Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Kerrigan · Jul 17, 2005, 10:16 PM

Brokeback Mountain is in production right now, it's a film starring two A-list celebs, Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal. Basically, they play two cowboys who fall in love in 1960s Texas. It seems to me that this is the first major Hollywood movie to be entirely centred around a normal gay relationship.

Up to this point, Hollywood films which involve gays are usually either comedies (Bird Cage) or are films that use homosexuality as a gimmick or twist, like Crying Game or Mr Ripley. This is a step in the right direction for Hollywood and America.

(And yes, I too thought that the title was "Bareback Mountain" at first glance

)

ender2002 · Jul 17, 2005, 10:20 PM

man. that sounds gay.

invisibleX · Jul 17, 2005, 10:58 PM

I think homosexuality is fairly open in movies.. although this is probably the first to revolve around a gay relationship.

Aside from porn.

budster101 · Jul 17, 2005, 10:58 PM

Who are they again? "A" List you say?

Getting my list out to check...

---

Who cares? Why is this great?
What was wrong with "As Good As It Gets" with Jack Nicholson? Weren't the Gays portrayed well enough for you there? There are countless movies where Gays are portrayed, none of them good huh?

Brokeback, is that code for Bonedass?

2 Gay Cowboys? Great, an Anti-John Wayne movie... I can see it now, "Top Gun" but with Horses...

UNTeMac · Jul 17, 2005, 11:11 PM

Originally Posted by budster101

Who are they again? "A" List you say?

Getting my list out to check...

---

Who cares? Why is this great?
What was wrong with "As Good As It Gets" with Jack Nicholson? Weren't the Gays portrayed well enough for you there? There are countless movies where Gays are portrayed, none of them good huh?

Brokeback, is that code for Bonedass?

2 Gay Cowboys? Great, an Anti-John Wayne movie... I can see it now, "Top Gun" but with Horses...

You win the prize for ""Most Predictable Response."

budster101 · Jul 17, 2005, 11:16 PM

Glad to oblige. This thread *is* gay.

- Severed Head of Skywalker

lavar78 · Jul 17, 2005, 11:22 PM

Originally Posted by budster101

Severed Head of Skywalker

You really changed the movie there, didn't you?

Kerrigan · Jul 17, 2005, 11:29 PM

Budster, I thought you had calmed down recently but I guess I pushed a button?

JoshuaZ · Jul 17, 2005, 11:32 PM

Obviously you've never seen Spartacus.

budster101 · Jul 17, 2005, 11:38 PM

Given your post, did you mean to push any buttons?

I'm just giving my opinion of gay movies in general? Did I half-hazzardly push any of your buttons?
I think they, like this thread are gay, in the common slang vernacular meaning of the phrase. "That's Gay".

It's common slang.
It is ok for "Severed Hand / Head, whatever", to say it in other threads, but not me?

DeathMan · Jul 18, 2005, 12:18 AM

Originally Posted by budster101

half-hazzardly

haphazardly.

budster101 · Jul 18, 2005, 12:22 AM

Thanks for the correction... but I meant it the way it was written.

itistoday · Jul 18, 2005, 12:28 AM

Originally Posted by ender2002

man. that sounds gay.

Really nice sig.

analogika · Jul 18, 2005, 06:24 AM

Originally Posted by budster101

Who cares?

You do, cream puff.

You wouldn't bother posting, otherwise.

Doofy · Jul 18, 2005, 06:29 AM

Prediction: Film will bomb faster than an F15E Strike Eagle.

Zimphire · Jul 18, 2005, 06:33 AM

I could care less.

wolfen · Jul 18, 2005, 06:42 AM

No, there are lots of movies with gay people. In fact, nearly every time I try to pick something "critically acclaimed" off the shelf it turns out to have some major gay plot. I sometimes wish they'd have "WARNING: Gay Love Inside" in case maybe I 'm not in the mood to watch that sort of thing tonite. I think there was a month of weekends where nearly everything I picked was about homosexuals. On the third week I was screaming at the TV set. My wife got a kick out of it. We went on a long sci-fi/action binge after that I can tell you.

Secondarily, you may be surprised to learn that your evaluation of a "normal" gay relationship could be offensive. Now there's a "normal" gay relationship they're supposed to conform to? I think if you spent 30 seconds in Hollywood you'd probably find every boundary of normal violated on an hourly basis. It's a wonder they produce films that any of us can relate to when you think about it.

But I think your intent is clear, that you're just happy to have a movie like this being produced. It sounds better than what Tim Burton did to Willy Wanker. But not much. It reinforces Eric Cartman's view that "all those independent movies are about gay cowboys eating pudding." Why pick on Cowboys? Why can't they be gay cab drivers or gay line cooks? Because it's a macho heterosexual stereotype that someone feels obligated to tear down. It's compulsive and obsessive, and this is why people object to these kinds of films.

Scientist · Jul 18, 2005, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by Zimphire

I could care less.

How much less could you care? A lot less or a little less?

budster101 · Jul 18, 2005, 09:17 AM

i'm sure much more less than less.

Eug Wanker · Jul 18, 2005, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Brokeback Mountain is in production right now, it's a film starring two A-list celebs, Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal. Basically, they play two cowboys who fall in love in 1960s Texas. It seems to me that this is the first major Hollywood movie to be entirely centred around a normal gay relationship.

Sounds boring. I'll await the reviews though. If positive, maybe I'll rent it. ie. It definitely doesn't sound like a movie release I'm gonna be anxiously awaiting.

Originally Posted by budster101

i'm sure much more less than less.

IOW he cares a moderate amount?

Zimphire · Jul 18, 2005, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by Scientist

How much less could you care? A lot less or a little less?

Scientist... I know where you are going... but you don't know what I was referring to I guess.

It's a common cliche around here.

budster101 · Jul 18, 2005, 10:46 AM

How about alternate names for that Movie? and why that name?

"Baby got my back"
"Queer eye for a Steer Guy"
"Not going straight into the sunset"
"Tinkerbell with Two Six Guns"
"Light in the Saddle"
"Rid'em Cowboy"
"Hi-ho Silver I'm gay!"
"The great gerbil roundup"
"Rainbows on the Range"

This isn't a remake of the old-time western show: "Rawhide" is it?

Rollin' Rollin' Rollin'

Keep movin', movin', movin',
Though they're disapprovin',
Keep them doggies movin' Rawhide!
Don't try to understand 'em,
Just rope and throw and grab 'em,
Soon we'll be living gay and wide.
Boy my heart's calculatin'
My true love will be waitin', be waiting at the end of my ride.

Move 'em on, head 'em up,
Head 'em up, move 'em out,
Move 'em on, head 'em out Rawhide!
Set 'em out, ride 'em in
Ride 'em in, let 'em out,
Cut 'em out, gay'em up.

Full Lyrics

Rollin', rollin', rollin'
Rollin', rollin', rollin'
Rollin', rollin', rollin'
Rollin', rollin', rollin'
Rawhide!

Rollin', rollin', rollin'
Though some things are swollen
Keep them dogies rollin'
Rawhide!
Rain and wind and weather
Hell-bent-over for leather
Wishin' my gay guy was by my side.
All the things I'm missin',
Good dances, love stories, and kissin',
Are waiting at the end of my ride

CHORUS
Move 'em on, head 'em up
Head 'em up, move 'em on
Move 'em on, head 'em up
Rawhide
Count 'em out, ride 'em in,
Ride 'em in, count 'em out,
Count 'em out, gay'em up.
Rawhide!

Keep movin', movin', movin'
Though they're disapprovin'
Keep them dogies movin'
Rawhide!
Don't try to understand 'em
Just rope, throw, and brand 'em
Soon we'll be living (gay) and wide.
My hearts calculatin'
My true love will be waitin',
Be waitin' at the end of my ride.

Rawhide!
Rawhide!

Eug Wanker · Jul 18, 2005, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by budster101

"Queer eye for a Steer Guy"

Hah.

RAILhead · Jul 18, 2005, 10:56 AM

/obvious

budster101 · Jul 18, 2005, 10:59 AM

"This thread isn't just gay, this whole place is."

wallinbl · Jul 18, 2005, 11:03 AM

Originally Posted by Zimphire

Scientist... I know where you are going... but you don't know what I was referring to I guess.

It's a common cliche around here.

The proper cliche is "I couldn't care less". If you could care less, then you are saying that you do care some.

Hugi · Jul 18, 2005, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by budster101

This isn't a remake of the old-time western show: "Rawhide" is it?

"Rawhind"

Please don't ban me

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jul 18, 2005, 11:06 AM

Jake Gyllenhaal has made comments in interviews about being attracted to men.

lavar78 · Jul 18, 2005, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by wallinbl

The proper cliche is "I couldn't care less". If you could care less, then you are saying that you do care some.

No, that's the common cliché. The common cliché around here (the Internet in general and MacNN in particular) is to use the incorrect "I could care less" and for others to complain about it. I'll take this time to point out once again that "I could care less" works if you say it sarcastically, which doesn't help much on the Internet.

MindFad · Jul 18, 2005, 11:13 AM

Still, the proper use of the expression is "I couldn't care less." [/MacNN]

Wait, what's going on in this thread?

xi_hyperon · Jul 18, 2005, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by MindFad

Wait, what's going on in this thread?

Some question about the orientation of budster's cows I think.

Zimphire · Jul 18, 2005, 11:15 AM

Yes that is the proper use. I used teh

turtle777 · Jul 18, 2005, 11:21 AM

Alright, this thread just screams for a pic...

-t

ghporter · Jul 18, 2005, 06:26 PM

Originally Posted by wallinbl

The proper cliche is "I couldn't care less". If you could care less, then you are saying that you do care some.

Oh PLEASE!!! Didn't we waste enough time and inconvenience enough elecrons last month on this!?!?!?!?

wallinbl · Jul 18, 2005, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

Oh PLEASE!!! Didn't we waste enough time and inconvenience enough elecrons last month on this!?!?!?!?

I have no idea. I only read these forums periodically.

scottiB · Jul 18, 2005, 06:45 PM

[South Park reference]

As long as they also eat pudding...but then that would make it an independent film like Go Fish

[/South Park reference]

ghporter · Jul 18, 2005, 07:06 PM

Originally Posted by wallinbl

I have no idea. I only read these forums periodically.

This was the subject of a LONG thread last month. There was no resolution. People in entrenched semantic positions stayed entrenched. It's not worth it to bother discussing the subject for a while. I believe we agreed to tolerate each others' "wrongness" in the spirit of Mac cooperation, but that's about it.

On the subject of the movie, it is true that most gay characters in any Hollywood production (TV or film) are fairly well stereotyped. It's easier for the producers to feel that viewers will "understand the character" if he or she is painted two-dimensionally and portrays familiar behaviors. In other words, Hollywood producers and money people aren't interested in truth, they're interested in simple. Simple stories, simple minded viewers, etc. From what I've read of Brokeback Mountain, it breaks away from stereotypes and trys to portray the two main characters as (gasp!) people. What a concept.

Doofy · Jul 18, 2005, 08:21 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

Hollywood producers and money people aren't interested in truth, they're interested in simple.

That's because people go to the cinema to be entertained, not for a sociology lesson.

 · Jul 18, 2005, 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Up to this point, Hollywood films which involve gays are usually either comedies (Bird Cage) or are films that use homosexuality as a gimmick or twist, like Crying Game or Mr Ripley. This is a step in the right direction for Hollywood and America.

Apparently you never saw Wet Hot American Summer.

Kerrigan · Jul 18, 2005, 08:40 PM

And oftentimes well written, believable stories based on realistic characters provide for the most entertaining movies of all. Anybody can make a film with 2-dimensional characters in an unlikely situation, and these types of film bore quite a lot of people. When a clever story is crafted from characters who are believable and placed into normal situations, this is how real art is made.

Doofy, I think you underestimated the average moviegoer. Perhaps in the summer, most people go to the cinema for big-budget action flicks and shallow comedies, but for the rest of the year, people prefer to watch interesting, nuanced films.

analogika · Jul 19, 2005, 03:30 AM

Originally Posted by Doofy

That's because people go to the cinema to be distracted, not for brain food.

Fix0r3d.™

budster101 · Jul 19, 2005, 08:52 AM

You are soooo way fuxxen c00Lerz cuz you can writerz like dat.
Doofy had it just fine thank you very little.

I go to be entertained, which is a distraction from life, which on the contrary is quite entertaining in another less entertaining way.

ghporter · Jul 19, 2005, 09:11 AM

Hollywood aims directly at 17-19 year old males with disposable income and negative IQs-and cashes in every time. When someone from outside the Hollywood elite makes a movie that is successful, this is termed a "fluke." Examples are "The Lord of the Rings" trillogy, mainly because nobody in the world thought Peter Jackson could pull it off. Considering his moviemaking history, they may have had a superficial point. But he was VERY outside the Hollywood elite, so his success was "exceptional." What the West Coast movie makers are interested in is a quick payoff at the boxoffice, then a nice lucrative run on video, not "making art," or even social commentary.

WAAAAAAY back in the day, there was a movie called "Adam's Rib" starring Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn. It was a) a bit of a screwball comedy, b) a very nice love story, and c) a biting social commentary-particularly on gender inequality. Note that Kate got chastized more than once for (gasp!) wearing slacks onto the studio lot...after a round of golf. She was NOT a person to suffer fools nor their foolishness lightly. You CAN make entertaining movies with multiple layers of entertainment (take a look-a good, hard look-at almost ANY Bugs Bunny cartoon to see multiple layers). But the money folks have to be ready to pay for something they don't understand in 50 words or less.

budster101 · Jul 19, 2005, 09:14 AM

Well put ghporter.
Just watched "Collateral" last night with Tom Cruise. Ok, he was in it, not with me for you smart-arse types.

Though I'd like to have a private chat with that freaky dude, and get the low-down on his break down.
Anyway, that movie was made for the 17-19 crowd.

wallinbl · Jul 19, 2005, 09:51 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

Examples are "The Lord of the Rings" trillogy, mainly because nobody in the world thought Peter Jackson could pull it off. Considering his moviemaking history, they may have had a superficial point.

You're talking about the guy that made Bad Taste! That movie is fantastic. It's hard to find, but it's awesome.

Kerrigan · Feb 13, 2006, 08:18 PM

Originally Posted by Doofy

Prediction: Film will bomb faster than an F15E Strike Eagle.

I'm always glad to bring up old threads in order to say: I was right and you were wrong!

slugslugslug · Feb 13, 2006, 09:06 PM

You could add that it's an effin' great movie too, but it seems that many people here are convinced of the logical impossibility of an effin' great movie about gay people. Nonetheless, it certainly deserves the little gold dude.

far200 · Feb 13, 2006, 09:34 PM

Well as the song goes " save a horse, ride a cowboy " big and rich...... I think they ment girls though.....

Paco500 · Feb 13, 2006, 09:36 PM

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

I'm always glad to bring up old threads in order to say: I was right and you were wrong!

Not to bust your chops, but you are clearly mistaken. Doofy's never been wrong. Seriously. Just ask him. And he's RICH! And successful beyond your wildest dreams!

PookJP · Feb 13, 2006, 09:40 PM

Brokeback was a wonderful movie. To focus solely on the main characters' sexuality is to miss the larger subtlety and power.