Brokeback Mountain: Our Community's Common Bond > Brokeback Mountain Open Forum
Intriguing Perspective on Bobby Twist's Paternity
whiteoutofthemoon:
I thought I had read everything about this movie, but here's an interesting take on Lureen and Bobby Twist from the IMDB board. The issue of the timeline has come up many times, but I've never heard it like this....this one poster seems to have a compelling argument that if Jack and Lureen met in August 1966, and then the reunion scene takes place in September 1967, when Bobby is "8 months old", then it is impossible that Bobby is Jack's child. Part of that poster's argument and debate is below. I thought I'd post it here for you Brokiephiles, in case it hasn't been discussed before, to see what you make of it. It would throw a rather confusing "twist" to the story, but at the same time, if it wasn't so, then we have to assume that Ang Lee made a major mistake in this timeline, which I find hard to believe, as it is such a glaring error when you look at the argument. Is the poster right or wrong? And, at the same time, it does answer some questions, like about how Jack is more disconnected to his son than Ennis is to his daughters.
On top of that, if Lureen was indeed with child when she met Jack, she was definitely drinking in the bar, possibly before the true dangers of that were really known, and here is little Bobby Twist, with dyslexia in the book, and with a learning disability in the movie, requiring a tutor!
Here's the post (It's in response to some other posts debating the poster's argument):
__________________________________________
*****Apparently, in the short story Jack meets Lureen between late 1964 and 1965, not in 1966.*****
Doesn't matter. That's NOT what happened in the film.
*****It's humanly impossible for Lureen and Jack to have a 8 months baby by September 1967 if they met in August 1966*****
Agreed.
*****unless Bobby wasn't his, which doesn't make sense within the context of the story.*****
100% wrong. Take some time to really, REALLY think about this. (I truly mean this as a polite request.) This not only makes sense, it agrees with the character development of Jack as the film portrayed him.
There are numerous reasons why this makes complete sense -- the 'Yee-haw' scene, the 'Lureen's bedroom' scene, the 'tractor riding' scene, the 'blue parka' scene, the 'Twist family Thanksgiving' scene, the 'Real Thinker' scene, and for me, probably the most important, the development of Jack across these scenes with respect to his relationship with Bobby.
Didn't it ever kind of irk you that Jack, at the 'reunion river' scene, was sooooo willing to leave behind a wife and eight-month old son? Is that the Jack we know? What do we know about Jack and the Newsome family? He got roped in by Lureen in a car one night. She was in a hurry -- yes, she said she had to get the car home for daddy -- that's the text -- but we all know that with every line in this film, the sub-text is much more significant -- subtext: she was pregnant at the time. There's a familial disconnect between Jack and the Newsomes at the 'Lureen's bedroom' scene. Jack said LD hated Jack's guts. Jack was ready and willing to throw all that away for Ennis at the 'reunion river' scene. Why? Because it's a lot easier for him to do it at that time knowing that Bobby is not his child, that he had not bonded with Bobby, and that he was an outsider in the Newsome family circle.
Or maybe Jack's just an a$$hole.
And what happens later… AFTER Jack comes to terms (slowly) with Ennis’ intransigence? We see three scenes of Jack bonding more with Bobby. Taking an interest… teaching him, unlike Old Man Twist. Growing and building… until Thanksgiving when Jack takes strong, possessive ownership of his right as a father. He’s proved it for about 10 years at this point. Contrast all of this with Ennis’ relationships with his daughters.
*****It's a mistake made by the film-makers not by Proulx. It's a continuity error.*****
There are some mistakes in the film, no doubt. But they do not have the kind of repercussions that this one would have if it was, in fact, a mistake. The dates are clearly given in the short story. The DIFFERENT dates are clearly given in the film. And they’re there for a reason. The same kind of reason that explains the filmmakers’ other significant changes.
Lee is a stickler for details. We have hundreds of threads and thousands of posts confirming this. There is no way this is a simple continuity error. It’s way too big and way too significant.
Or maybe Jack is a true a$$hole.
Penthesilea:
Why do you and/or the other posters from IMDB think that Jack met Lureen in August 1966?
This is not apparent to me. ???
Daniel:
It's because of the apparent disruption in the timeline. We assume that the film is presented in chronological order. The scene directly before Jack meets Lureen is the Fourth of July picnic in 1966.
Penthesilea:
Uups. Thanks, Daniel. I forgot about the Forth of July. It must have been 4th of July 1966 because of Ennis's girls.
So the OP is right. Even if Jack had met Lureen only one day after the 4th of July scene, and even if Lureen had gotten pregnant on this very same day, Bobby could not have been 8 month old before December 1967.
July 1966 + 9 months pregnancy= April 1967
April 1967 + Bobby 8 months old = December 1967
But the reunion was clearly not in Winter. They were skinny-dipping. It may have been fall, with warm days and fresh nights (both wear jackets in the evening after the jump into the lake) - but no way it could have been December.
So either there's a mistake in the movie - or Jack is not Bobby's biological father. Can't decide which is more likely.
From my first viewing on, it has always been my impression, that Lureen got instantly pregnant from their first sex in the car. And that's what I still believe. So for the moment, I tend more to "mistake in the movie" than to the other possibility.
But I'm very curious about other's opinions on this topic. Thanks for opening this thread, whiteoutofthemoon!
David:
Well..... the only thing I might add is that it is an editing decision. Ang Lee was trying to depict the lives of the two boys after brokeback and before the reunion. Perhaps flipping back and forth between the two guys often in the correct timeline was too choppy? So he had us watch scenes with each guy for a while before flipping to the other. As many times as I have seen the movie, I have always thought that the boys separated in August 1963, Jack came back for work again the next summer 1964, then went down to Texas again and ultimately met Lureen and was married in 1965. Plenty of time to get her pregnant before the reunion with Ennis in Sept 1967.
Damn it. I can't type "reunion with Ennis" without tearing up! (sniff) :'(
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version