My God, people, how do you find the *time* for these lengthy and illuminating posts?
I know my posts can get quite lengthy… sorry … but if they’re illuminating, too, then I don’t feel so bad. I find just about every post here to be illuminating – that’s why I respond to just about every one of them. You all make for some pretty good and lively discussions Makes me feel all perky.
I've stated elsewhere that when it comes to "Did Ennis know the "thing" was love" I agree completely with Katherine.
But there are some distinctions to be made here. I agree Ennis knew it was love. But what did he *do* with that knowledge? How did he react to it? To what extent did he “know” it? For how long – both chronically and acutely? Did he let it rise to the surface and remain? Did he define his relationship that way? He did everything he could to distance himself from allowing “it’s love” to be incorporated into his life. This was one of the greatest destructive effects of homophobia on the poor guy – the inability to admit to himself that he was “in love” with a man.
…if losing Jack was necessary for Ennis to be able to move forward in life or to at least come to terms with his own life or manage the day-to-day "being Ennis" - why doesn't Jack's death work the same way? Or does it? But I see this has been touched upon in the most recent exchange of posts, so I'll count myself answered, if still actively mulling this over.
It’s still worth mulling over. First, we could get into an entirely new thread discussing whether Jack’s death does or doesn’t allow Ennis to move forward or come to terms. I think the important thing to remember here is that because of Jack’s death, it really becomes a moot point. We all know that Ennis learned some things about life and love – too little, too late – but, there are still too many clues that Ennis will continue to live a lonely life and never love again. Aren’t our only real clues that he might move on 1) the little bits of learning that we see he did at the very end, and 2) his agreeing to go to Jr.’s wedding? Two wouldn’t have happened but for one. And two is simply the most important day in Jr.’s life – Ennis mentions its importance. Does this really add up to Ennis “coming to terms?”
Second, the focus should not be on “…if losing Jack was necessary for Ennis…” Regardless whether it would or could cause Ennis to “move on” or “come to terms,” Jack releasing Ennis from his captivity was necessary for Jack to do because Jack loved Ennis. That’s what true love makes one do. It makes one do the right thing – sublimating oneself and one’s needs for the one one loves. If Ennis “moves on” as a result, great. “Come to terms,” even better. Regardless its outcome, it’s what Ennis needed and Jack gave him what he needed.
Another thing I've been mulling over is whether Jack subconsciously - I don't ever think he'd do this consciously - realized that one way of managing the quitting (again, quitting for the sake of Ennis, for his love of Ennis) would be his own death…
A little too far for even me.
I just can't get my head around the Randall we meet in the film ever moving to Lightning Flat.
You make a lot of very good points here. (I didn’t quote them all, but they’re there in your post above for anyone who wants to re-read them.)
For one thing, the shooting script included a scene where Randall lets Jack out of his car and they are observed by some grumpy guys who don't seem to appreciate two men behaving in that particular way. This must have been filmed since those guys appear in the BBM trailer and in all probability are the ones who kill Jack in the telephone conversation "flashback".
OK – please indulge my little rant… I hate going to extraneous things that just aren’t “Brokeback Mountain.” To me, BBM is the film as we see it with our eyes and hear it with our ears. The short story, the screenplay, the script, comments from Proulx, Lee, the actors… it’s all just speculation and interpretation. The film does not follow the short story, the screenplay, or the script in every way, and in many instances, not in key ways. Facts were changed and cannot be translated from any one to any one of the others. Same with motivations – except for “well, possibly what’s going on here…” But that’s no different than any other interpretation any one else would come up with. The people involved have all said many things about BBM. Too often, they contradict each other and they contradict themselves. Too often, they change their story over time. And one of the biggest offenders in this regard is Proulx. Yes, she’s the author of the short story, but she’s not the author of the film. Even Lee’s intentions for what he wanted to do with the film and get across through the film did not all come to pass. The film is as we see and hear it.
Sorry for that. Now, that having been said, I’ll get into the point of the comment I quoted above. What I read is that the scene of which you speak was not filmed. The guys we see in the trailer were filmed as a part of the scene at the beginning of the movie where Ennis walks in (from the semi that brought him to Signal) past an auto garage and the three men look at Ennis. Ennis sees them. The point behind this scene having been filmed was that when Ennis’ imagination ran wild and he envisioned Jack being murdered, the three men who Ennis saw murder Jack in his imagination were the same men Ennis had walked past on his first morning in Signal. The implication being that Ennis was so scared and homophobic as he walked into Signal that those three men stuck in his mind until his imagination pulled them out twenty years later. The scene wasn’t included in the film because Lee knew that if people realized that the three men beating up Jack were those same three men Ennis had walked past twenty years earlier, the whole “Jack was murdered” scenario would be obviously bogus to the viewer. It’s interesting that Lee thought that would be too much of a clue that Jack wasn’t really murdered, but Lee obviously didn’t think that showing an imagination coming out of Ennis’ overly fearful imagination would be too much of a clue. Go figure.
I think he mentioned Randall not because he necessarily believed in it, nor because he and Randall had made any sort of final decision about it - but because he needed to officially start "quitting" Ennis as soon as possible, while his decision held firm. To make it as much of a road of no return for himself as possible. And where better to do that than the place where he had indulged in speaking his daydreams of ranching up with Ennis out loud? Once he'd said that it was over out loud too, it would be so much more real. And no better way to say it is over than to introduce the new guy at the same time. Makes it sound that much more final.
Excellent take on it. Spot on, if you ask me.
…imagine what that part of the film (and the following scene of Ennis finding the shirts) would have lost if the news to Ennis that Jack was leaving him hadn't been there....
Another great one.
