I don't want to rehash much of this 6-page, highly stealth-bumped (by trolls), troll-originated thread. But there are some bits to vaporize's rebuttal on p. 1 that I really love, and I don't want to mutilate his or her post or slap my own editing judgments on it, so I leave it intact, including most of the original troll-post being quoted for shredding. And on p. 6, brokebackjack-1 and latjoreme made a few comments about the symbolism that I would hate to see lost. It looks like the thread is going to fall off tonight "over there" -- whoowhee!
Re: Get lives.
by vaporize (Tue Feb 13 2007 20:11:15)
Ok, I'm sorry to say this, but why are you people still here? I'm serious.
Because it's a public forum where people exchange comments. Don't you think it's self-explanatory?
Do you think it's healthy to post all day about this movie, watching it thousands of times until your eye
sockets bleed from all the tear excretion?
Do you think it's healthy posting complaints about what others choose to do with their spare time?
And don't you think the BBM-themed screennames (with matching signatures) are going a bit far?
I certainly don't care. I don't think your screen name is as clever as you may think but I'm not dedicating an entire post to it.
I could understand if Brokeback Mountain was a great movie... but it's really not that good.
Actually, it is really that good. If you don't believe me, I'll be more than happy to convince you.
Watching it over and over again, only so you can come here and post topics about the fact that you
noticed something new in the background in frame 48 is a sign that you need to start thinking with your
minds, and not your hearts,
Since when is cognitively spotting something within a given frame making use of the heart?
which are obviously overflowing with love for two characters who not only don't exist, but whose
representative actors aren't even that good.
Yes, they don't exist. But since when was that ever debated? And the acting was more than good which explains all the nominations from numerous award shows. Not that their talents need vindication, it's just an objective way of proving you wrong.
Not only that, but it came out forever ago.
It's been less than a year, child. And the fact that people still talk about it is a testament to how amazing the film is.
1. It wasn't that sad.
Yes it was.
2. There wasn't that much symbolism (trust me, the train in the beginning- I bet you anything I have that
it didn't mean sh!t whatsoever, other than, oh, I don't know, being a train, and possibly transporting
goods)
As another poster has said in previous posts, "Directed by Ang Lee, Written by Annie Proulx." In other words, yes, there was that much symbolism.
3. It was far too long.
I disagree. It was a little over two hours which isn't that much longer than a typical feature length. It was a suitable length, although many argue that it could have been longer.
4. Obsessing over it doesn't make it any better.
Which is why actual film discussion is encouraged and makes the film so much better after multiple viewings.
5. But watching them make out was pretty hot.
If that's all you got out of the film, then I suggest you spend your time watching pornography instead. At the ripe age of 15, I'm sure you don't have trouble exploring your sexuality.
Besides, they cheated on and lied to their wives and children so that they could *beep* in the woods-
hardly an apex of sympathy.
They cheated and lied to the world for the sake of being accepted. And in the process, they caused destruction to their own lives as well. Sympathy doesn't have to go to noble individuals who do the right thing; it can go out to those whose flaws remind us of our own mistakes.
-------------
Let's go the the beach tonight
with a bottle of wine
Re: Get lives.
by brokebackjack-1 (Thu May 31 2007 23:46:34)
wow lol, are you really so dense or simply a troll?
The train? Well for one thing, it DOES have symbolism: It tells us at the very start of the film that we are watching Ennis' story, that we will be shown glimpses of him at widely spaced intervals of his life and that ....nothing changes.
It was VERY sad.
It is PACKED with symbolism. JAMPACKED.
It was not too long, you simply don't have any taste. Watching them make out is not what the film was about. Or the short story, which is probably and very arguably the greatest short story to be written in the English language during the 20th century. Your comments show us your remarkably shallow state of mind.
....but nothing could be done about it, and if you can't fix it you've got to stand it.
Re: Get lives.
by latjoreme (Fri Jun 1 2007 07:00:49)
The train? Well for one thing, it DOES have symbolism: It tells us at the very start of the film that we are watching Ennis' story, that we will be shown glimpses of him at widely spaced intervals of his life and that ....nothing changes.
Good one, brokebackjack-1. I'd never thought of it quite that way. My idea was that the train shows that something in Ennis' life is about to change, but I like your explanation better.
It is PACKED with symbolism. JAMPACKED.
That's for sure. Sometimes I think there is hardly a line, prop, set piece or clothing item in BBM that doesn't have deeper meaning. I'm sorry I didn't get the chance to hear more of your insights in person while watching the movie!
