Brokeback Mountain: Our Community's Common Bond > Brokeback Mountain Open Forum
what's the point of the job switch?
serious crayons:
Chris, thanks for your partial agreement and for sharing your personal perspective. I guess this is one of those Brokeback issues in which life experiences really influence one's interpretation.
BTW, I do think the influence is life experiences -- and probably, as Jeff says, one's view of human nature -- rather than orientation. From what I've gathered here and elsewhere, the two "sides" of this issue can include both straight and gay people, women and men. The division might not be 50/50, but the opinions don't seem very, or at least not totally, predictable by demographics.
Hey Chris, I hope your new moderator job doesn't take up all your time and keep you from posting here and elsewhere. We would really miss you! Also, next time, don't just lurk -- please jump right in! Even though I tell myself it's not like an ordinary conversation where only one person can talk at a time, anybody can feel free to contribute whenever they want, I somehow always feel like I'm hogging the thread.
Jeff, your post came in while I was writing this. In answer to your question, I think the thread I saw actually was from the last week or two. And unless you went by clancypants, MarshallPh (or is it MartinPh?) or taj_e over there, it wasn't you.
A bit OT, but the reason I went over to imdb -- I'd been on a long hiatus myself -- is I was looking for more discussions of movie content, which are starting to dwindle a bit here. I think people here are starting to feel as if we've covered every possible aspect. I know I do. But over at imdb, there are still lively discussions going on, and although some of them are way too newbyish for me, and there are still plenty of homophobic ones, if you really look hard you can find people still making interesting and novel points. The gun one that I copied and posted here a couple of days ago is an example.
But you can't find much just scrolling down the board. The key is to find some posters who are thoughtful and insightful and articulate, then look up THEIR posts and scroll for ones with interesting subject lines. It can be a bit tedious, because sometimes their posts are only a bump or a brief comment. But when you find their longer posts, they really pay off. The posters I mention above are all good. Also, there are people there I've always liked who for some reason never made it here (eg. Banner Hill, catglith, Rontrigger, lauragigs, jschrieb), or maybe they ARE here under different names. And some people from here continue to post over there. Casey Cornelius, for example, still frequently posts there but rarely here.
Jeff Wrangler:
--- Quote from: latjoreme on May 11, 2006, 09:33:10 am ---Jeff, your post came in while I was writing this. In answer to your question, I think the thread I saw actually was from the last week or two. And unless you went by clancypants, MarshallPh (or is it MartinPh?) or taj_e over there, it wasn't you.
But you can't find much just scrolling down the board. The key is to find some posters who are thoughtful and insightful and articulate, then look up THEIR posts and scroll for ones with interesting subject lines. It can be a bit tedious, because sometimes their posts are only a bump or a brief comment. But when you find their longer posts, they really pay off. The posters I mention above are all good. Also, there are people there I've always liked who for some reason never made it here (eg. Banner Hill, catglith, Rontrigger, lauragigs, jschrieb), or maybe they ARE here under different names. And some people from here continue to post over there. Casey Cornelius, for example, still frequently posts there but rarely here.
--- End quote ---
Nope, Clancypants and MarshallPh ain't me--but JSchreib--actually, it's "Scheib"--is. I wanted something neater than my legal name when I came here! And you are not a thread hog. You've said that before, now stop it! :)
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: Jeff Wrangler on May 11, 2006, 09:50:49 am ---Nope, Clancypants and MarshallPh ain't me--but JSchreib--actually, it's "Scheib"--is. I wanted something neater than my legal name when I came here! And you are not a thread hog. You've said that before, now stop it! :)
--- End quote ---
Well, no wonder I like jscheib! Sorry for the misspelling. I guess when I saw your name it must have been at the top of an older thread. I don't think the others I mentioned are here, and I do think they're still active there; somewhere recently I saw people here discussing their failed efforts to try to lure them over.
Anyway, I don't believe the particular post I was referring to, about the lake scene, included you. It was mainly between clancypants and taj_e. Clancy took what I would loosely describe as "your side" (meaning Jeff's and I guess Chris') and taj took "my side." But Clancy is MUCH more of a hardliner than either of you guys. My impression is that he would never agree to the kind of let's-compromise, everybody's-right, it's-a-little-of-both conclusion we have reached here (though I know that possibly we do that only because we want to move on).
Clancypants is very smart and a good writer, but he (I'm assuming it's a he) is ruthlessly unsentimental. He makes just about everybody at BetterMost seem like hopeless romantics by comparison. If anybody dares to call it a "love story," he scolds them. "If you want to watch this movie through a heart-shaped screen, fine, go ahead. But it's not a love story, people, it's a tragedy!" As if the two were mutually exclusive. I have to steel myself to read his posts -- they can be very disturbing for a romantic optimist like myself. Still, however astringent, they're bracing and well-argued. He spots subtleties and metaphors that I had never considered before, provides new interpretations of old issues. For example, he contends that Cassie's "girls don't fall in love with fun" line triggers an epiphany for Ennis about his relationship with Jack. So Clancy's posts are enlightening, but when I read them I have to search for what I would consider logical flaws -- and in my view, there are some -- or I would wind up very depressed.
Note to clancypants, in case you ever make it over here: If I've misrepresented your argument, sorry!
Aussie Chris:
--- Quote from: latjoreme on May 11, 2006, 12:11:15 pm ---Anyway, I don't believe the particular post I was referring to, about the lake scene, included you. It was mainly between clancypants and taj_e. Clancy took what I would loosely describe as "your side" (meaning Jeff's and I guess Chris') and taj took "my side." But Clancy is MUCH more of a hardliner than either of you guys. My impression is that he would never agree to the kind of let's-compromise, everybody's-right, it's-a-little-of-both conclusion we have reached here (though I know that possibly we do that only because we want to move on).
--- End quote ---
Not me Katherine, I really do see your "side" and incorporate it into my understanding. No one point of view could possibly appreciate every nuance of BBM, and I have found my interpretation change radically from my first viewing to today. This could only happen if I was open to change in the first place, and it is what makes talking with you kind folks so much fun. I live for those days when someone notices something and I say: "oh wow, that's so cool, I missed that". I now have a much better appreciation of the romantic elements for example.
I don't know if we'll ever be able/want to move on. I for one love this thread and see it as the most important and challenging scenes of the film. So much is explained/exposed in these few minutes, but paradoxically ends with us wanting so much more. And as I said, I remain open. Still thinking of reasons why it's more about homophobia... ;)
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: Aussie Chris on May 11, 2006, 06:48:38 pm ---Not me Katherine, I really do see your "side" and incorporate it into my understanding. No one point of view could possibly appreciate every nuance of BBM, and I have found my interpretation change radically from my first viewing to today. This could only happen if I was open to change in the first place, and it is what makes talking with you kind folks so much fun. I live for those days when someone notices something and I say: "oh wow, that's so cool, I missed that". I now have a much better appreciation of the romantic elements for example.
I don't know if we'll ever be able/want to move on. I for one love this thread and see it as the most important and challenging scenes of the film. So much is explained/exposed in these few minutes, but paradoxically ends with us wanting so much more. And as I said, I remain open. Still thinking of reasons why it's more about homophobia... ;)
--- End quote ---
Sorry Chris, I didn't mean to oversimplify your viewpoint. I was kind of streamlining for brevity's sake, and I lumped you and Jeff together on one "side" based on your last post and some of Jeff's earlier posts. I can imagine you both objecting, but it seemed to me that you both emphasized the "more about homophobia" aspects a TEENY-TINY bit more, and I emphasized the "more about losing Jack" aspects more, and then for the sake of peace we all agreed that it's some of both.
The people on the other thread I mentioned had not reached any peaceful compromise; they were much more purists than we are -- for them, it was either one thing or the other. Which sounds simplistic I know, but, as I said, they did make some good points.
I watched the movie today for the first time in two months. I noticed all kinds of new things, but I don't think I reached any startling new conclusions about the lake scene. I still think Ennis is mostly upset about losing Jack -- sorry to prioritize emotions, but he just looks so heartbroken. Try as I might, I can't read his anger in the Mexico threat as being about Jack's Mexico ventures indicating that Jack is gay. Then, when Jack begins his angry monologue, Ennis turns, bows his head and starts crying, I think, almost immediately. When he says "why don't you then? why don't you leave me be?" it's so sad, impliying as it does that Ennis himself has no control over the situation; if anybody's going to end the relationship, it can only be Jack.
One thing I noticed, though, that you might like: I think Ennis does reach an ephiphany in the pie scene. He's sitting there chewing pie, head down, throughout almost the whole scene. Then Cassie says "girls don't fall in love with fun." And he stops chewing, stares straight ahead, not really at Cassie (who has fled by then), but more as if lost in thought. And he maintains that expression for the rest of the scene (a few seconds). As if hearing the word "love" -- first time it's spoken in the movie -- gets him thinking in a whole new way. I guess this would support your view, Jeff, that he doesn't think of his relationship with Jack as love until the end.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version