Automoderated users, edit
1,837
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 20:
Line 20: + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Brokeback Mountain (view source)
Revision as of 19:18, October 7, 2008
, 19:18, October 7, 2008Various comments.
::Just because YOU never heard of it, doesn't mean it wasn't a hit. Heath Ledger had STARRING roles in A Knight's Tale (2001), The Four Feathers (2002), The Order (2003), Ned Kelly (2003), Casanova (2005), The Brothers Grimm (2005), and Lords of Dogtown (2005). Gyllenhaal was also the star of The Day After Tomorrow prior to Brokeback Mountain, and it was a blockbuster. I'm not sure if Jarhead was before or after Brokeback, but it also was a hit movie. Give the devil his due.--[[User:IanG|IanG]] 14:44, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
::Just because YOU never heard of it, doesn't mean it wasn't a hit. Heath Ledger had STARRING roles in A Knight's Tale (2001), The Four Feathers (2002), The Order (2003), Ned Kelly (2003), Casanova (2005), The Brothers Grimm (2005), and Lords of Dogtown (2005). Gyllenhaal was also the star of The Day After Tomorrow prior to Brokeback Mountain, and it was a blockbuster. I'm not sure if Jarhead was before or after Brokeback, but it also was a hit movie. Give the devil his due.--[[User:IanG|IanG]] 14:44, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
::[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]], I'm guessing you're the wrong gender to appreciate Ledger's, uh, talents. I loved him in ''Ten Things''. In my house, we enjoyed comparing it to Shakespeare's ''Taming of the Shrew'', which it was based on. We also enjoyed ''Knight's Tale'', especially all of the wonderful jousting scenes. I hated ''Lords of Dogtown'', but the documentary it was based on, ''Dogtown and Z-Boys'', was great. Ledger, though, did a pretty good job in ''Lords'', given a horribly-written movie. I'm not a big movie lover, but I was familiar with Ledger well before ''Brokeback'', as were many other movie fans. While he wasn't on everyone's radar, he was far from a no-name actor. [[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]], the problem with writing a summary/analysis of ''Brokeback'' without seeing the movie is that you may get the basic facts right, but without seeing it you may not get the tone right, or understand the nuances that made it a quite good ''and complex'' movie, regardless of its controversial subject matter. In this movie, tone and nuance is everything. For the record, I have seen the movie. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 15:00, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
::[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]], I'm guessing you're the wrong gender to appreciate Ledger's, uh, talents. I loved him in ''Ten Things''. In my house, we enjoyed comparing it to Shakespeare's ''Taming of the Shrew'', which it was based on. We also enjoyed ''Knight's Tale'', especially all of the wonderful jousting scenes. I hated ''Lords of Dogtown'', but the documentary it was based on, ''Dogtown and Z-Boys'', was great. Ledger, though, did a pretty good job in ''Lords'', given a horribly-written movie. I'm not a big movie lover, but I was familiar with Ledger well before ''Brokeback'', as were many other movie fans. While he wasn't on everyone's radar, he was far from a no-name actor. [[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]], the problem with writing a summary/analysis of ''Brokeback'' without seeing the movie is that you may get the basic facts right, but without seeing it you may not get the tone right, or understand the nuances that made it a quite good ''and complex'' movie, regardless of its controversial subject matter. In this movie, tone and nuance is everything. For the record, I have seen the movie. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 15:00, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
I'll expand my comments here, rather than engage in an edit war. As noted above, I have actually seen the movie. --[[User:Hsmom|Hsmom]] 15:18, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
* ''Brokeback Mountain is a drama movie from 2005 by Ang Lee'' - "Drama movie" is weird phrasing. I'm not sure how to fix it, though. "Is a romantic drama" would work, but leaves out that it is a movie. Anyone have a better idea?
* ''Afterwards, they come to their senses and marry beautiful, dedicated and loving women.'' I would not have used "come to their senses" - the movie is way more complex than that.
* ''However soon their past comes to haunt them and destroys not only their lives but the innocent lives of their wives and innocent children.'' No argument with the content, but two "innocent"s aren't needed - pick one.
* ''Audiences witness the families torn asunder in waves of agonizing revelations, all stemming from a secret around "fishing" trips where the men once again use their seclusion to its "ends".'' While the first part of this sentence is fine, the rest totally misses the complexity of the relationships in the film, and leaves out completely the romance.
* ''Despite the destructive message of this film'' What is the destructive message? Gay relationships end in sadness? Or is it something else? If we are claiming a destructive message, I think we need to spell it out. I'm guessing some readers here would have a different answer others.
* ''people were admonished for not having seen it and not being "open-minded" to a "different" love story.'' Who was admonished? Who did the admonishing? Citation, please.
* ''In that respect, the advertising purposefully concealed the theme of homosexuality from the unsuspecting public, merely referring to it as a modern day "love story" and concentrating on the appealing rugged cowboy element and picturesque landscapes.'' Purposefully concealed? I think movie-goers were pretty clear on the content of the movie. I'd like to see a citation that there was an attempt to hide the content of the film.