BetterMost, Wyoming & Brokeback Mountain Forum

Brokeback Mountain: Our Community's Common Bond => Brokeback Mountain Open Forum => Topic started by: bbm_stitchbuffyfan on April 09, 2006, 12:50:08 am

Title: Actors' restraint
Post by: bbm_stitchbuffyfan on April 09, 2006, 12:50:08 am
So, I'm sure that a lot of you know that, allegedly, Ang Lee told his actors to restrain in this movie. You probably noticed while watching the movie.

Now here is what I would like to know: why do you think he wanted it that way?
It sure keeps the performances and the film itself from going anywhere near over-the-top. And which scenes do you think Jake, Heath, Anne, or Michelle restrained in? (I can think of at least one or two examples for each.)

Thoughts/comments?

www.jlodown.com (http://www.jlodown.com)
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: YaadPyar on April 09, 2006, 12:11:41 pm
Restrained for two reasons:

1.  Because the cultural mileu of the time and place is a restrained one.  Folks in the rural west are taciturn and stoic, not prone to talking about feelings or experiences.  The characters had to be true to that reality, and so talking for the sake of conveying anything non-essential had to be kept to an absolute minimum.  Otherwise the audience loses the honesty of the experience.

2.  Ang Lee seems very intersted in the audience being fully engaged in the emotional experience of the characters, and wants the viewer's to be placed squarely in the middle of the story.  For this reason, the actors must never so fully experience and express their emotional nature that nothing is left for the audience to feel.  Melodrama can create emotional experience, but not the kind that lingers or lives on.  With the very restrained performances in BBM, the audience finished the story and felt the emotions of the characters fully, and far beyond the theater experience. 

I think that's why we walked out feeling something, but needing days, weeks or even months to understand it - just as it took Ennis so long to understand what he felt. 
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: silkncense on April 09, 2006, 12:53:39 pm
Yaadpyar -

Great post.  And the directing is then also true to the authors vision:  "It is my feeling that a story is not finished until it is read, and that the reader finishes it through his or her life experience, prejudices, world view and thoughts." -- Annie Proulx
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: opinionista on April 09, 2006, 12:57:29 pm
Because the cultural mileu of the time and place is a restrained one.  Folks in the rural west are taciturn and stoic, not prone to talking about feelings or experiences. 

Jake Gyllenhaal said in a interview he had a lot of trouble with this. That he is a very expressive person who like to talk about almost everything and the fact that Ang Lee wanted him to restrain himself, made the experience harder for him that it was for Heath, for example. He says Heath is less expressive than he is. 

However, I think the fact that he is so expressive was what made him play Jack so well. I don't know him and have never seen him in person, but he strikes me as someone who makes a lot of eye contact. And in my opinion that characteristic of his played an important role in his performance as Jack. At the confrontation scene, for instance, when Ennis is telling Jack about wanting to kill him for having been to Mexico, Jack is quietly listening. But the expression on his face tells much more that words would. You can tell by his eyes how much Ennis' words are hurting Jack. Jake managed to convey so much feelings through his eyes, that it made me wonder if Jake himself felt hurt by those words.
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: bbm_stitchbuffyfan on April 09, 2006, 09:40:06 pm
Some excellent replies!

It's truly astonishing how even the directing of this film echoes the writing style of the original story. Ang Lee really is a genius. Like yaadpyar was explaining, I agree that it helped us feel the characters' emotions and that is what I think worked so, so brilliantly.

I can see Jake Gyllenhaal being a very expressive person but I am not trying to be presumptuous or anything, considering I've only seen him in interviews. Next time I watch the movie, I'll look at his eyes when Ennis threatens him about Mexico. I agree that Jake used his eyes to an excellent benefit in his performance; he made some expressions that were just amazing.

www.jlodown.com (http://www.jlodown.com)
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: Toast on April 10, 2006, 12:09:41 am

I think the restraint is what gave us the feeling that we wanted more of every scene. 

We were conttinually dragging our feelings into the next scene.

The feeling created is one of incompleteness of our experience.

Just like the incompleteness of the lives we were watching.

Amazing effect.  Less is so much more in this film.

Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: serious crayons on April 10, 2006, 02:06:58 am
Ang Lee seems very intersted in the audience being fully engaged in the emotional experience of the characters, and wants the viewer's to be placed squarely in the middle of the story.  For this reason, the actors must never so fully experience and express their emotional nature that nothing is left for the audience to feel.

Well put, Celeste! And you too, Toast!

The emotional restraint draws viewers into the characters' heads. Because we have to figure out what they're thinking rather than being told what to think we develop more empathy for them. And we get to be moved by the events of the story rather than the actors' emoting. Also, the restraint helps maintain the momentum of emotion. For instance, you might assume that after Ennis read the final postcard, or got off the phone with Lureen, he would be distraught, perhaps collapsing with grief. But showing that would undermine the power of the scenes to follow at the Twist home and then in his trailer. Instead, Ennis exhibits a bit more emotion each time, as the scenes get progressively sadder and sadder and finally almost unbearably poignant and sad.

Whenever anybody who hasn't seen the movie asks me why I think it's so good, I say something to the effect of, It's a really powerful story told with incredible subtlety and restraint. Of course there are a million other things I could praise about it. But to me, it's that stark contrast above all else that makes the film so moving.
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: amh on April 10, 2006, 04:27:15 pm
Other posters have mentioned Jake's acting when he is *quiet* during the lake confrontation scene, which is true.  But I also think he showed restraint when he finally lets it all out at Ennis during this scene too. 

Sure, he's emotional, and the most emotional he's ever been with Ennis.  But he still delivers this emotional outburst *just* far enough without going overboard.  Particularly when he delivers the final "I wish I knew how to quit you" line.  It bothers me so much that this line has been parodied and made a joke of.  Because the way Jake delivers that line to me is *just perfect*, and one of the most emotional, heart-wrenching moments of the film, a pivotal turning point that causes Ennis to finally break down, and with Jack's delivery of that line the emotional pain he's carrying seemlessly shifts from Jack onto Ennis.

I love Heath and his performance.  But as I type this again I am reminded how completely *underrated* I think Jake is throughout this film.  His acting is just as astonishing. 
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: YaadPyar on April 10, 2006, 05:26:11 pm

I am reminded how completely *underrated* I think Jake is throughout this film.  His acting is just as astonishing. 


Agreed!  Jack seems very much more expressive than Ennis, but think of all the things Jack never says - he walks away from Ennis just as Ennis walks away from him, with a look back, and hope for the future, but nevertheless, he also walks away with hardly a word.  Heath can't be brilliant without Jake, and vice versa!

Compared probably to most anyone in our own lives, these two characters conceal more from each other than they ever reveal through words, which is essential to the tragedy of the story.  All them things we never know - never come to know...   :'( :'( :'(
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: bbm_stitchbuffyfan on April 10, 2006, 06:18:18 pm
Quote
Compared probably to most anyone in our own lives, these two characters conceal more from each other than they ever reveal through words, which is essential to the tragedy of the story. 

I don't know about that. I always saw Ennis being able to confide in Jack. There are some things Jack couldn't say to Ennis but I think he felt at ease with him and he was obviously elated when in Ennis' presence, unless something was terribly wrong (see: lakeside confrontation). And I agree, I think Jake's performance is very underrated and I thought he was just about perfect in the part.
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: Aussie Chris on April 10, 2006, 06:21:27 pm
Agreed!  Jack seems very much more expressive than Ennis, but think of all the things Jack never says - he walks away from Ennis just as Ennis walks away from him, with a look back, and hope for the future, but nevertheless, he also walks away with hardly a word.  Heath can't be brilliant without Jake, and vice versa!

So true Celeste.  I've felt quite challenged by the concept of "it's all Heath" in the acting department.  Back a few months ago in an interview with Annie Proolx she said words to the effect that Heath got into the character of Ennis far better than she had imagined, but Jake was about 50% of the Jack she was thinking of.  This wounded me a little because I interpreted this as a sign of disrespect.  But a few weeks later I heard this again is another context and it sounded more like Jack in the book was much less than what Jake gives us, and that Jake's performance was more mature and credible (not just the puppy-dog that he could have been).

One thing though, I find myself swinging between "all Ennis" and "all Jake" in my admiration of these performances.  The two best "conversations" I can think of that use no words are when Jack and Ennis come off the mountain the first time and talk about coming back next year (Jack's pleading eyes), and Jack's mom at the end of the film (understanding).  With Jack I like the early moments of the confrontation scene when Ennis first says he won't be back until November.  Check Ennis biting a finger nail and his "that ok?" look from under the brim of his hat, and then Jack's accusing eyes as he processes this in disbelief.

Astounding stuff - it just could not work as well without all of the elements - the whole is so much greater than the sum of the parts.
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: RouxB on April 10, 2006, 08:49:46 pm
I also believe that the restraint goes a long way in creating the mood of ambiguity that permeates this movie. The ambiguity allows the viewer to interpret scenes within the context of his or her own life which in turn drives the intense emotional reaction that many of us experience.
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: YaadPyar on April 10, 2006, 09:50:42 pm
So true RouxB, about the restraint contributing to the ambiguity.

And Chris - the pleading eyes of Jack slay me every time.  There is no imgage in the film that hits me strong than Jack's raised eyebrow in his hopeful inquiry of another summer on BBM.

The perfection of the casting fails only in the character of Bobby Twist, who is universally considered to be nothing but a distraction in the Twist Thanksgiving scene (yup - universally...I got the stats to provie it!).

The harmony between Jake & Heath is stunning every time I watch.  A more expressive Jack would have thrown the entire relationship out of any balance that Ennnis could have maintained.  He could live with disappointing Jack - he couldn't have lived with having to make a choice.
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: Phillip Dampier on November 27, 2006, 07:33:53 pm
bump
Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: Brown Eyes on February 28, 2008, 12:44:17 am
Heya!

Just bumping this for now because I just discovered this cool old topic and want to come back to it later!  How did I miss this one the first time around?


8)

Title: Re: Actors' restraint
Post by: Brown Eyes on February 28, 2008, 12:45:48 pm
It seems to me that the concept of restraint in the acting performances in BBM reflects not only the general character of the society in which the story is set... but it's an essential factor in the dynamics between Jack and Ennis that allows the relationship to move forward.

If too many truths were uttered and aspects of their relationship were thoroughly discussed or surfaced to the fullest... it seems clear that Ennis especially would be completely spooked.

Taking an example from early in the film (rather than the lake argument)... the "I'm not queer" discussion seems to be entirely about having the mose spare and restrained conversation possible about the huge thing that's just happened between Jack and Ennis.  There are a million things that could be talked about between them here... they could confide in each other on an honest level about how they're feeling about their sexuality... they could even confide in each other simply about the level of confusion that must exist for each one on the question of sexuality at that point.  Instead, they cover almost everything over with a lot of silence and one enigmatic agreement about the "one shot deal" (does anyone really understand what that means... even Ennis?)  and another enigmatic/ fib-like agreement about "I'm not queer."  But, this exchange seems to lessen the tension between the two.  They seem content to just be close to one another here.  I feel like when Jack taps his toes together (very, very subtly) it's almost like a signal that some level of tension has been let go (at least for now).  And, I think the fact that TS2 follows from this... and that TS2 (which is clearly one of the most overtly intimate scenes) occurs in nearly complete silence (aside from Jack's whispered "s'alright" and the controversial "I'm sorry") between the two is critical for this interaction to be possible between Jack and Ennis.  Again, I think if too much openness or discussion happened here... Ennis in particular would be spooked and scared off.

Throughout the relationship Jack seems to measure his words and what he reveals to Ennis very carefully.  I think Jack's restraint is very much forced and deliberate.  Perhaps he learned a lesson of sorts during the "prayer of thanks" camping trip... where he learned how painful expressing too much could become.  Asking Ennis to move in with him and start the cow and calf operation (all in sort of a nervous rush... the way he actually makes this proposal verbally) was a big risk and a moment where he's exposing more of his desires and thoughts on the relationship and their future than in many other instances.  The rejection of this offer and the spare terms for the relationship spelled out by Ennis may almost feel like a punitive reminder of the risks associated with saying, suggesting or offering too much.