Return to Brokeback Mountain

If you haven’t seen my original take on Brokeback Mountain, it’s here. As you might have inferred, I didn’t have a burning, yearning desire to go see the movie. Sure, there was the curiosity factor, but if it hadn’t been for my wife’s desire to check it out, I probably wouldn’t have gotten around to renting the DVD for quite some time. But, with this weekend having been a typical Jersey spring-time weekend, filled with rain, wind, and chilly weather, it was the perfect opportunity to catch up on movies, and Brokeback made the short list. (By the way, consider this a spoiler alert. I’m going to discuss the plot and storylines a bit, so keep that in mind if you haven’t seen it yet.)

First reaction: it’s not a bad movie. It’s actually pretty good, with a decent story. But it’s only that – a decent story. It’s not overly profound, nor is it any more moving than any other love story, and not as moving as some I've seen. It is a nice little tale about two people who want to be together but are kept apart by circumstances. However, the only thing “ground-breaking” about it is the fact that it features two men in the lead roles, instead of a man and a woman. Had it been a man and a woman in the leads, it would have been a fairly formulaic “love story” about two people who want to be together but cannot be. Think Bridges of Madison County crossed with Same Time Next Year and replace the female lead with Jake Gyllenhaal, and you’ve got Brokeback Mountain. Seriously – that’s the movie.

Don’t get me wrong. Brokeback is certainly very well acted. Heath Ledger was extraordinary in the role of Ennis Del Mar, and both he and Gyllenhaal had to really get into their roles to sell the male-on-male aspect of the story. But they did it, they did it well (at least as far as I could tell), and, for me, they did sell me on the belief that they were attracted to each other. To me, that’s the sign of great acting in a good – not great -- movie.

Oh, I understand the social significance of the movie. It’s supposedly the first “mainstream” movie with gay characters in the leads, and it shows that “real” love transcends both gender and social “norms.” How “mainstream” the movie is remains an open question (which I addressed in my previous post on Brokeback). I also question how truly “significant” the movie is in this day and age. From Ellen Degeneris coming out on her sitcom and now hosting her own highly regarded talk show, to Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, to Will and Grace, people not only recognize that there are gay people in the world today, but also that gay and lesbian folks actually have lives and relationships, fall in love, adopt children, and lead fulfilling and influential lives. Moreover, those that don’t realize that now, or refuse to recognize it, aren’t going to be converted by a movie like Brokeback, primarily because they’ll never see it.

On top of that, it does occur to me that Brokeback is not really a “gay” movie at all. It’s a movie about a unique relationship between two unique people defined by its time and circumstances. To be sure, Gyllenhaal’s Jack Twist is without question gay, covering his orientation with a marriage of convenience. However, I’m not certain that you can characterize Ledger’s Ennis as “gay.” Sure, he jumps on Jack Twist up on the mountain (with surprisingly little provocation and virtually no chemistry that I could see), but as far as I can tell, Jack is the only male that Ennis is interested in in his entire life. Unlike Jack, we don’t see Ennis going after, talking with, or pursuing any other male in the movie – ever. He doesn’t seem interested in any other man, and based on his father’s “lesson” while Ennis was young, it seems that Ennis was repulsed by the idea of any other man. Ennis got married, had kids, and seemed to want to make it work with Alma. Ennis is curious, conflicted, and confused, but only with respect to Jack. I don’t see Ennis as “gay” so much as he is interested in Jack, and Jack alone. Of course, that’s just my purely heterosexual perspective on things. I’m sure others will have a different take.

Finally, as to all of the hoopla about how Brokeback got cheated out of the Best Picture Oscar in favor of Crash, the “Best Picture” is purely a subjective thing, so that’s your answer right there – the Academy made a subjective selection. From my perspective, there is no contest – Crash is a much better movie than Brokeback. Apart from the gay aspect of Brokeback, its plot is otherwise fairly pedestrian. I’ve seen this story before – having a gay backstory doesn’t change the underlying plot. Crash, on the other hand, is more unique and far more difficult to pull of seamlessly. Grand Canyon did something similar years ago, but not nearly as well as Crash. I haven’t seen Capote yet, which was also nominated, but between Crash and Brokeback, it’s not even close.

Overall, I would recommend Brokeback. It’s a good flick, and it’s well done. As long as you go in understanding you’re watching a love story, and expecting a lot of character development and exposition, you’ll enjoy it. Sit back, put your feet up, and indulge.