avoid Bareback Mountain like the plague.

[QUOTE=Stray Bullet]Besides, hasn't being gay lost it's shock value after shows like Queer Eye for the Straight Guy and Project Runway...well, pretty much since Bravo got popular. Since then anything gay has lost it's edge. I think most of normal society is pretty much like, "we get it! You're here and queer and that's perfectly fine, just stop making it such a big deal about it"[/QUOTE]
FUCKING THANK YOU!

[QUOTE=Stray Bullet]Besides, hasn't being gay lost it's shock value after shows like Queer Eye for the Straight Guy and Project Runway...well, pretty much since Bravo got popular. Since then anything gay has lost it's edge. I think most of normal society is pretty much like, "we get it! You're here and queer and that's perfectly fine, just stop making it such a big deal about it"[/QUOTE]

...the next taboo will be churchgoing "breeders" with 2.5 kids and a white picket fence - people will freak - their kids will be outcast for their beliefs and counter-culture lifestyle. their jobs will be threatened because of their WWJD bracelets, rapture bumper stickers and preference for whitebread. Their friends will abandon them after their tenth year wedding anniversary, as their friends will now have nothing in common...

you watch - they'll be hunted and thrown to the proverbial lions

and why is it that shock value has to be the driving force behind anythign we read see or hear these days? what is wrong with A GOOD STORY? am i the only one left (and yes i know what website i am on here, so spare me the obvious...)

[QUOTE=Atomos]im not a homophobe. i'd bitch just as much about all the goddamn girls gone wild ads i see if we made a thread about it.

in fact, one of my closest friend is incredibly gay and plays country songs on the gee-tar and wears a cowboy hat[/QUOTE]

I have gay friends too! And for some reason I never feel the need to make derogatory statements about gays when I'm posting on the internet.

[QUOTE=kasey_carpenter]and why is it that shock value has to be the driving force behind anythign we read see or hear these days? what is wrong with A GOOD STORY? am i the only one left (and yes i know what website i am on here, so spare me the obvious...)[/QUOTE]

kasey, please ready the story by Annie Proulx that Bareback Mountain is based on. (same title) I haven't seen the film so I don't know how much of the original remains. The short story has nothing to do with shock value. It's just a fine and haunting piece about love and loss.

[QUOTE=mirka]kasey, please ready the story by Annie Proulx that Bareback Mountain is based on. (same title) I haven't seen the film so I don't know how much of the original remains. The short story has nothing to do with shock value. It's just a fine and haunting piece about love and loss.[/QUOTE]

only because you recommend it - I'll add it to the list, and only if you read Mark Richards - The Ice At The Bottom of the World - it was recommended awhile back in here - best collection of short stories/essays in minimalist you will EVER READ (except some good Hempel.)

[QUOTE=Stray Bullet]Besides, hasn't being gay lost it's shock value after shows like Queer Eye for the Straight Guy and Project Runway...well, pretty much since Bravo got popular. Since then anything gay has lost it's edge. I think most of normal society is pretty much like, "we get it! You're here and queer and that's perfectly fine, just stop making it such a big deal about it"[/QUOTE]
So every movie about a gay relationship has to be taken to be "shocking"?
I dont think that this movie is meant to be shocking at all or even that edgy.
Its a period movie. It isnt complaining about straight attitudes today. Its about a relationship between two people that was compleatly unacceptable in that environment. I dont think there is a modern gay agenda to push, especially since there were no gay males involved in the writing or directing at all

Its sad that a movie about truthful gay relationships cant strive to exist in mainstream markets without people criticising it because of the fact its about homosexuality while they claim to be not homophobic.

[QUOTE=Stray Bullet]Besides, hasn't being gay lost it's shock value after shows like Queer Eye for the Straight Guy and Project Runway...well, pretty much since Bravo got popular. Since then anything gay has lost it's edge. I think most of normal society is pretty much like, "we get it! You're here and queer and that's perfectly fine, just stop making it such a big deal about it"[/QUOTE]

Yes but it sets off those nutty christians who'll bitch and moan and roll about on the floor about family values and morals and how the gay community has hijacked the movie industry to promote it's gay agenda to turn everyone gay. Then the media jumps into the fray and suddenly John Q. Public, which has an I.Q. comparable to buttered toast parrots whatever points they make.

So is there actual anal penetration or dick sucking? Cuz if there isn't . . . I ain't going to see it.

[QUOTE=kasey_carpenter]only because you recommend it - I'll add it to the list, and only if you read Mark Richards - The Ice At The Bottom of the World - it was recommended awhile back in here - best collection of short stories/essays in minimalist you will EVER READ (except some good Hempel.)[/QUOTE]

I've read it. I liked it very much although I'm not a big fan of minimalism in general. I like a lot of asides "digressions" as Holden Caulfield would call them in my fiction reading pleasure.

So toss me another to read.

[QUOTE=Fiberoptic Jesus]So every movie about a gay relationship has to be taken to be "shocking"?
I dont think that this movie is meant to be shocking at all or even that edgy.
Its a period movie. It isnt complaining about straight attitudes today. Its about a relationship between two people that was compleatly unacceptable in that environment. I dont think there is a modern gay agenda to push, especially since there were no gay males involved in the writing or directing at all

Its sad that a movie about truthful gay relationships cant strive to exist in mainstream markets without people criticising it because of the fact its about homosexuality while they claim to be not homophobic.[/QUOTE]

love and respect

[QUOTE=Fiberoptic Jesus]So every movie about a gay relationship has to be taken to be "shocking"?
I dont think that this movie is meant to be shocking at all or even that edgy.
Its a period movie. It isnt complaining about straight attitudes today. Its about a relationship between two people that was compleatly unacceptable in that environment. I dont think there is a modern gay agenda to push, especially since there were no gay males involved in the writing or directing at all

Its sad that a movie about truthful gay relationships cant strive to exist in mainstream markets without people criticising it because of the fact its about homosexuality while they claim to be not homophobic.[/QUOTE]

Good post.

This is a romance film. The sexuality of the protagonists is incidental. The key, like Kasey says, is whether it's a good fucking story or a drawn out lump of bore.

and it's the latter.

[QUOTE=Fiberoptic Jesus]So every movie about a gay relationship has to be taken to be "shocking"?
I dont think that this movie is meant to be shocking at all or even that edgy.
Its a period movie. It isnt complaining about straight attitudes today. Its about a relationship between two people that was compleatly unacceptable in that environment. I dont think there is a modern gay agenda to push, especially since there were no gay males involved in the writing or directing at all

Its sad that a movie about truthful gay relationships cant strive to exist in mainstream markets without people criticising it because of the fact its about homosexuality while they claim to be not homophobic.[/QUOTE]

I'm not saying that's how I view it, but the media way overhypes any movie/tv show homosexual oriented. They spearhead ads being like, "look! there's gayness going on!". Even in movies where there was no homosexualty, they still find a way to put it in there. Like in Troy everyone was wondering if Achilles (Brad Pitt) character was going to have homosexual overtones. And when Alexander came out all that anyone could talk about was how the main was gay.

And I'm not saying that there is a gay agenda or anything, but the media likes to push anything gay because they still think people care. And I'm not criticising the movie itself really (for I haven't even seen it) but more the hype around it and such.

Huh, who knew sodomy was going to become a marketing tactic. Five years ago i would have never guessed such a thing, but here i am today! For some reason a show with more than one gay character or a movie dealing with homosexuality(male not female oddly enough) is CUTTING EDGE & GROUNDBREAKING.One of our goals as a society right now should be to blur the lines of gay and strait, not to use the gay community as a CUTTING EDGE addition to mediocre movies.I know this is based off of a book about suppressing passion, but after seeing what asshead did with the Hulk i can almost guarantee this movie will reek of mediocrity and completely miss the point.

[QUOTE=Stray Bullet]I'm not saying that's how I view it, but the media way overhypes any movie/tv show homosexual oriented. They spearhead ads being like, "look! there's gayness going on!". Even in movies where there was no homosexualty, they still find a way to put it in there. Like in Troy everyone was wondering if Achilles (Brad Pitt) character was going to have homosexual overtones. And when Alexander came out all that anyone could talk about was how the main was gay.[/QUOTE]

This is not the fault of the movie makers. This is the fault of trash media and the Jerry Springer addicts that eat that garbage up. Holding it against the movie is just like claiming you don't like certain bands for no reason other than they got popular.

[QUOTE=Unhygenix]Huh, who knew sodomy was going to become a marketing tactic. Five years ago i would have never guessed such a thing, but here i am today! For some reason a show with more than one gay character or a movie dealing with homosexuality(male not female oddly enough) is CUTTING EDGE & GROUNDBREAKING.One of our goals as a society right now should be to blur the lines of gay and strait, not to use the gay community as a CUTTING EDGE addition to mediocre movies.I know this is based off of a book about suppressing passion, but after seeing what asshead did with the Hulk i can almost guarantee this movie will reek of mediocrity and completely miss the point.[/QUOTE]

So what you're saying here is you haven't seen the film and you don't know what you're talking about.

And whatever you think of Hulk, this isn't just some hack director here.

I've seen no evidence that "sodomy" has been used as a marketing tactic. If people, not just the evil "media", choose to relate to it as "the gay cowboy movie" or look at it as a film furthering the gay cause, then that's their choice. And quite a revealing one at that.

[QUOTE=jase]This is not the fault of the movie makers. This is the fault of trash media and the Jerry Springer addicts that eat that garbage up. Holding it against the movie is just like claiming you don't like certain bands for no reason other than they got popular.[/QUOTE]

That's exactly what I'm saying! But I'm also saying that in the making of the movie they got wrapped up in all that and the story is bound to suffer. I'm sure the original short story is a beautiful piece of writing, but I bet ya some board somewhere in hollywood got their hands on it and was like, "what! a story about gay cowboys, we can market the hell out of this!" All I'm saying is, books/stories tend to get ruined once they're put through film production and all the media hype surrounding it.

[QUOTE=Stray Bullet]All I'm saying is, books/stories tend to get ruined once they're put through film production and all the media hype surrounding it.[/QUOTE]

I wonder if [I]that [/I]was why the Hulk was so bad? :rolleyes:

(This is a joke. I have not seen the Hulk)

[QUOTE=Riddlegimp]So what you're saying here is you haven't seen the film and you don't know what you're talking about.

And whatever you think of Hulk, this isn't just some hack director here.

I've seen no evidence that "sodomy" has been used as a marketing tactic. If people, not just the evil "media", choose to relate to it as "the gay cowboy movie" or look at it as a film furthering the gay cause, then that's their choice. And quite a revealing one at that.[/QUOTE]
sodomy line was meant to be a joke, a poor one but a joke none the less. and yes i agree if people decide, not if the media decides. But im still right about how the gay lifestyle shouldnt be CUTTING EDGE & GROUNDBREAKING, no other lifestyle should be either. Groundbreaking or Cutting Edge should come from strong writing, original premises & excellent direction.. not the lifestyle of the characters

Well, if dispelling myths and attacking social prejudices is CUTTING EDGE AND GROUNDBREAKING then perhaps a film about gay cowboys could be considered such. Last time I checked, the cowboy was still something of an icon of rugged male america, despite what the Village People might say.

Obviously portraying a "gay lifestyle" itself shouldn't make a film intrinsically bold and worthy.

You haven't seen the film, so perhaps BM has strong writing, excellent direction. It FOR SURE has an original premise.

my intellegence is drained, for the most part you are right it is a risky subject and maybe it will an attack on the gay myths and preconceptions. I am just hesitant about how movies like this will have an effect in the long run.

on one hand we should (as a fair society) have movies showing strong minded non steriotypical people from every race,creed, and sexual orientation. It shouldnt be taboo at all.

on the other hand the close minded assholes are still a part of our culture and will not accept anything out side of thier own enviroment. I personally have been hassled by dickheads when movies or television shows with even one gay character become pop culture and i know im not alone in this.

at the end of the day i wonder what the movie would be like if they were pirates instead of cowboys (no this is not an ass pirate joke...i just think pirate costumes are goofier)

Well, I guess ideally this movie will look severely dated in twenty years time. Because hopefully then the idea of a movie dealing with gay cowboys won't be such a risque topic at all (unlikely).

The thought that this film may be talked about in let alone a year disturbs me.
If only you'd all seen what I saw I have yet again, in the space of a week, been scarred by the dregs of hollywood.

Oh, I'll definitely see it. And no doubt be bored to tears.

[QUOTE=SnowWhite]The thought that this film may be talked about in let alone a year disturbs me.
If only you'd all seen what I saw I have yet again, in the space of a week, been scarred by the dregs of hollywood.[/QUOTE]
is their a sex scene or even a decent makeout scene?

Yes, there are sex scenes but they're not exactly anything you haven't seen before in a film with gay couples. And the build ups to them are incredibly cliche. i.e rolling around the grass, play fighting and then a sudden sweep in for the kill.

However, having made it rather clear that I wholly disliked the film, I would like to say that the bits with line-dancing in were good. [/snort.]

[QUOTE=SnowWhite]And the build ups to them are incredibly cliche. i.e rolling around the grass, play fighting and then a sudden sweep in for the kill.[/QUOTE]

Wait, you haven't seen brokenback mountain!!! You just described Attack of the Clones!

I already put this on the velvet but here you go...

Wow! Some of you are coming off as real insecure about yourselves in this thread .

Anyways, we saw it Saturday (unlike some cinemas in the land of the free, we actually get to decide, like adults, what we want to see), as mentioned above Heath Ledger is excellent in it *shock*, in fact all the performances in it are excellent, the dialogue and plot are as you would expect from a literary translation convincing and it looks absolutely stunning. The only real fault was with the end, I was expecting a sort of Boys Don't Cry type ending and was expecting to leave the cinema in tears but it's all a bit sudden and very subtle, so a wee bit disappointing. It's good but not great.

[QUOTE=Quiet You!]

Wow! Some of you are coming off as real insecure about yourselves in this thread .
[/QUOTE]
much like the movie, i havent seen or read this thread but where do you get that vibe from ?
it isnt because someone was bored with a movie about gay ranch hands* is it ?
ive never seen that pig movie "Babe" and everyone raves about it, but i dont need to sit through it to decide if its something worthwhile or not the premise alone seems dull and uninteresting

*and they are ranch hands, NOT cowboys! its set in the 1960's for crissakes

[QUOTE=Quiet You!]I already put this on the velvet but here you go...

Wow! Some of you are coming off as real insecure about yourselves in this thread .

Anyways, we saw it Saturday (unlike some cinemas in the land of the free, we actually get to decide, like adults, what we want to see), as mentioned above Heath Ledger is excellent in it *shock*, in fact all the performances in it are excellent, the dialogue and plot are as you would expect from a literary translation convincing and it looks absolutely stunning. The only real fault was with the end, I was expecting a sort of Boys Don't Cry type ending and was expecting to leave the cinema in tears but it's all a bit sudden and very subtle, so a wee bit disappointing. It's good but not great.[/QUOTE]
You must be on a completely higher level to me, then.

isn't this movie like a gay the notebook or something, why'd you think it'd be good Snow? Its for gay guys who wanna believe in LUV I believe.

Fuck all you haters. This movie is absolutely terrific. One of the best love stories I've ever seen, and what [i]makes[/i] it great is that it's clandestine. It's not about being gay, or being a cowboy, or whateverthefuck, it's about a romance that isn't societally acceptable and therefore all the more emotional. As Americans, aren't we supposed to love the outsider? Think [i]Easy Rider[/i]. Think [i]Harold and Maude[/i]. That's what this movie is like.

I actually called this bareback mountain in english today - i hope you're happy! everyone sniggered then someone said '[i]broke[/i]back mountain.'
i guess the movie isn't as risque as i was imagining then anyway.

[QUOTE=jane s.]Fuck all you haters. This movie is absolutely terrific. One of the best love stories I've ever seen, and what [i]makes[/i] it great is that it's clandestine. It's not about being gay, or being a cowboy, or whateverthefuck, it's about a romance that isn't societally acceptable and therefore all the more emotional. As Americans, aren't we supposed to love the outsider? Think [i]Easy Rider[/i]. Think [i]Harold and Maude[/i]. That's what this movie is like.[/QUOTE]
If it was anything like those movies I would've loved it.

I'm really quite surprised you didn't like it, Hattie.

Oh, I tried so hard.

ps: I liked Michelle Williams.

I thought you were a big Gyllenhall fan. You had a [i]Donnie Darko[/i] thing going for a while there.

And again, I'm going to pull the nationalist card, but part of the reason I really loved this was because of the location in which it was shot and the attitude of the people in the locale. It really hit home with me. I grew up in that sort of environment (hell, my dad works on ranches) and I really could understand all the character's points of view, and their various predicaments and prejudices. Maybe it's a Midwestern thing?

Perhaps.

I do like Gyllenhall. I still like him, I just didn't like the film. And yes, the landscapes were beautiful.

[QUOTE=jane s.] Think [i]Easy Rider[/i]. Think [i]Harold and Maude[/i]. That's what this movie is like.[/QUOTE]
never saw those either

Im going to see this movie on thursday or friday (Not out of interest, just out of the sake of forming my own opinion). The fact that they are not authentic western cowboys ruins a large part of the taboo hype.

[QUOTE=Unhygenix]Im going to see this movie on thursday or friday (Not out of interest, just out of the sake of forming my own opinion). The fact that they are not authentic western cowboys ruins a large part of the taboo hype.[/QUOTE]
see, i do not get this
why go see a movie your not interested in? its a frickin movie ! why form an opinion out of something your not interested in other than media hype ? ive heard some people say that they went to see passion of the christ for this reason also, it puzzles me !

[QUOTE=karbunkle]see, i do not get this
why go see a movie your not interested in? its a frickin movie ! why form an opinion out of something your not interested in other than media hype ? ive heard some people say that they went to see passion of the christ for this reason also, it puzzles me ![/QUOTE]
Sometimes it helps to see a movie if you want to debate its merits. We all know debating a film is much more fun than universally applauding it.

[QUOTE=jase]Sometimes it helps to see a movie if you want to debate its merits. We all know debating a film is much more fun than universally applauding it.[/QUOTE]
if your interested in debating its merit then you'd have some kind of interest in seeing in the first place, i can see that part
if someones a fan of any of the actors or whoever and you wanna critique how it was filmed, ok fine
seeing a film because everyones talking about it, and you have no interest in it aside from being able to conversate about it is ridiculous

I've never seen the passion of the christ.

Bottom line, the jews did it.

all im trying to say is i'll be going to see the naked vampire chick movie instead of this one

I'll wait for the bootleg.

[QUOTE=UbikRex]I'll wait for the bootleg.[/QUOTE]
is that some kind of gay sex reference ?
is it homophobia if the only problem i got with the gays is super-secret lingo ?

[QUOTE=karbunkle]is that some kind of gay sex reference ?
is it homophobia if the only problem i got with the gays is super-secret lingo ?[/QUOTE]

Meant I'll download it. Its cheaper and more private when my pants start camping.