Brokeback Mountain

[Jessie]

I think that marrying someone you don't love to fit some societal norm, and then actually seeing the person you do love behind their back is a pretty shitty thing to do to the person you marry.  If they were heterosexual, I'd argue that these guys were assholes.

I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know the story well enough to comment.

I think, though, that back then they didn't have much choice to be themselves.  I don't know that that totally makes it right, but I don't think it can be viewed by today's standards.

I'll think about it more after I've seen the movie.

[Bishamonten]

What about life savers?  Perfect fit, no?

too much wiggle room

however, they do have the 'chocolates on the pillow' kind of flair.

My penis needs not penache!

[Mr. Ubiquity]

What about life savers?  Perfect fit, no?

too much wiggle room

however, they do have the 'chocolates on the pillow' kind of flair.

My penis needs not penache!

just needs to be visible to the naked eye?

[Bishamonten]

What about life savers?  Perfect fit, no?

too much wiggle room

however, they do have the 'chocolates on the pillow' kind of flair.

My penis needs not penache!

just needs to be visible to the naked eye?

That implies a care for someone else's pleasure and an assumption that I'm a caring/sweet person...

[Mr. Ubiquity]

What about life savers?  Perfect fit, no?

too much wiggle room

however, they do have the 'chocolates on the pillow' kind of flair.

My penis needs not penache!

just needs to be visible to the naked eye?

That implies a care for someone else's pleasure and an assumption that I'm a caring/sweet person...

not really.   helps to identify ones exact gender and that the pump needs replaced if it still doesnt become visible after hours of use...

[Beefy]

I think that marrying someone you don't love to fit some societal norm, and then actually seeing the person you do love behind their back is a pretty shitty thing to do to the person you marry.  If they were heterosexual, I'd argue that these guys were assholes.

Valid point, and I heard that the film does deal with how the decisions of the men affects the lives of the women. 

In the end, nobody wins.

[DownSouth]

Were the cows gay?

[ignom]

In the end, nobody wins.

Stop making gay jokes.

[Bennyhana]

I think that marrying someone you don't love to fit some societal norm, and then actually seeing the person you do love behind their back is a pretty shitty thing to do to the person you marry.  If they were heterosexual, I'd argue that these guys were assholes.

Valid point, and I heard that the film does deal with how the decisions of the men affects the lives of the women. 

In the end, nobody wins.

I just don't think it can count as a "touching love story" if the love involved damages innocent people.  But, I guess if we can handle Ross dumping the british chick on the wedding day to get back together with Rachel, we can handle these guys cheating on their wives.

[Jessie]

I think that marrying someone you don't love to fit some societal norm, and then actually seeing the person you do love behind their back is a pretty shitty thing to do to the person you marry.  If they were heterosexual, I'd argue that these guys were assholes.

Valid point, and I heard that the film does deal with how the decisions of the men affects the lives of the women. 

In the end, nobody wins.

I just don't think it can count as a "touching love story" if the love involved damages innocent people.  But, I guess if we can handle Ross dumping the british chick on the wedding day to get back together with Rachel, we can handle these guys cheating on their wives.

I think it's a touching love story, although it is a bittersweet one.  It makes me think of (and I'll probably be tarred and feathered for this) The Bridges of Madison County.  I thought that was a great love story, even though it didn't really have a happy ending for anyone and the woman was cheating on her husband.

I don't see the actions of these two characters the same as I would a man or woman who was out cheating on their spouse just for the cheating's sake.  As I understand it, they love each other, but society won't let them. 

[Beefy]

I just don't think it can count as a "touching love story" if the love involved damages innocent people. 

I think I agree with that.  It may have been a different time, and they may have had a "forbidden" love, but that does not change that they married, and then cheated on, their wives.  If anything, people took the vows of marriage more seriously back then.

Perhaps everyone is misreading this film.  It's not a tragic love story, asking you to empathize with the cowboys.  It's really a parable of how gay/butt sex is harmful to us both as people and as a society.

[Beefy]

As I understand it, they love each other, but society won't let them. 

Even so, that shouldn't negate the vows they made to their wives.  The women deserve more respect than that.

[ignom]

I think that marrying someone you don't love to fit some societal norm, and then actually seeing the person you do love behind their back is a pretty shitty thing to do to the person you marry.  If they were heterosexual, I'd argue that these guys were assholes.

Valid point, and I heard that the film does deal with how the decisions of the men affects the lives of the women. 

In the end, nobody wins.

I just don't think it can count as a "touching love story" if the love involved damages innocent people.  But, I guess if we can handle Ross dumping the british chick on the wedding day to get back together with Rachel, we can handle these guys cheating on their wives.

Ross didn't dump Emily on their wedding day, he just accidentally said Rachel's name instead of Emily. They still got married, Emily just refused to speak to him after the wedding.

[Jessie]

I just don't think it can count as a "touching love story" if the love involved damages innocent people. 

Perhaps everyone is misreading this film.  It's not a tragic love story, asking you to empathize with the cowboys.  It's really a parable of how gay/butt sex is harmful to us both as people and as a society.

What genius!

[Jessie]

I think that marrying someone you don't love to fit some societal norm, and then actually seeing the person you do love behind their back is a pretty shitty thing to do to the person you marry.  If they were heterosexual, I'd argue that these guys were assholes.

Valid point, and I heard that the film does deal with how the decisions of the men affects the lives of the women. 

In the end, nobody wins.

I just don't think it can count as a "touching love story" if the love involved damages innocent people.  But, I guess if we can handle Ross dumping the british chick on the wedding day to get back together with Rachel, we can handle these guys cheating on their wives.

Ross didn't dump Emily on their wedding day, he just accidentally said Rachel's name instead of Emily. They still got married, Emily just refused to speak to him after the wedding.

* Jessie points and laughs at ignom

[Jessie]

As I understand it, they love each other, but society won't let them. 

Even so, that shouldn't negate the vows they made to their wives.  The women deserve more respect than that.

That's true.  I think that doesn't negate their love for each other, though.  They made bad choices because of the stigma and rules of society.  Had they gone against those rules, the likely would have paid with their lives.

Also, I haven't seen the film, but I believe that part of their marrying was them trying to deny what they felt and who they were.  I could be wrong about that part, though.

Funny that we're discussing them as if they're real.

[Bennyhana]

I think that marrying someone you don't love to fit some societal norm, and then actually seeing the person you do love behind their back is a pretty shitty thing to do to the person you marry.  If they were heterosexual, I'd argue that these guys were assholes.

Valid point, and I heard that the film does deal with how the decisions of the men affects the lives of the women. 

In the end, nobody wins.

I just don't think it can count as a "touching love story" if the love involved damages innocent people.  But, I guess if we can handle Ross dumping the british chick on the wedding day to get back together with Rachel, we can handle these guys cheating on their wives.

Ross didn't dump Emily on their wedding day, he just accidentally said Rachel's name instead of Emily. They still got married, Emily just refused to speak to him after the wedding.

Yeah that's it.  Anyway, I'm just saying that if we can accept Ross and Rachel's love, even though it hurt others, we can accept the tabs with tabs and hurt slots....or something.

[nishi]

for the record, romeo and juliet is often called a touching love story and it's a bloodbath of murder and suicide.

unless they're chikfliks, many many love stories include people being horribly hurt - either by their own actions or the actions of others. which makes them, to my mind, much more realistic. love is often messy and hurtful.

we've gotten the idea that love stories are just these pretty things, and they're not. people die, cheat, get pregnant, become miserable, go to prison, leave family behind....

you can be the protagonists of a love story and still do things that hurt other people. that makes it a more complicated and interesting love story.

[Beefy]

As I understand it, they love each other, but society won't let them. 

Even so, that shouldn't negate the vows they made to their wives.  The women deserve more respect than that.

That's true.  I think that doesn't negate their love for each other, though.  They made bad choices because of the stigma and rules of society.  Had they gone against those rules, the likely would have paid with their lives.

Also, I haven't seen the film, but I believe that part of their marrying was them trying to deny what they felt and who they were.  I could be wrong about that part, though.

Funny that we're discussing them as if they're real.

Well, these are real issues that affect our society right now, which is why this film has become such a hot topic in the first place.

They may have married because that was expected of them, but that doesn't make the wives lesser victims.

I've pondered posting this several times now and haven't, not knowing how it would turn out.  But I guess the time is right.  They did a review of the film over at CHUD a ways back and, seeing as the film is a political fireball, the reaction on their boards got a bit steamy.  This inspired one of the CHUD staffers, Devin, to lob an op.ed. piece addressing some of the criticism.  And then another one.  I was really surprised at how I ended up reacting to it all.  It's a bit of a long read, but I've found it worthwhile and thought-provoking to follow it.

The 2nd Op Ed piece is here.

The board discussion is here.

[meredith]

so next time i break someone's heart, i'll tell them i'm just making the story better.  got it.

[Bennyhana]

for the record, romeo and juliet is often called a touching love story and it's a bloodbath of murder and suicide.

unless they're chikfliks, many many love stories include people being horribly hurt - either by their own actions or the actions of others. which makes them, to my mind, much more realistic. love is often messy and hurtful.

we've gotten the idea that love stories are just these pretty things, and they're not. people die, cheat, get pregnant, become miserable, go to prison, leave family behind....

you can be the protagonists of a love story and still do things that hurt other people. that makes it a more complicated and interesting love story.

I've always taken "love story" to mean "a story which revolves around the love of a couple (or their falling in love), showing the beauty and power of love."

I kinda think that a story where it's shown that love damages so much kinda shits on the concept of love.  I was never a fan of Romeo and juliet.  I guess most love stories include someone getting hurt, but often it's the character designed for you to hate, so you don't care.

[Jessie]

I don't mean to lessen the suffering of the wives.  I'm sure that would be heartbreaking.  I just don't see these men as being full of malice.  That doesn't make them RIGHT, either.

[Beefy]

I don't mean to lessen the suffering of the wives.  I'm sure that would be heartbreaking.  I just don't see these men as being full of malice.  That doesn't make them RIGHT, either.

Gloria Steinem wants a word with you.

/stupid movie still isn't opening down here this weekend

[nishi]

for the record, romeo and juliet is often called a touching love story and it's a bloodbath of murder and suicide.

unless they're chikfliks, many many love stories include people being horribly hurt - either by their own actions or the actions of others. which makes them, to my mind, much more realistic. love is often messy and hurtful.

we've gotten the idea that love stories are just these pretty things, and they're not. people die, cheat, get pregnant, become miserable, go to prison, leave family behind....

you can be the protagonists of a love story and still do things that hurt other people. that makes it a more complicated and interesting love story.

I've always taken "love story" to mean "a story which revolves around the love of a couple (or their falling in love), showing the beauty and power of love."

I kinda think that a story where it's shown that love damages so much kinda shits on the concept of love.  I was never a fan of Romeo and juliet.  I guess most love stories include someone getting hurt, but often it's the character designed for you to hate, so you don't care.

i would agree with your definition with one exception - i would remove the word "beauty". the power of love is an astounding thing, but that doesn't mean that all outcomes are good.

i personally find romeo and juliet kind of annoying but it is a classic love story of our western literary canon. and their love, by certain definitions, would be both powerful *and* beautiful. pure.

and the "character designed for you to hate" - that's the part that i think is hollywoodish. in real life, there is no character designed for you to hate.

i think that we might be looking at the difference between fiction with something to say about people in general, and then fiction with some kind of moral lesson.

[dazie]

I REALLY want to comment on this but I'm at work and I'm a little fraz-mo-lated.  I'll add my 2 cents later.