Catholic commentary on culture, media, and politics.

Monday, December 19, 2005

"Bareback Mounthim" a huge hit, except at the box office

While The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe and King Kong (even The Polar Express in an IMAX re-release) reckon their profits in the ten$ of million$, the gay cowpoke flick has made a tiny fraction in box office. It opened on a pitiful eight (8) screens in big cities in its opening run. But it's already tapped to win Golden Globes and Oscars For Most Fabulous Everything.

Gay
I'm gay sure gay glad gay that gay the gay new gay Ang Lee gay movie gay has gay no gay gay gay agenda. No, gay no, gay it's gay a gay tender gay love gay story gay with gay universal gay themes gay we gay can gay all gay relate gay to gay as human gay beings.


GLAAD president Neil Giuliano says, "What Brokeback Mountain does is allow audiences to experience, on an intensely emotional level, how ignorance and intolerance can force people to deny their love and deny who they are."

Any questions?

Curt Shepart, director of government relations for the Los Angeles Gay & Lesbian center, said "Brokeback" is different because "It's not self-conscious. it's not dealing with coming out of the closet." The characters, said Shepard, have no political agenda, and the film doesn't proselytize.

Allrighty then.

BTW, the two gay cowboys are names Jack and Ennis.

Jack. Ennis. Think about them names, pardner.

No unseemly resonances here, folks, move right along.

I guess Bareback Mounthim will get a pass this time...but is it not outRAGEeous that homophobic Hollywood dared to cast straight actors as gay cowboys? You watch-- this complaint will surface next time.

15 Comments:

Blogger Rick Lugari said...

LOL

I hadn't caught the names before. It would be hard to make a parody funnier than that. ;)

2:35 PM

 
Anonymous Domenico Bettinelli said...

Technically they're not cowboys, but sheep herders.

Gee, the bishops' conference reviewer liked a movie about two gay shepherds. Color me surprised.

5:19 PM

 
Anonymous midwestmom said...

Bareback Mounthim?! (ROTFL)

Of course 'bareback' comes to mind when you hear the name of the movie and know that it's a gay flick but 'mounthim'? Genius!

8:44 PM

 
Blogger Clayton said...

"It's just about these two people in that period of time, when it was impossible to express themselves in any way except through the relationship."

As opposed to expressing themselves through Academy Awards speeches, parades and reworked catechetical texts? What a brave new world.

4:18 AM

 
Blogger Clayton said...

I did see the film this past Sunday, and it played to a nearly full house in Sherman Oaks. I will be writing a review on my blog within the week. I'll just say this: the movie does not scream 'agenda' the way Million Dollar Baby did; Ang Lee is a much more disciplined director than Eastwood, with a greater command of his craft. And I think I believe Lee when he says he didn't intend an agenda film. But I think it will be an example of art being made to say what people want it to say... Very few people receive art for what it is anymore, most have to spin it, to perform eisegesis on it...

It was difficult to watch, and there was definitely material that warranted the O rating. I don't know how the USCCB review felt justified with the L rating, except that their reviewer must be one of those neo-Puritans who thinks that the only thing that can be offensive is the amount of flesh that is visible, not the act itself.

More about the movie later.

I was surprised to so many heterosexual couples there, as that did not seem to be the target audience, if you know what I mean. I suspect a lot of women dragged their mates to the cineplex.

The red-carpet premiere happened just down the street from my office in Westwood a couple of weeks ago. There, the demographic was almost solely men looking to get a snapshot of Heath or Jake.

4:32 AM

 
Anonymous Tony said...

Jack? Ennis? Now I'm embarassed. I don't get it. Someone will have to explain it to me.

Had they been named Neil and Bob, I would have gotten it.

10:55 AM

 
Anonymous midwestmom said...

I'm thinking anus for Ennis but I'm not sure about Jack. Patrick, DO TELL.

6:06 PM

 
Blogger Tito said...

I'm surprised not one reviewer noticed the 'true' love between Jack and Enis and their horses!

There is an underlieing beastiality message that is subverting the homosexual themes.

All kidding aside, we're 10 years away of having the next 'Benji' movie with requited love being exchanged by that little mutt and his boy owner.

NAMBLA will be mainstream and GALA will go gaga over this 'historic' breaking epic of a film.

Ugh.

8:06 PM

 
Blogger Patrick said...

Rick: I do try!

Dom: a) I forgot it was sheep herders -- makes it more fun to parody! Not goat or llama - sheep! b) how do you know so much about (cough cough) all this, cowboy?

MWM: I'm here all week. Try the veal.

Clayton: I don't doubt that Mr. Lee did not make a gay-style agenda movie like Million Dollar Baby. It's the depiction of Misunderstood Beauty and Glory of Gayitude as normal and "human" that makes it a few cuts above agitprop. And correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't their mutual hunka burnin' love end up destroying at least one marriage and, implicitly, the lives of young children? Believe it or not I have little interest in separating myself from nine bucks and two hours to see it.

Tony: If I explain Jack, it gets unseemly. Let's just say you're close. Hint: some West Hollywoodites might watch the movie ALONE. fyi, I believe the choice of names for the two leads is not random.

Conde: The bestiality theme already stared with Peter Shafer's play (and movie) "Equus." google it. I wish I was kidding.

USCCB film reviewer: What are you doing after the rodeo, my little leather-chapped Buckaroo?

10:48 PM

 
Blogger Patrick said...

This is beginning to look like the Free Republic thread on this subject. All condemnation, but man it's sure fun to talk about sexual innuendo, oral and anal sex (the "unprotected" kind, of course).

The movie would be a great thing to study in light of reparative therapy theory. In fact, if people would stop for a moment and consider it they might figure out a way to use it toward these ends.

It also might be an opportunity to consider that, whether or not you agree that "homosexuality" is acceptable, the men and women who deal with it often live lives of torment, even the "good" ones who remain chaste.

Patrick

7:13 PM

 
Blogger Clayton said...

Patrick,

Kudos for bringing the comments back onto the track of charity.

I'll be writing a review of the film on my blog eventually, but right now I'm just reading what's out there, because if someone else has said it well, why should a hack like me waste my time?

The best I have seen so far is Victor Morton's review, and I think the Christianity Today review is good as well.

I think the movie raises some larger questions... Let's say we accept the premise that the movie, in itself, is not driven by an agenda. Let's say we accept the premise that it tells the truth about characters and about the devastating effects of perverse behavior. None of this answers the question: is it a story that ought to be told? This is where things get sticky... and nuanced. Just because a thing may be true does not mean it ought to be broadcast... and just because homosexual gential acts happen in the world doesn't mean the general public should be asked to watch them...

Another dimension to be considered: a movie can tell the emotional truth about a situation... but if we live in a society of Men without Chests (see Lewis' Abolition of Man), can we be surprised if the "emotional truth" is interpreted as a moral imperative?

4:28 AM

 
Blogger Clayton said...

Victor Morton's review is here, and the Christianity Today review is here.

4:32 AM

 
Blogger Patrick said...

PDP:

If your "all condemnation/Free Republic" comment refers to anything I wrote, please say where.

If anything, my post was meant as parody. But also as criticism: BB Mountain is a love letter from Hollywood to itself. Period. If you saw insights in it re: reparative therapy, then why don't you write something about it? If you do, and I'm sure you could do a good job, you'll be slammed by homosexualists (most of whom despise the very idea of reparative therapy, and are enamored by the movie's endorsement of their sexual preferences). I dare you.

My gripe with the movie is this: most legitmate polls put the population percentage at 2-4%. The last Canada census found 1%. In the UK, it showed one in 16. This means a small MINORITY of the general population. But this movie has been handed every accolade and nomination known to man, has received unprecendented (positive) coverage by all the usual leftists in Tinseltown and their red state admirers. But the movie itself has *not* done big box office: it opened on eight -- 8!!) screens in its initial run. This is otherwise known as blatant advocacy of the gay agenda (cliche political term but there it is) by a small minority *about* a small minority. If the lovers were heterosexual, don't you think the flick would be noted as being troublingly pro-adultery?

Your remark about tormented lives is well noted -- another reason why the gay lifestyle shouldn't be honored and lauded by Hollywood, or elsewhere.

3:18 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

LATEST HOLLYWOOD SCRIPT DEALS



LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter)—Lowend Productions has purchased the script “Brokeback Prison” from Boston screenwriter Leon Jones. Lowend CEO W. E. Makcrap says production will begin in February for release in December 2006.



“This is one of the strongest spec scripts we’ve ever come across,” said Makcrap. “It has action, romance, drama, even a little bit of comedy. We expect that this will be an awards contender in 2007.”



“Prison” is story of two convicts, Lamont Jenkins and Malik Harris, who become cellmates in New York’s notorious Riker’s Island prison. An initially adversarial relationship leads to friendship—and one night, it leads to more.



After a unexpectedly passionate evening, Jenkins and Harris deny their attraction to each other, but after Harris is paroled, Jenkins finds himself longing for his former cellmate. After Jenkins’ release from prison, he pursues Harris, who has since married his girlfriend and fathered three children with her. Despite his marital connections, Harris cannot deny his love for Jenkins, and the two men try to maintain their love in the face of a hostile society.



Makcrap says the roles are “unbelievably well written. Jones did a remarkable job with the script, and we’ll surely find two young, handsome, muscular studs to play the leads. These roles have star-making potential.”



Jones previously wrote “What the Hell Were You Thinking, Girl? The Whitney Houston Story” and “The Man Who Killed Tupac,” and directed the documentary “Mumia Abu-Jamal: Guilty as All Hell.”



Jones says he's thrilled to see his script--"which I labored long and hard on"--go into production.



"I just think this is a fabulous story," said Jones from his South End condo. "Not only is love a force of nature, but sometimes love just comes up and hits you from behind."



Reuters/Hollywood Reporter

1:15 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The point remains, Clayton, who the hell cares?

Hitler was disappointed in how his reign turned out. This should be viewed with about with the same level of concern. And for the same reasons.

12:21 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home