Got What They Deserved?

[David]

It's not OT.  I saw the movie first, and I'm thinking my first initial reaction would have been way different if I had read the short story first.   

Not me.   I saw the movie first.   It blew me away!   I'm glad I didn't know what any of the story line was going to be.

And I when I read the book,  I was thrilled that the movie stayed so close to it.    I could see our boys in my head as i read the the story.

[dly64]

And I look don't look at BBM as saying it's intrinsically negative to be gay any more than I look at Romeo & Juliet as saying it's intrinsically negative to be very young and straight and passionately in love.  Like Jeff says, the movie shows that the judgment, and ultimately the tragedy, came down from society much more so than the protagonists themselves, just as in R&J.  Ennis' (and Romeo's and Juliet's) fears were created, and then fostered, by that society.

I know I'm a straight woman coming at this from a different perspective, so I certainly understand it when gay men see it as being negative towards gay men, though.

It's interesting you used the Romeo and Juliet analogy. I have used it as well. I think there are many parallels. If anything, I see BBM as a way of humanizing gays, void of stereotypes and preconceived notions. The intensity of feeling, the passion, love and pain are all universal. The only negativity stems from an acrimonious homophobic society that doesn't make room for the love of two men. That is the tragedy.

[silkncense]

The intensity of feeling, the passion, love and pain are all universal.

Exactly.  I also believe it's true that a movie or story that has a tragic ending stays with the audience & elicits more review & thought...how could it have ended better/different?  What could they have done?  Was it society/parents/non-communication/etc that caused the tragedy.

Brokeback didn't need to have a happy ending; it showed the intense love between these two people for all to see.  Viewers with negative preconceived ideas would have not been swayed by a happy ending.  And I believe a happy ending would have been enjoyed and then it & this movie would have been forgotten in short order.  As fontaine stated:

The only question in my mind is whether tragedies, as Plato described, have more "power" to affect people than happy endings do. Is there as much to learn if everything works out? In that case, the movie isn't likely to move inside you so that you can finish the lesson it begins to tell.

The true beauty of this film is how thought provoking it has been and as Eric said, will continue to be... 

[welliwont]

Like Jeff says, the movie shows that the judgment, and ultimately the tragedy, came down from society much moreso than the protagonists themselves, just as in R&J.

I think the tragedy came from Ennis refusing to make a life with Jack.  I know that Ennis was affected by how brutally Earl was killed, but he let a tragedy of twenty or thirty years ago ruin his life and ruin Jack’s life too. Just because Earl was brutally killed, DID NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN that Ennis and/or Jack would meet the same fate.  Over the years, since re-uniting with Jack, and especially by the time he and Alma were divorced, common sense and reason should have kicked in, IMO.  Life's a gamble, you only go around once, 94% of stuff we worry about never comes to pass……

Ennis was a jerk and a coward. There I said it.  Now I'm probably gonna be killed fur that!!  "Can't see you again until November, gotta toil like a skivvy."  How dumb is that?  Why was Ennis denying himself the happiness of being with Jack?  Was he really so stupid that he could not arrange his life to have a bit of enjoyment?  Or did he do it purposely because subconciously he did not think he deserved to be happy or to be loved?  I just don't get you Ennis Del Mar!

The whole way through the movie I was on the edge of my seat, waiting, waiting, waiting (like Jack) for Ennis to come to his senses, to finally be with Jack like they were meant to be.  I did not know the story, thankfully nobody told me what was going to happen, so the postcard was just as much a surprise to me as it was to Ennis.

"There y'see!  Ya blew it!  Now yer NEVER gonna be together! Ya wasted all that time bein' afraid of somethin' that you couldn't even see, and now it's TOO LATE!!  God damn you Ennis!"

((running into the woods of Brokeback as fast as my legs can carry me!))

J

[serious crayons]

The movie works on two levels, one small and individual and the other large and society-wide.

In the small, individual sense, it's a story about two people in a tragic romance. As Barb so astutely put it, if it's a negative portrait of gay men, then Romeo and Juliet is a negative portrait of straight teenagers.

In the larger, society-wide sense, it's a story about how intolerance -- in this case, homophobia -- warps people's lives. If it's a negative portrait of gay men, then Schindler's List is a negative portrait of Jews.

Yes, it's nice when movies show gay people leading happy, normal, relatively untragic lives, as many gay people we know do. There are a few movies like that, and no doubt there should be more, until the day comes when a movie about a gay couple is as unremarkable as that one with Jennifer Aniston and Vince Vaughn. Or whoever. Just like movies about happy Jewish people are not unusual these days, obviously (although they once were).

But to deny the pain and tragedy and violence caused by homophobia throughout human history, which obviously continues today, in this country and in even more homophobic cultures elsewhere, seems a little like denying the Holocaust.

Jane, I won't try to debate all those points. But I'd like to respectfully point out that "he let a tragedy of twenty or thirty years ago ruin his life and ruin Jack's life too" seems oversimplified and unfair. Growing up gay with a father who you presume capable of torturing a man to death for being gay is hardly some isolated forgettable incident. Ennis' view of his own sexuality was warped, not just by that one experience -- the tip of the iceberg -- but by years and years of experiences, not only with his abusive father, but with almost everybody he came in contact with. It's a lot easier for us, from our comfortable educated 21st-century enlightened liberal post-Stonewall perspectives, to see what "common sense and reason" entails than it would be for Ennis, in that environment, with that background. From his perspective, common sense and reason meant staying with Alma, attempting a relationship with Cassie, devoting himself to work. For Ennis, it was seeing Jack that was the breech of common sense, a huge risk and emotional struggle that he was willing to undertake to the extent he did only because of his incredible love.

[Penthesilea]

The movie works on two levels, one small and individual and the other large and society-wide.

In the small, individual sense, it's a story about two people in a tragic romance. As Barb so astutely put it, if it's a negative portrait of gay men, then Romeo and Juliet is a negative portrait of straight teenagers.

In the larger, society-wide sense, it's a story about how intolerance -- in this case, homophobia -- warps people's lives. If it's a negative portrait of gay men, then Schindler's List is a negative portrait of Jews.

Yes, it's nice when movies show gay people leading happy, normal, relatively untragic lives, as many gay people we know do. There are a few movies like that, and no doubt there should be more, until the day comes when a movie about a gay couple is as unremarkable as that one with Jennifer Aniston and Vince Vaughn. Or whoever. Just like movies about happy Jewish people are not unusual these days, obviously (although they once were).

But to deny the pain and tragedy and violence caused by homophobia throughout human history, which obviously continues today, in this country and in even more homophobic cultures elsewhere, seems a little like denying the Holocaust.

Jane, I won't try to debate all those points. But I'd like to respectfully point out that "he let a tragedy of twenty or thirty years ago ruin his life and ruin Jack's life too" seems oversimplified and unfair. Growing up gay with a father who you presume capable of torturing a man to death for being gay is hardly some isolated forgettable incident. Ennis' view of his own sexuality was warped, not just by that one experience -- the tip of the iceberg -- but by years and years of experiences, not only with his abusive father, but with almost everybody he came in contact with. It's a lot easier for us, from our comfortable educated 21st-century enlightened liberal post-Stonewall perspectives, to see what "common sense and reason" entails than it would be for Ennis, in that environment, with that background. From his perspective, common sense and reason meant staying with Alma, attempting a relationship with Cassie, devoting himself to work. For Ennis, it was seeing Jack that was the breech of common sense, a huge risk and emotional struggle that he was willing to undertake to the extent he did only because of his incredible love.

I quoted your whole post, because it's worth repeating. Again, you put all things running through my mind into such eloquent words I never would be able to find. So for me there's not much left to say, except to totally agree with you.

I share your thoughts about the way gay men are portrayed in BBM. And, as you already know, I completely share your POV on Ennis.  Thanks for elaborating it again and for your "defence" of Ennis. For me as a fellow Ennis-phil it was a pleasure to read 

[Mikaela]

To its great credit at least, at least Brokeback Mountain does not make the tragedy intrinsic to being gay. It shows that the tragedy comes from without, because of how difficult it is to be the person you truly are in a homophobic social environment.

and

To me, it's a morality tale about what life becomes if one doesn't follow the "whispers of one's heart."

I think that one sign we've come quite far, after all - one positive sign despite the bleak outcome for Jack and Ennis in the film - is that few would not agree with the above quoted statements, ie few reasonably enlightened people would not agree that this is the message of the film. At least, in my optimistic view that is so. In my country the film was actually accused in one review for being rather irrelevant in that it was "kicking in open doors" ie. purporting common knowledge messages and fighting battles that have been won already. Not that I want the film to have poor reviews, but if they have to be then I guess that kind of "poor" is the best one can hope for.

And it needen't have been that way - because the film itself makes no big proclamations, no statements about the horrors of homophobia - no scenes or dialogue that signals "Here's the message! Listen up, people!" It just moves in intimately and symphatetically on the lives of a few people who live a Greek tragedy in living their ordinary, everyday lives - men *and* women - who never are concerned about the big picture or the big policies.   And the message gets across all the more for the lack of "message". It's not a happy tale, no - but few wouldn't be moved to share the sentimens that the strictures that kept Ennis away from Jack all those years are plain *wrong*.

What would have been worse, would have been if people came out of the cinema actually and honestly debating whether it's a morality tale showing that "when men don't fight their homosexual urges and stay on the straight and narrow, they are doomed". Not too long ago, that would easily have been the interpretation made - I know it still is in some circles. So we've at least gotten this far. The next step now should be the "happy ending" message versions. I hope.

he let a tragedy of twenty or thirty years ago ruin his life and ruin Jack’s life too.

The Earl incident is a vicious symbol of the homophobia that permeats all of Ennis's time and place and upbringing and psyche. Ennis is not letting one incident per se ruin his life - he's unable to overcome the strong homophobia instilled in him, his shame and self-loathing over loving another man.  Latjoreme, you said it very well.

Comparisons have been drawn to Romeo and Julliet already. If Romeo had been taught from infancy, and truly belived to the very core of his being, that the Capulets were immoral, sinful, perverted, and disgusting - and that any association with them, not to mention love for any one of them would certainly lose him his soul and make the angels weep - if he truly and unquestioningly knew that to be so, and YET loved his Juliet - then *that* would be a Brokeback parallell.

Seen in a certain light, Romeo and Juliet had it easy compared to Ennis. Once in love, they were battling outward forces, society and family -  not their own psyche and selves.

[ednbarby]

I think the tragedy came from Ennis refusing to make a life with Jack.  I know that Ennis was affected by how brutally Earl was killed, but he let a tragedy of twenty or thirty years ago ruin his life and ruin Jack’s life too. Just because Earl was brutally killed, DID NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN that Ennis and/or Jack would meet the same fate.  Over the years, since re-uniting with Jack, and especially by the time he and Alma were divorced, common sense and reason should have kicked in, IMO.  Life's a gamble, you only go around once, 94% of stuff we worry about never comes to pass……

Ennis was a jerk and a coward. There I said it.  Now I'm probably gonna be killed fur that!!  "Can't see you again until November, gotta toil like a skivvy."  How dumb is that?  Why was Ennis denying himself the happiness of being with Jack?  Was he really so stupid that he could not arrange his life to have a bit of enjoyment?  Or did he do it purposely because subconciously he did not think he deserved to be happy or to be loved?  I just don't get you Ennis Del Mar!

The whole way through the movie I was on the edge of my seat, waiting, waiting, waiting (like Jack) for Ennis to come to his senses, to finally be with Jack like they were meant to be.  I did not know the story, thankfully nobody told me what was going to happen, so the postcard was just as much a surprise to me as it was to Ennis.

"There y'see!  Ya blew it!  Now yer NEVER gonna be together! Ya wasted all that time bein' afraid of somethin' that you couldn't even see, and now it's TOO LATE!!  God damn you Ennis!"

((running into the woods of Brokeback as fast as my legs can carry me!))

J

I disagree.  I believe that Ennis would have been open to having a life with Jack if he, like Jack, had been raised in a household in which at least one parent loved him unconditionally.  We don't know about Ennis' mother, but we don't have to.  It's clear that his father's influence shaped the adult he would become.  It's not that he let Earl's brutal death and his father's forcing him and his brother to see the aftermath of it shape him - it's that he couldn't help but have that shape his perception of himself all the rest of his life.  Ennis was gay.  His father sensed that in him (and maybe in his brother, too, for all we know) and so probably "done the job" himself and then showed his handiwork to his boys.  And if his father was capable of that kind of monstrosity, then his father was a hateful, bigoted monster in general.  So even before the murder, he was influencing the way his boys thought about gay men or anyone else he perceived as different.  His Dad was the jerk and the coward.  Not him.

And isn't it the case that the very thing he most feared would happen if he and Jack got openly together happened anyway?  That, to me, is the crux of the tragedy - Jack was killed by the same bigotry and hatred and monstrosity that killed Earl, and not because they got together, but perhaps because they didn't.

I respectfully submit that I think you're being way too hard on Ennis.  Yes, I was angry with him, too, the first few times I saw the movie.  But after lo my many further viewings, I just feel infathomably sad for him.  It was inevitable that he become fearful - his father and society in general made sure of it.  And then that he hated himself to boot.  Jack knew all this all along - knew Ennis through and through - and yet he loved him anyway.  He kept waiting and risking his heart because that love was undeniable.  He was fearless.  And as such, the exact counterpart Ennis needed to complete himself.  Sorry I'm waxing (or trying to wax) so lyrical, here.  But I can't have either of my boys disrespected.  Together, they make the perfect human being.  That's what true love does. 

[serious crayons]

Penth, thank you!    I'm always happy to see you post because, as you say, we are so often in accord!

What would have been worse, would have been if people came out of the cinema actually and honestly debating whether it's a morality tale showing that "when men don't fight their homosexual urges and stay on the straight and narrow, they are doomed". Not too long ago, that would easily have been the interpretation made - I know it still is in some circles.

Mikaela, I agree with everything you said, too. On the one hand, I have heard well-meaning people -- people who aren't homophobes but didn't love BBM -- make the same point you heard made in your country, ie, what's the big deal? That's 1960s Wyoming, not 2000s America, we're past all that now. It's nice they think so, but they're regrettably under-informed. The very fact that there ARE people who come out of the movie thinking the message is that Ennis and Jack should have renounced homosexuality and devoted themselves to their wives is one sign of that (among many others).

If Romeo had been taught from infancy, and truly belived to the very core of his being, that the Capulets were immoral, sinful, perverted, and disgusting - and that any association with them, not to mention love for any one of them would certainly lose him his soul and make the angels weep - if he truly and unquestioningly knew that to be so, and YET loved his Juliet - then *that* would be a Brokeback parallell.

Seen in a certain light, Romeo and Juliet had it easy compared to Ennis. Once in love, they were battling outward forces, society and family -  not their own psyche and selves.

Very good point, Mikaela. The Montagues probably DID try to raise Romeo to believe that the Capulets were bad people: wicked, untrustworthy, possibly even immoral. But they would have stopped short of calling them "sinful, perverted, and disgusting" -- terms that would trigger a far deeper sense of shame and self-loathing. (In fact, the Montagues probably regarded the Capulets with a certain degree of respect, as strong and worthy adversaries, as opposed to the contempt and repugnance Ennis' father felt for gay people.) And even if they did use those terms, Romeo could have looked around his environment and easily found contradictory viewpoints. Ennis heard that message everywhere he went, every time the subject of homosexuality came up -- even, as Ellemeno just pointed out on another thread, from the announcer on the radio that's playing as he's packing for a trip with Jack.

Barb, your post came in as I was writing this, but I agree with everything you say, too. And you expressed it beautifully!

[fontaine]

It's interesting you used the Romeo and Juliet analogy. I have used it as well. I think there are many parallels. If anything, I see BBM as a way of humanizing gays, void of stereotypes and preconceived notions. The intensity of feeling, the passion, love and pain are all universal. The only negativity stems from an acrimonious homophobic society that doesn't make room for the love of two men. That is the tragedy.

I think this is very true. It's also one of the things that made this a good movie in that by portraying them as regular people--regular human beings--it avoided cliche (which is always good in fiction) and also helped make a political statement. But the movie, IMO, transcended political statements. The way it was written and filmed allowed it to take on more universal, human qualities. While it may have been society that discriminated against these two lovers, it was ultimately their inability and unwillingness to counter that society that was the deeper tragedy IMO.

Although we might wish that society made whoever we are more accepted and embraced, what other people do and don't do (individually and in a group) is outside our control. What is far harder to do is to change ourselves to deal with outer realities. Jack and Ennis, in particular, did not do that. To me, that was the greater tragedy and Ennis paid the price for it.