Brokeback Mountain: Our Community's Common Bond > Brokeback Mountain Open Forum
Does Jack know that is or is not his child?
RossInIllinois:
--- Quote from: brokeplex on February 03, 2008, 04:40:05 pm ---Whoa cowboy! Let the horses munch on some clover for a while and rest.
Lets both agree that the short story and the film are two separate but equally valid creations. Lets both agree that anyone can critique both or either as long as you are careful not to mix the two.
For the purposes of a discussion about Lureen's pregnancy on this thread and also on other threads, I chose information from the film that led me to the conclusion that Jack is not the biological father of Bobby. Many here on Bettermost disagree with my conclusions. I am not a stranger to controversy. On other threads most everyone disagrees with my conclusion that Jack Twist was adopted, or my conclusion that Aguirre is an OK boss, or my conclusion that the heteronorming elements in the film were added by the screenwriters in order to boost marketability - to just name a few.
You can ignore that information which I saw on the film, or believe that it was just a mistake on the part of the director and screenwriters to include that information, or a misinterpretation on my part. All AOK with me.
But to say that there is not valid basis upon which to critique the film if it disagrees with the ss seems rather odd to me. If I am misinterpreting your conclusion, then mea culpa. If not, please tell me why we can not for the purposes of analysis treat the ss and film as separate and distinct works?
--- End quote ---
Besides the mistakes the screen writers or maybe even the prop department that had the cards printed made, NO reference was made in either the movie or the short that the child borne to Laureen Twist was not that of Jack Twist. So why try to make something out of a printing or writing error? Unless you have other evidence you have to rule out the before mentioned first IMO. If a writer was trying to send a message such as you suggest I think a little red headed or blond Bobby would have been a better choice to convey that message don't you think? The Boy they used in the screen play was cast to look like Jack IMO.
Artiste:
Thanks all of you... interesting!!
May I dare ask if Jack and Lureen's Twist child, was maybe adopted??
As some or one of you thought that Jack twist had been adopted maybe or so, then he would have more easily adopted a child?
Hugs!!
RossInIllinois:
--- Quote from: Artiste on February 03, 2008, 05:13:12 pm ---Thanks all of you... interesting!!
May I dare ask if Jack and Lureen's Twist child, was maybe adopted??
As some or one of you thought that Jack twist had been adopted maybe or so, then he would have more easily adopted a child?
Hugs!!
--- End quote ---
Now what in the movie or original short would cultivate such a question?
Artiste:
Ross, to me in the movie that child does not look like Jack nor like Lureen!!
I have other(s) reasons, which maybe I will mention later;
I aks you what makes you think that that child is theirs DNA wise, etc. ??
Hugs!!
brokeplex:
--- Quote from: ineedcrayons on February 03, 2008, 04:52:26 pm --- :laugh: And that's not even getting into the political discussion threads!
I agree that Aguirre is an OK boss (a jerk, but not a bad boss). And I agree that the film is every bit as "real" as the story, and as legitimate a work for analysis. When the film and story diverge, they should be considered separately. But one does not automatically trump the other, possible timeline mistakes and other bloopers notwithstanding.
--- End quote ---
Hi ineedcrayons!
Yep, I forgot that I'm kind of an iconoclast on the "current events" forum too! Its great to be on a web site where almost no one totally agrees with me, but we strive to keep the tone friendly and the discourse informative. I wish that I could convince more conservative gay men to post here, so far not much luck, but I'll keep on trying.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version