I'm sure you're right about the book, Jeff (though I don't even have the DVD!). But as I've probably mentioned before, I get uncomfortable with so-called real-life commentary on Brokeback (except all of ours, of course). I rarely watch those making-of things. I'm not sure I'm going to watch the special features on my rental DVD. A couple of days ago I happened across a link on this board to an interview with Heath. I called it up and it looked really good, but still -- and despite my crush on Heath! -- I had to close the window before he even started talking.
Yes, I know, I'm very neurotic about this. I should add that somewhere I have read AP's essay, at least in part, and it was good, and I'm sure the others probably would be very enlightening. Maybe my reluctance has to do with destroying the illusion of the film's reality. Or maybe it goes back to our earlier discussion of Diana's comment and my disagreement with it -- maybe I'm afraid I'll hear or read something that will conflict with my understanding of the movie, and I'm pretty happy with my understanding as it is.
Well, I haven't watched the special features on the DVD either. In fact, I've only found the time to watch the film once since the DVD came out. Add to that, I'm so technically inept it's a wonder I can play the movie, let alone
find the special features.
I hate to sound like a book salesman, but I still find
Story to Screenplay useful as a check rather than trusting my memory--though, as I said, there are some differences between the screenplay and what we actually see and hear on screen, and some of them I wouldn't consider minor. So buy the book and don't read the essays.
I understand what you're saying about not destroying the illusion of reality. For me, I'm glad to have every piece of "evidence" relating to this masterpiece that I can get my hands on, including what is known as the 2003 screenplay. I bought that on e-Bay in the mistaken impression that it was actually a "script" for the film as we have it; it isn't. And don't I wish I had a script for the film as we finally have it!
But this is the way I "build" my interpretations and understandings. I look to the story, the screenplay, and the film. Not to reopen an old debate, but, just as an example, this is why I'm so confirmed and content in my understanding of what Ennis and Jack actually did when they had sex, and why I believe they didn't alter their routine in twenty years: I see no "evidence" that convinces me "beyond a reasonable doubt" that they ever did anything other than what they did "the first time" (though I hope they took more time and it wasn't always so rough.
)