree often, but this is exactly the situation. That's all I have said in my posts. I don't freaking CARE about whether Brokeback is good or not. I suspect it is a mediocre love story - not much different than, say, My Best Friend's wedding. Perhaps it is better than that. I doubt i will see it, other than the lengthy clips I have seen.

That doesn't mean it's bad or good. I didn't see Dukes of Hazzard - and I am thinking that's a probably less than a classic. I also never saw The Royal Tennenbaums or The Pianist, which many people have told me are excellent movies. I did see many of the most popular movies this past year (Batman, Narnia, Star Wars, Fantastic Four0, and found all I saw entertaining.

My point in all this is that this movie has received all the push, both heel and face because the romantic leads are both male. And that's probably not right, probably in either case. But I doubt that the ones giving it a heel push would be doing it, if the face push wasn't coming down our throats (no relation to the plot).

I did just see (today) Edge of the Sword - great movie about an important topic. Bet it gets no push, outside of a small base.

Why is it that similarly great movies, or similarly mediocre movies, get disproportionately different pushed from Mass media? It is my contention that Mass Media is biased toward a particular agenda - moving people to a more leftist position, and since they have the media, they can push the agenda.
asteroidboy
Andouille
Level: 90

Posts: 2215/2241
EXP: 7168527
For next: 20109

Since: 22.1.02
From: Texas

Since last post: 1338 days
Last activity: 246 days
#37 Posted on 24.1.06 2105.16
Reposted on: 24.1.13 2105.17
    Originally posted by AWArulz
    Exactly, Moe. We don't agree often, but this is exactly the situation. That's all I have said in my posts. I don't freaking CARE about whether Brokeback is good or not. I suspect it is a mediocre love story - not much different than, say, My Best Friend's wedding.


Right. Well, thanks for weighing in on the merits of a movie you didn't see, what a valuable post. Also, between Brokeback, Royal Tennenbaums and The Pianist, you missed three really good movies.

*****Spoilers*****





I did see the movie and was pretty uncomfortable with the first love scene between the two. And the subsequent kissing in the tent.

But after the initial shock, it wasn't an issue any longer. Maybe it was desensitization, but as a viewer, I adapted and moved on. What followed was a love story that was remarkably crafted and beautifully acted.

In response to the previous posts, what made this movie different from the formulaic story about two lovers that are kept apart because of circumstances is that Brokeback fleshes out its characters in much greater detail than tripe like "My Best Friend's Wedding."

The difference is, like in all good movies, we get to see the lead actors in shades of gray. We see the consequences of them not following their hearts. They get married, they cheat on their wives (who then harden and become bitter), they drink, they fight, they act out. We see this progression in all of their lives, of people dealing with the realities of the world they live in. Those realities turn out to be crushing.

I don't know if you CAN separate the gay aspect of the movie and try to compare it to a regular romantic comedy with Julia Roberts, because the two men are having to struggle to cope with their identities in a very hostile environment. The fact that they could be killed for showing affection to each other colors everything they do. It also raises the stakes, proving that they must care for each other a great deal, just to spend time with each other year after year. It's more than a gimmick or a plot device, one man's love for another man is both their salvation and their ruination.

It's that dichotomy that makes the film work and it's what makes it so powerful. You care about not just the two men, but you empathize with their wives, who both husbands are immeasurably cruel to. And you REALLY care at the end, when the two get torn apart permanently.

So, yeah. I cared about all of them. Especially the gay cowboys. Sorry. Guess the Hollywood agenda worked on me, but to be honest, I didn't hate gays in the first place and I'm from small-town Texas. Sorry again.

And if the movie causes a few people to hate gays less, or just to look at them as people and not a political wedge issue, I'm not sorry at all if that upsets some of you.

(edited by asteroidboy on 24.1.06 2134)
Eddie Famous
Andouille
Level: 90

Posts: 1370/2182
EXP: 6918685
For next: 269951

Since: 11.12.01
From: Catlin IL

Since last post: 243 days
Last activity: 237 days
#38 Posted on 24.1.06 2112.36
Reposted on: 24.1.13 2113.06
(deleted by CRZ on 24.1.06 2121)
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst
Level: 103

Posts: 2184/3059
EXP: 11457760
For next: 13685

Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1896 days
Last activity: 1830 days
#39 Posted on 25.1.06 0343.00
Reposted on: 25.1.13 0343.00
    Originally posted by AWArulz
    Why is it that similarly great movies, or similarly mediocre movies, get disproportionately different pushed from Mass media? It is my contention that Mass Media is biased toward a particular agenda - moving people to a more leftist position, and since they have the media, they can push the agenda.


This happens EVERY YEAR. Films of all stripes get championed by the critical elite, regardless of political agenda or subtext. We've seen all kinds of movie pushed as the number one critical smash over the past decade. And yes, often it seems that liberalism is a more familiar concept. Thats because art and issues often go hand-in-hand, and art and thoughtful, intelligent examination even moreso. How many studied dramas pushing Republican values are there?

Besides, you've got nothing to worry about when it comes to hypocritical Hollywood. In an industry where it would be career suicide for a lead actor to announce his homosexuality, pushing a gay-themed movie smacks more of congratulatory backslapping than any serious dedication to the issue itself.
asteroidboy
Andouille
Level: 90

Posts: 2216/2241
EXP: 7168527
For next: 20109

Since: 22.1.02
From: Texas

Since last post: 1338 days
Last activity: 246 days
#40 Posted on 25.1.06 0406.49
Reposted on: 25.1.13 0408.40
The reason it got all the media attention is because it was the first major Hollywood release with two gay leads and had major young actors playing the roles. That's news.

The media picked up on that because it's something NEW, it's not some liberal Zionist plot to convert your children to sodomy. But what's more, they jumped on it because it's easy to report on, it contains a certain sensational quality, and can be explained easily by idiot reporters reading telepromters.

The promotion and news converage has nothing to do with AWA's magic Illuminati theory, although I doubt anyone can convince him otherwise. It has much more to do with America being behind the times on gay issues and lazy reporters jumping at a relatively easy coverable piece of Hollywood infotainment.

I agree there was probably some Hollywood back-slapping involved with them being proud of themselves for enlightening the rubes in the flyover zone. But as OSH pointed out, Hollywood is traditionally chickenshit about this issue, because it could potentially mess with profits. So they're not above reproach. They're just trying to make money, not dictate the cultural direction of the country. Neither is the media, sorry to dissappoint you.
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 NextThread ahead: Is a Bias toward one political slant OK for a journalist?
Next thread: Canadian Election Hits Homestretch
Previous thread: New nutjob on shortwave
(165 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - The Hollywood Agenda: BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN (contains film spoilers)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.3 seconds.