lovable subtle details

[Penthesilea]

Distracting from my own question here:

The other day I posted a photo on HHH of the making of I'm not There, where Heath gets a tat covered:



Like Amanda, I don't think it's much of a problem to cover them up, otherwise actors wouldn't get them. I think make-up is checked (and fixed if necessary) between takes anyway. I've never noticed any of Heath's tats (or of other actors) in other movies.
Which brings me back to my question: why do we see the wrist tat not only once or twice (which I would buy as production mistake), but several times?

At the moment, I think both possibilies are unlikely, that they made the same production mistake with the same tat relatively 'often', but also to think it was done deliberate. Hm 

[belbbmfan]

I don't think the tattoo was deliberately visible. I couldn't picture Ennis with a tattoo. He would probably think that was kind of a hippie thing to do. And we all know how he felt about them.

[serious crayons]

Like Amanda, I don't think it's much of a problem to cover them up, otherwise actors wouldn't get them. I think make-up is checked (and fixed if necessary) between takes anyway. I've never noticed any of Heath's tats (or of other actors) in other movies.

Well, my thought was that it must be somewhat of a problem to cover them up, or we wouldn't see them in BBM, either. I know it can be done, but it must not be foolproof. I remember years ago reading a quote from Cher, who had just gotten some big tattoo, saying she knew it meant she would never get another movie role again but that's OK, she really wanted the tat anyway. Now obviously it's not THAT problematic, but you'd think it might be more trouble or risk than it's worth. Especially for tats in really conspicuous areas, like the wrist.

As for piercings, I think that after they've been there for a while they do not grow back very easily.

Then again, here we are talking about a medium where they can make people look 50 years older or like monsters or Dr. Seuss characters or give them serious wounds or whatever ... so I guess covering up a tattoo wouldn't be an insurmountable problem! 

Anyway, sorry to derail the thread, but I've always wondered that. Just as I wonder when I see cashiers with long, carefully polished fingernails.

[Front-Ranger]

Jack is so lovable when his thoughts come out despite him trying to cover them up for Ennis' sake:

"We should both be in this camp."

"That's one a the two things I need right now." (from the story)

"I can't get by on two HAFs a year."

He's always thinking in twos.

[brokeplex]

Jack is so lovable when his thoughts come out despite him trying to cover them up for Ennis' sake:

"We should both be in this camp."

"That's one a the two things I need right now." (from the story)

"I can't get by on two HAFs a year."

He's always thinking in twos.

Good point about the "twining" and "paralleling" comments made by Jack! This compliments my obsession to see the film as a palindrome.

[elomelo]

Apologies if this has been mentioned but the dissapearing log? Maybe Jack knocked it off accidentally when he looked towards Ennis when Agguired peered through his binoculars.

Another thing: when Ennis tells Jack for the first time about marrying Alma when he comes off the mountain, Jack ignores the comment like nothing happened.

[brokeplex]

the block of wood doesn't really disappear, it is just back in the same location where Jack has picked it up before Aguirre rode up. In other words, the scene was filmed in several takes, and the continuity people didn't notice that there was a discrepancy in between the takes.

[brokeplex]

http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,8644.120.html

here are some other "mistakes" that we discussed on another thread.

[serious crayons]

Good point about the "twining" and "paralleling" comments made by Jack! This compliments my obsession to see the film as a palindrome.

Broke, a lot of us share that obsession. I know of one person who thinks it's a mirror, literally scene for scene. Personally, I don't think it's quite that symmetrical -- there are reflecting scenes that aren't in perfect opposite sequence, and little mini-mirrors thrown in here and there, to keep the pattern from being too neat.

But definitely there are matching reflected images, the most obvious being the opening scene with Ennis riding in a truck going in one direction at dawn, carrying a bag with two shirts, and the scene near the end of Ennis riding in a truck going in the opposite direction at sunset, carrying a bag with two shirts. In fact, that one is SO obvious it almost seems like a deliberate suggestion to viewers to look for others.

[Brown Eyes]

I agree that the mirroring/symmetry/palindrome pattern isn't always completely neat and tidy.  But, there are certainly lots of recurring patterns (as we've all noticed)... sometimes having to do with content/narrative/dialogue and sometimes having to do with subtle things as in how certain shots are composed.

On Friday night while watching BBM the idea of certain shots being composed in similar ways really struck me.  Particularly in the examples on Brokeback where Jack is either standing to the right in the frame (or is entering into the frame from the right) and Ennis is either mounting his horse on the left/already sitting on his horse to the left or riding away to the left.  The three examples of this that I can think of are (1) at the time of the job switch... Ennis is with his horse to the left and Jack approaches from the right and says "you won't get much sleep..." (2) the morning after TS1 (3) the moment immediately following the dozy embrace.

I think the interesting point to bear in mind is that there are patterns... of many kinds and varieties.  And, sometimes different patterns overlap or intertwine.  And, none of this is absolutely precise all the time.  There are some examples that seem pretty precise (like the trucks driving horizontally across the screen/landscape at the beginning at end, but in opposite directions... and like the paper bags at the beginning and at the end) but precision is certainly not the rule.