Now I am probably about the 90 bajillionith person to write an entry about Brokeback frikkin' Mountain, but screw that. I just saw it, and Papa's got things to say.
That is if he can put it into words.
I'm finding it very hard to actually verbalize how I felt about the movie, not bcause I loved it or hated it so much that I can't get it out. I just feel so many different things about that particular cinematic experience. So just to ease me into this, let's start with the superficial:
Cowboy wrestling = f-ing hot, ayit? I cannot even express how much fan fiction/erotica I predict will be written about this film. And really, they had it coming. Gyllenhall's character is named Jack Twist. That is so queer. I can imagine a bidding war between the major gay porn studios fighting for the rights to 'Bareback Mountain'.
As for the actual movie, I found the cowboy thing pretty incidental. Yes, it added a certain flavour/fetish to the film, but really, it was the early 60's - they really didn't need cowboys to demonstrate how unacceptable it was for Joe and Jim Average to live happily ever after. Still, given the genre that was chosen, it worked incredibly well. Their was a gruff resentment that usually doesn't appear in any love story, regardless of the sexes. A self-loathing, especially on the part of Heath Ledgers character.
As with any demographically-intrinsic movie, that particular demo is going to see the movie very differently than the rest of the audience. There's always the fear that they're going to make us look bad, which thankfully didn't happen here. There's also an pathos that only that demo can relate to, cause unless you're gay (and I mean really gay; not 'truth or dare' gay), you really can't understand the nature of the relationship. Differently-sexed couples (self-kudos for that term), no matter how forward thinking about equality of the sexes as they may be, will never have potential for an equal balance. It's just not possible. With two people of the same sex, you do have the potential for a Gemini Effect (sounds a lot better than the Olson Effect), because there are certain biological inevitabilities that just naturally fall into place. Perhaps that's why so many gay people have trouble finding a partner. With straight couples, you're dealing with Yin and Yang; you complete each other. You can embrace each others biological strengths and support the weaknesses. It's completely different with gay couples. We can't realistically hope to find a matching piece that fits us. I suppose there are gay couples with very polarized gender roles and I suppose this theory really wouldn't apply to them, but as someone who is neither hyper-masculine or -feminine, I feel it does apply to me and my ideal.
Yet while I was able to relate to it in my own little pink triangle way, I found it very hard to believe in. I'm used to seeing love stories both schlocky and genuine, but they're almost always straight couples so I'm always kinda removed from it. The result is almost like watching a fairy tale. Gives me an Awww moment, but little else, and so I just accept the suspended disbelief. However, watching to guys, it almost feels like an insult. Like, "How dare you feed me this sentimental drivel when it can't possibly exist." This all relates back to my previous entry, which spent far too much time analyzing my feelings on the subject and therefore needs no repeating.
Holy crap. That was ranty.
So, to review: good movie, breeders don't get it*, and Davey's messed.
*Generalized 'it', not Brokback Mountain 'it'. I thought it would flow better if I added that after the fact rather than in the middle of the sentence, don't you think so?