Posted by Temsonic on 02/22/06 13:25

"Gunther Gloop" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:461m68F92308U1@individual.net...
> Temsonic wrote:
>> I'm surprised someone such as you who very obviously likes to make up
>> their own mind about films instead of listening to the herd's
>> opinions would let something like the 'gay sector' or 'liberal media
>> types' liking it put you off. I haven't seen it yet but I plan to,
>> and it hadn't occurred to me until now that it might be considered
>> 'un-hetero' of me to want to see it and I most certainly hadn't
>> worried about who I might be sitting next to in the cinema. Good god,
>> F-cking Amal is one of my favourite films, and I sure as hell isn't a
>> teenage lesbian, I don't see why watching Brokeback Mountain would be
>> any different.
>
> I wasn't looking for anything other than some balance. I recognise that a
> certain group have a vested interest in it (or that's how it's portrayed
> at least). The fact that _any_ one group can like a movie does not mean
> it's good or bad or worth-seeing in itself.
>
> But I hate movies/books, etc. that deliberately preach a particular
> viewpoint and show people with opposing viewpoints as stupid/ backward/
> facistic/ childish/ etc. while it "teaches us all the error of our ways".
>
> So I didn't like Pleasantville, Cider House Rules, Amelie and others
> mainly for that reason. It's nothing to do with my own opinion of what
> they were 'preaching', or what anyone else liked or disliked about them.
> I think it's wrong for "art" to have a set-viewpoint. That should be left
> up to the viewer/listener to decide.

I agree to a certain extent, though I think we can sometimes impose that on
a film ourselves. E.g. If a film has the two main male protagonists falling
in love it's obviously going to upset some of the characters around them in
the film, and if we care at all about those protagonists by that point, then
we're likely to see any prejudiced charater's words and actions towards them
as hurtful and 'bad' - unless of course you're homophobic in which case you
may well take the other side. Essentially, your own reaction to what you see
as being 'preached' (and I use that word in the loosest possible sense) from
opinions and values you already have can easily colour your view of the
film.

Maybe that's just me, I don't like 'observing' films clinically, I enjoy a
film more if I can understand the characters and can at least feel some kind
of empathy with what I'm watching. I think that's why I'm not (yet) a big
fan of directors like Kubrick.

I don't think you can categorically state it's wrong for art to have a set
viewpoint, but I do think that the art/artist should be open and honest
about that viewpoint and not present it as the objective true and correct
viewpoint. Just out of interest, what was Amelie preaching to me? Whatever
it was was lost on me!


> Still, if I was aware beforehand that the movies above were like that I
> probably wouldn't have bothered with any of them (well maybe I'd still
> have seen Amelie -of the three I most wanted to see that one). For that
> reason I've avoided Chocolat (which seems like a remake of Pleasantville)
> and a number of others.
>
> My main aim in this thread was to determine if Brokeback Mountain is about
> "teaching chip-on-their-shoulder rednecks that gays are good" or is it
> actually a proper 3D-characters movie. Ang Lee's presence indicates it
> probably _does_ have real characters, but as I said, I didn't really enjoy
> much of his other movies anyway.
>
>
>> Some of the reactions remind me of Y Tu Mama Tambien, which I thought
>> was an astoundingly effective film, and lent to my brother-in-law
>> who's not averse to subtitled films. I described it to him as being
>> 'Mexican with lots of sex and social commentary' but I'd forgotten
>> about the scene where the two boys get it on. He came back to me
>> saying he'd really enjoyed it but didn't like a certain part - can
>> you guess which bit? - and found it 'unnecessary'. Why some men get
>> so uptight about this really puzzles me but there we go (suffice to
>> say I'll be wary about letting him borrow any of my Almodovar films).
>> It's hardly like watching gay porn, it's a love story about people.
>> Porn never features love or people, it features personality-less
>> bodies for sexual titillation - not that there's anything wrong with
>> that in it's right place, but the two shouldn't be confused.
>
> I really enjoyed Y Tu Mama too. Very sexy and crude and thought-provoking
> I thought. Must watch again sometime. I was very surprised when the
> director was 'chosen' to make that Harry Potter movie (must watch that
> some time too. Probably).

I think JK Rowling possibly had something to do with it. In her interview on
the Prisoner of Azkaban DVD she says that she loved Y Tu Mama Tambien and
approved the choice of Alfonso Cuaron because 'he really understands teenage
boys'. Prisoner of Azkaban is by far the best of the HP series. It's a
wonderfully directed film and has currently made it's way to the top of my
rewatchable feelgood film list.


>> Also, I don't see why anyone should be surprised that it's been
>> championed by the gay scene. It's not often that anyone makes a
>> mainstream Hollywood film that doesn't either caricature gay
>> characters or completely play down their sexuality - look at the flak
>> Oliver Stone took regarding a historically accurate portrayal of
>> Alexander as being gay, or the fact that Brad Pitt had to get upset
>> about his... ahem... "cousin" in Troy.
>
> As I said, it's not about putting down any particular group. I wanted to
> hear from the 'other' group because I hadn't already.
>
> From what I now know of Brokeback Mountain, it seems like a close
> comparison might be Bridges of Madison County.
> ...I have yet to watch that movie too. ...It's "on the list", but not a
> priority.

Never seen Bridges of Madison County though I know roughly what it's about.
I was thinking something along the lines of In The Mood For Love (though
probably not half as stylish) - again the general forbidden love angle
rather than two hours of shirtlifting in a field full of sheep ;)

[Back to original message]