Brokeback Mountain: Our Community's Common Bond > Brokeback Mountain Open Forum
The true reason
serious crayons:
Barb, I guess we just read the piece really differently. The way I read it, it's an op-ed column examining one aspect of a much-talked-about and much-misunderstood movie, trying to explain why -- contrary to popular belief at the time -- straight women might find it as appealing as everybody already assumes gay men do.
I didn't think of Daum as intending to present a thorough analysis of the whole movie. She's not writing a review. So she doesn't try to interpret the movie's overall themes. She's a fairly astute person, judging from other things I've read of hers -- her background is as a novelist and literary essayist, writing for the New Yorker and other publications -- so I'm guessing she understood them, but who knows.
For the purposes of this piece, she's not concerned with why Ennis collapses in an alley or waits by the window. If she were discussing the plot, she'd probably mention his emotional repression and loveless marriage (and many other things). I don't think she's claiming that Ennis' expression of emotion shows he is good at communication or mentally healthy. As I read it, all she's saying is that it's refreshing to see men in movies show emotion, period.
--- Quote ---And I have seen movies where straight male characters act that romantic. To name a few: Casablanca, Gone With the Wind, The English Patient, Shakespeare in Love, An Officer and a Gentelman, Pretty Woman, Say Anything, Witness, Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights, Jane Eyre, Emma, The Graduate
--- End quote ---
Yes, those movies feature straight men acting romantic. But do they act as emotional? Do they collapse and vomit in alleys? True, they love their romantic partner. They show longing and tenderness and sadness, go to great lengths on behalf of the woman, etc. But as a rule (and I realize there are many exceptions) they stay "strong" and in control, rarely distraught and vulnerable.
As a kid, I was a huge fan of Gone With the Wind (before I got old enough to be horrified by its racism). Rhett Butler cries only once in that movie, and that's when Scarlett, after a fall down the stairs while pregnant, is hovering on the brink of death. Apparently Clark Gable came close to quitting the movie over having to do that scene. Olivia de Havilland said, in an interview after his death, that she had to talk him into staying. He didn't think it was masculine to cry.
In all the other pivotal moments, Rhett remains stoic, often even bemused. The one other time he gets really emotional -- when he gets angry over Scarlett's continuing attraction to Ashley -- he expresses it by getting drunk and commiting spousal rape (though afterward she doesn't mind). At the end of the movie, Rhett is dry-eyed and Scarlett is sobbing.
Anyway, though, we already know that those other movies appeal to women. Nobody has to write an op-ed piece explaining why. I think Meghan Daum intended simply to show why BBM does, too.
--- Quote ---I'm just saying there is more of a universal appeal to this movie than one that is just for gay men and straight women. I think anyone open-minded enough to see it can help but be drawn in a) by the storytelling and b) by the universal truths about what the damage denial does.
--- End quote ---
I absolutely agree about the storytelling and universal truths. But I don't think Daum contradicts this; it just wasn't what she was trying to discuss in this particular piece.
ednbarby:
That's cool, Katherine. No worries. It being an op-ed piece, she can state whatever opinion she'd like, of course. And I do agree with it to some extent. I think it's natural for straight women to enjoy seeing vulnerability in men on a certain level - it makes us feel closer to them in a way we don't usually get to. I get that. I just think her choice of words and arguments in a couple of cases kinda turned me off is all.
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: ednbarby on August 11, 2006, 02:31:34 pm --- I just think her choice of words and arguments in a couple of cases kinda turned me off is all.
--- End quote ---
OK, that happens. No worries here, either! People read things different ways. I just wanted to explain what I thought she was trying to do. There are already enough idiots out there dissing our movie, so I figured, here's somebody praising it in the country's second-biggest newspaper, maybe we should give her a break.
Fun debating it, though! It's an interesting topic. One of so many this movie inspires.
:-*
dly64:
This is way OT … but I had to mention something, just because I am a lover of films from the 1920’s, 1930’s and 1940’s. (BBM is really the first contemporary movie I have loved …. or at least this degree … period.)
--- Quote from: latjoreme on August 11, 2006, 10:53:55 am ---As a kid, I was a huge fan of Gone With the Wind (before I got old enough to be horrified by its racism). Rhett Butler cries only once in that movie, and that's when Scarlett, after a fall down the stairs while pregnant, is hovering on the brink of death. Apparently Clark Gable came close to quitting the movie over having to do that scene. Olivia de Havilland said, in an interview after his death, that she had to talk him into staying. He didn't think it was masculine to cry.
In all the other pivotal moments, Rhett remains stoic, often even bemused. The one other time he gets really emotional -- when he gets angry over Scarlett's continuing attraction to Ashley -- he expresses it by getting drunk and commiting spousal rape (though afterward she doesn't mind). At the end of the movie, Rhett is dry-eyed and Scarlett is sobbing.
--- End quote ---
Just humor me on this, please. I know this was not your intent, but I wanted to share this anyway.
I wanted to just say a few things about GWTW and other movies from this time period. I try to look at the racism in a few different ways ….
1. The world view was very different at that time
2. There was no such thing as political correctness
3. Rarely were African-Americans represented in a light that emphasized their intelligence. I am not saying that was a good thing. On the contrary,It was a really horrible thing. I am just saying that it is the way it was …) There were a couple of exceptions like “Imitation of Life” in both the 1930s and 1950s versions. The change really started in the late 50’s with the brilliant Sidney Poitier who refused to play stereotypical black roles.
It was this movie, GWTW, that had the first black actor/ actress to win an Oscar (to even be nominated, as a matter of fact). The fabulous Hattie McDaniel was the first to break through that barrier. It was no small feat since it was during a time where racism was very prevalent. I get a kick out of Hattie because she was a strong and opinionated woman. She used to say that she got a lot of grief from the black community because she often played housekeepers or cooks. Her response was, “I’d rather play a housekeeper than be a housekeeper.”
Another issue that is often brought up from this time period is the violence/ dominance of the male leads towards the female leads. (This was something you referenced … when Rhett threatens to crush Scarlett’s scull and then commits spousal rape. The points that I made in regards to racism (from the same time period) are the same for the depiction of violence towards women. Clark Gable’s roles were notoriously controlling, demeaning and violent towards women. In today’s world, we gasp in horror about how the women were treated by the testosterone driven males. Again, I am not condoning violence towards women … not at all. But, during that time period, women found a controlling and somewhat violent male lead as extremely sexy and erotic.
So, in a long-winded way, I am saying that classic films almost always have elements that make us cringe today. But that does not negate the importance or the likeability of any given film. i.e. a person need not feel guilty about loving a film that could not be made the same way today …. such as GWTW. You have every right not to love it …. but it need not be based solely on how a character is portrayed.
That’s my opinion …. “for what it’s worth …”
silkncense:
--- Quote --- why should this movie be any more of a draw for straight women in general than any other beautiful love story ever filmed? I honestly don't think it is. If it were, every red-blooded woman we all know who usually likes such stories would have seen it by now. And every one who has would be a Brokie.
--- End quote ---
I agree with this. I do not think the draw for women (or gay men for that matter) is the romantic story it portrays exclusively. For me, the impact was ultimately about fear & regret & that transcends many areas of peoples lives. The love story is the vehicle that carries the message (and what a beautiful vehicle to carry us along).
Another thing that isn't true for me personally. EVERYONE knows how I feel about the message & movie of Brokeback Mountain. I think it is an important message for everyone & I have tried (unsuccessfully often) to convince very religious individuals, Christian, Jewish & Muslim to see this film & to try to understand the underlying message of love, fear & regret & that it affects all people.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version