# Brokeback Mountain (2005)



## Marky Lazer (Feb 27, 2006)

What's the big deal with Brokeback Mountain? I rather enjoyed the movie, but nominated for eight Academy Awards? Is it just because it's about gays, and whole the United States get mad and praise how brave Lee is to direct this? I don't see the big deal, personally...


----------



## Teir (Feb 27, 2006)

My mum freaked out about the gay thing with this movie. But then again, my whole family is like homophobic  *sigh*. Well they claim they aren't but their all like - 'Eww gay guys, I'm not watchin that' (or something to that tune)

I'm like, Jesus people! cant you move past all your prejudicial crap and just enjoy a movie!  

Like as not though - for the foreseeable future, a gay story on the big screen is always gonna raise a few eyebrows and cause comment. It's just the way society is. I plan to take the awards it has been given at face value and as a good sign as to its quality and go from there. 
 I 've heard nothing but good things myself.


----------



## roddglenn (Feb 27, 2006)

I haven't seen it yet, but I would hope that the awards have been given because of the quality of the film, actors etc, not because it's suddenly trendy to acknowledge gay cinema.


----------



## Sibeling (Feb 27, 2006)

I was really bored by the film, I even couldn't watch it till the end. It is just like the usual melodrama only with you-know-who insted of a man and a woman. So why is everyone so excited about it?


----------



## roddglenn (Feb 27, 2006)

you-know-who??? lol

You can say gay or homosexual in this day and age, ya know


----------



## Marky Lazer (Feb 27, 2006)

roddglenn said:
			
		

> you-know-who??? lol
> 
> You can say gay or homosexual in this day and age, ya know


Not if you're from Texas


----------



## roddglenn (Feb 27, 2006)

lol


----------



## Caretaker66 (Feb 27, 2006)

This movie's gay.......no pun intended.


----------



## Brian G Turner (Feb 27, 2006)

roddglenn said:
			
		

> I haven't seen it yet, but I would hope that the awards have been given because of the quality of the film, actors etc, not because it's suddenly trendy to acknowledge gay cinema.



Ahh, the idealism of youth.


----------



## the_faery_queen (Feb 27, 2006)

***** SPOILERS WARNING!! ***** [added by I, Brian]



i have a lot of friends who love it. but they're girls (as am i of course) and into slash (as am i ) so it appeals to us. BUT i haven't seen it because a, i have no friends, b, i hate cowboys and c, i dont' like endings that make me cry in public, as this one will.

i think people rate it, perhaps because of the homophobia? death of the character in such a tragic way? tragic endings often make people thik a film is brilliant. that and, for most women, it has cute men being with each other


----------



## dreamwalker (Feb 28, 2006)

the_faery_queen said:
			
		

> i have a lot of friends who love it. but they're girls (as am i of course) and into slash (as am i ) so it appeals to us. BUT i haven't seen it because a, i have no friends, b, i hate cowboys and c, i dont' like endings that make me cry in public, as this one will.
> 
> i think people rate it, perhaps because of the homophobia? death of the character in such a tragic way? tragic endings often make people thik a film is brilliant. that and, for most women, it has cute men being with each other


 
nice way to wreck a film faery queen


----------



## Shoegaze99 (Feb 28, 2006)

Sheesh. Good thing I wasn't planning to see this when it was released on DVD or anything ...


----------



## roddglenn (Feb 28, 2006)

Ooops - Faery ya shoulda really put a warning about spoilers there!

I, Brian - I know, I'm eternally optimistic (better know as a gonk!)


----------



## Teir (Feb 28, 2006)

the_faery_queen said:
			
		

> it has cute men being with each other


 
 ....that will do it.


----------



## Marky Lazer (Feb 28, 2006)

I'm seriously thinking it got 8 Oscar nominations because it is about homo-sexuals. Getting it for best director... come on...


----------



## the_faery_queen (Feb 28, 2006)

i didn't say who died! 
but sorry if it did ruin it for anyone. i've not even seen it tho, and i know what happens *shrugs* not that i could tell you which character was what tho.


----------



## GrownUp (Mar 2, 2006)

I thought it was excellent. The last film I saw of remotely this calibre was "Ordinary People" and I don't expect there will be another film as well made for another 25 years.

But in the meanwhile I can watch films like Under Seige and the X-Men and Elektra and Highlander. Too much brain-food would probably make me tired anyway.


----------



## Marky Lazer (Mar 5, 2006)

I think the movie isn't about homo-sexuality per se, but I'm pretty sure hal the viewers don't realize that.


----------



## lizzybob (Mar 6, 2006)

I've seen this movie twice and I love it ... mainly for the cute guys being together ... but it is also a really good movie. The images are stunning and the story is handled well - not as a gay pride thing but as a love story, which just so happens to be between two men. It annoys me that loads of people are like oh its about gay pride and thats why it is getting all the attention it is. I don't think it is about gay pride at all which is highlighted by the fact that it has taken a hetrasexual director and 2 hetrasexual male leads to create one of the first gay movies to be nominated for 8 oscars.
The soundtrack is amazing - the sparse chords really work in creating the atmosphere.
Anyway save to say I absolutely love this movie.


----------



## the_faery_queen (Mar 6, 2006)

it does kinda annoy me that its called the gay cowboy movei. it is, as you said, a romance where they are both men. but i guess that's how its being marketted, and i guess that's also because its a fairly new thing. there have been other films with gay characters, or gay driven plots, but they don't tend to be romance. romance tends to be straight couples, so i guess that's why they hightlight this. but for me, calling it a gay cowboy movie kinda makes it sound cheesy, or stupid. it doesn't really refer to it as what it is, its almost cheapening it by refusing to call it a gay romance.

or something.


----------



## Marky Lazer (Mar 8, 2006)

I don't think the love story is the main message of the movie...


----------



## the_faery_queen (Mar 9, 2006)

no? i guess it depends on perception then really. because i have heard it called that, and know a few do see it that way.
but as i haven't seen it, i can't really have an oopinion myself! 

i still don't like the simplistic way of summing it up as 'gay cowboys' i guess because there aren't many of them, we all know what they mean when they call it that, whereas to say, the mad axe murderer wouldn't really specify any particular film. but i think things should be called by their name, not summed up like that. it seems dismissive somehow.

to me at least *shrug*


----------



## GrownUp (Mar 16, 2006)

I suppose the best description would be that it is an old-fashioned 'weepie'. 

The reason I respected the film was the execution of the thing. 

The characters are so well realised that I find myself arguing with them, mainly 'Ennis' and possibly trying to send them to therapy.
...With the psychiatrist from 'Ordinary People' who lives on in my mind as well. 

I wasn't like 'Oh, I see what they are trying to do here,' or 'That was an excellent, moving performance.' I was like, silently, furiously, 'Ennis, stop being such a miserable git, you miserable git.' Honestly. I'd have got right up in the theatre and kicked him up the arse if I could. I didn't care about the lighting. I didn't notice the costumes.

I think a film being made like that is called 'competent'. 

But 'Ordinary People' still just pips it for me.


----------



## weaveworld (Mar 16, 2006)

Yeah I know!  Ang Lee, have you seen Hulk?


----------



## Marky Lazer (Mar 16, 2006)

I think this movie is about something 'not-done', and here they opted for a homo-sexual relationship. But I think you can see it in the same way as following a different or opposing a political system.


----------



## GrownUp (Mar 16, 2006)

weaveworld said:
			
		

> Yeah I know! Ang Lee, have you seen Hulk?


 
Yep. Of course. It's _much_ more my sort of standard viewing fare. I'm trying to keep the thinking deeply to a minimum, to maintain a proper balance.  

As an antidote to this reasoned discussion we're having, for example, I'm going to go and watch 'The Lost Boys' and then possibly 'E.T'.

...and eat ice-cream.


----------



## tonic (Mar 16, 2006)

Well it was really funny, because I just saw this movie a few days ago. I went with a few good friends of mine (two girls and a guy). So we go into the theater, and I must say for a teenager, just getting up the nerve to go into a theater and buy this ticket is a difficult thing. It seems small, but it isn't and we went up and bought the tickets (socially concious as ever), and the people selling the tickets to us laughed in our faces. Suffice to say that my friend got them fired for their narrowmindedness, but it just proves that if even the people selling the tickets can't do it, then who can? Now, I'm a very liberal person so seeing this movie wasn't a very big thing, I was curious and I wanted to know what all the hype was about.

The main thing with this movie is not that's its a story on homosexuality, although that obviously plays a big part about it. The main thing is that it provides proof that love doesn't have to be two-dimensional. The main focus of the story is that it's a story of two people who fell in love, and couldn't act upon the love because of the stigmas of society. There are continous references of why they won't be able to act upon their love for eachother, they're both married and  (in other peoples minds) it just wouldn't be right. That's the main message of the movie. 

Obviously it's so hyped because it hasn't been done, and it takes "daring" to execute, which I think is ridiculous. It was as good a story as any other, and it was amazingly directed, and acted wonderfully. I think that's because of the  character development throughout the story. You really knew who you were watching, and you knew why they were doing what they were doing. The film was also great because it had a raw feel to it, midwestern in the sixties when everything was completely rural. It had that kind of timeless affect, and its ironic because the issues a half-century ago are the issues today. 

Anyways, that's what I got out of it. I love movies so this wasn't really a trial for me (other then getting over the ticket fiasco) and I'd tell anyone to see it. Plus the cinematography was really cool, makes me want to go to calgary (where it was filmed), I guess it's good that I'm Canadian and I may get the opportunity heh....Sorry about the long post, but I'm longwinded at times.


----------



## GrownUp (Apr 25, 2006)

Gosh, tonic.

Came out on DVD in the U.K., I think, yesterday. 
Now people will possibly have to face embarrasment in video shops, trying to watch a good movie.

I went to see it at the cinema with my mum. Most of the people there when we saw it were men and women of around her age (I think because it was a Monday afternoon) so I reckon you get less odd stroppy behaviour in those circumstances. Anyway, people are _always_ polite to my mum.

Maybe I should take her along to the video shop.


----------



## Nokia (Apr 25, 2006)

I saw it in Canada when it came out there, and went to see it shortly after it opened, so I wasn't really aware of what it was about. I bought tickets without any problem, but I was in Quebec where gay marriage has recently been legalised so the population is maybe more open-minded than where you are, tonic?

I thought it had a terribly slow beginning, but I admit that reflects my taste in films rather than bad film-making or anything. Otherwise it was good. Anne Hathaway did a good job, I thought she'd be terrible after her Princess Diaries days, but she acted as well as any of the others I think.


----------



## Jives (Apr 25, 2006)

I have a serious problem with this film.  Why?  Because the director deliberately chose one of the last male-oriented role models for children and used it to further his homosexual agenda.

I'm tired of this in-your-face gay agenda.  Let's face it, homosexuality is not the norm, not even close.  From the latest research I've read, by Simon LeVay, it's a birth defect.  Male homosexuals have female structures in their brains and vice versa.

See: Polydimorphic Brains http://members.aol.com/slevay/hypothalamus.pdf

I'm not homophobic, I could care less if some people do it, but I'm tired of having it forced down my throat.  TV - the gay channel with gay decorators all day long.  Movies?  Transexuals and gay cowboys.  Oh!  Look out the window!  It's a gay pride parade in support of gay Boy Scouts.

And another thing...just when did it become a great idea to glorify *adultery?*  That's what this film does.

So here we have a movie about two homosexuals that destroy themselves and their marriages, betraying everything and every value they have in their lives.

Great.  Just great.  I need this like I need a hole in my head.


----------



## GrownUp (Apr 26, 2006)

It's a beautiful film full of pain and loss. 

If you are disturbed by homosexual content, then might I suggest you don't watch it?


----------



## Marky Lazer (Apr 26, 2006)

Jives said:
			
		

> I have a serious problem with this film. Why? Because the director deliberately chose one of the last male-oriented role models for children and used it to further his homosexual agenda.
> 
> I'm tired of this in-your-face gay agenda. Let's face it, homosexuality is not the norm, not even close. From the latest research I've read, by Simon LeVay, it's a birth defect. Male homosexuals have female structures in their brains and vice versa.
> 
> ...


Did you actually watch this movie? If not, you don't know what you're talking about.
If you did, you missed the whole point of the movie.


----------



## Paige Turner (Apr 26, 2006)

Jives said:
			
		

> I could care less if some people do it…



Please say "I _couldn't _ care less." _"Could _ care less" implies that you do care to some degree.



			
				Jives said:
			
		

> … but I'm tired of having it forced down my throat.  TV - the gay channel with gay decorators all day long.  Movies?  Transexuals and gay cowboys.  Oh!  Look out the window!  It's a gay pride parade in support of gay Boy Scouts.



"Forced down your throat." You poor thing. 

Why, it's virtually unavoidable, unless you choose not to subscribe to the Pride Channel.

How can a person NOT see one of the Gay Movies? (which now comprise almost .0001% of all movies produced over the past 20 years)

And the parade? What can you do? I understand they stage them _every single day_  in tiny desert towns in the southwest. Traffic must be a disaster.


----------



## the_faery_queen (Apr 26, 2006)

Jives said:
			
		

> I'm tired of this in-your-face gay agenda. Let's face it, homosexuality is not the norm, not even close. From the latest research I've read, by Simon LeVay, it's a birth defect. Male homosexuals have female structures in their brains and vice versa.



Even if it is a birth defect, and i am not saying that it is or isn't, doesn't that mean that gays still ahve the right to see films that depict them? that offers something they can relate to as well as anyone else? they cannot help being born gay, and they certainly shouldn't be made to feel as though its a bad thing. their 'agenda' is nothing more than wanting equal rights, to be treated like everyone else. you wouldn't really say that there is a disabled agenda. that handicapped people have an agenda when they say they want to be treated equally, and have lifts put in for them, or when someone writes about a handicapped person in a film. of course not. so why is it any different with gays? perhaps they do have a defect, that doesn't change the fact that they are gay, that they deserve to see things that feature people they can relate to, just like anyone else.

and i hardly think it is forced down your throat. don't see the film. don't go and see it. you have a choice. turn it off. dont' watch it. don't watch it! 


and from what i understood of the film was, the men were in love with each other and couldn't be together and had wives. so basically you think that they should stay with their wives, and be unhappy, rather than be free to be with the person that they love? to me that shows the unfairness of the situation, that they felt they had to marry and couldn't be happy with the person that they loved, rather than it glorifiying adultery. a film that glorified adultery would be something where the main character had lots of affairs and got away with it, and had a great old time. not a tragic story of two men in love who want to be together, but can't, so marry so that they're at least not alone, and try and be 'normal.'

and no, the director didnt choose to mess around with the last male rolemodel for kids. he was making a film of a short story (perhaps you can say this about the writer of said story) but i am fairly sure that with EVERYTHING else there were gay cowboys. and to be honest, i really hate the idea of kids having specific gender roles! the idea that girls should play with dolls and pretend to be housewives, and that little boys should want to be tough and hardy and not show their feelings, like a rough cowboy. yeah, that's what we really need. to feel like we are defined by our gender like that and have to live up to sterotypes.

besides, is it not possible that a whole generation of kids may benefit from this? that they will not feel that they have to act a certain way to be straight, or do a certain type of job to be percieved as a real man? perhaps they will even realise that gay men  are NOT as they are steroyped and won't just be camping it up, that they can actually be 'real' men and do 'manly' type jobs as well.

i can only see good things coming from films like this. from any film really that challenges our perception of gender and sexuality. *shrug* but if you don't like it don't watch it.


----------



## Jives (Apr 26, 2006)

Cowboys - known for toughness, fairness, honor, integrity, and dignity.

Let's show them as adulterous homosexuals who destroy everything around them.

Just how is that good for society?  Just because you can do something is not a reason to do it.

People are constantly decrying the "lack of family values" in the generation of today.

Well, if you were a 15-year old, and you had just gotten done beating a hooker and taking her money in "Grand theft Auto: San Andreas", and then you turned ton the TV and this was on, wouldn't you be a little confused?

There is a line somewhere that decent people should say, "That's enough.  No more."  This movie crosses that line.

I don't buy the "Well, we need to explore this side of ourselves" thing either.  Some things we don't need to explore.  What's next?  "A Day in the Life of a Child Molester?"

I noticed that most of you are incensed that I don't like the homosexual aspect of this movie. Well, that's my perogative.  You can buy it and watch it all  you want, I'm not stopping you.  But I think movies like this, along with ultra-violent videogames and music are just plain bad for people.

Now, you'll probably say that normal people don't take movies and TV seriously.  I could point you to the group of five year olds that kicked a child to death on a Swedish playground after watching "The Power Rangers," but I don't have to.  We all know that it *does have an effect on us.*

When I am driving and I'm listening to some mellow Frank Sinatra, I am cordial and cautious.  But when I put some Rammstein in the CD player, I tense up and drive faster.  It's only natural.

But I'm still a little confused, so help me out. Homosexuality aside, why aren't you outraged that this movie glorifies adultery?


----------



## jackokent (Apr 26, 2006)

Jives, didn't you like this film then? 

On a personal basis, I think it's nice to see gay portrayal in a more normal/ real setting other then the very effeminate, Bird Cage, sort of steriotype. I'd be very suprised if there weren't lots of gay coyboys. Are cowboys really role models? In the same way as gangsters I imagine.  Do you mean modern cow herding cowboys or traditional indian shooting, shooting eachother and eating beans and farting a lot cowboys?

However, I've only seen the trailers and I don't generally go for cowboy films, I don't generally go for weepies and I don't generally like traditional love stories so I can't see me watching it unless someone brings it round. 

I'm glad you watched it though as it's certainly made this thread interesting.


----------



## Jives (Apr 26, 2006)

the_faery_queen said:
			
		

> they can actually be 'real' men



Whoops! Sorry.  "Real Men" don't cheat on their wives.


----------



## Jives (Apr 26, 2006)

GrownUp said:
			
		

> If you are disturbed by homosexual content, then might I suggest you don't watch it?



That's just the problem, Grown up.  We've all been doing just that.  For way, WAY too long.  If you could listen to some of the music I hear in the classroom, you would be flabberghasted.

Insane Clown Posse advocates randomly stabbing people like you and me on the street for fun.

I work with children, friends.  I'm telling you straight out that I've seen the direct impact of negative influences on this generation and it's not pretty.  One half of all children born last year in New Mexico were born to teens.  One half of those were born into extreme poverty. 

Gangs and gang violence is way up, drugs are freely available, especially methamphetamine.  *I have an entire school full of children from broken marriages..all of which are struggling just to get the basic skills in life.*

And you are going to try to convince me that a movie that blatantly promotes adultery is somehow the "answer?!"  Not likely.  This movie is part of the problem.

If you think that a lack of family values has nothing to do with statistics like that, then you tell me...what is doing it?


----------



## Jives (Apr 26, 2006)

Yeah, I watched it.  And I understood exactly the message the director was trying to get across.  Love cuts across all boundries. To be fair, that message came across clearly.

Unfortunately, he forgot the rest of the message he was sending.  That's the part I have a problem with.


----------



## jackokent (Apr 26, 2006)

I can't believe I am still posting about a film I haven't seen... but, surely as adultery is so comonplace, to ignore it in film making would be silly.  We don't seem to be ignoring violence, drugs, crime and lots of other nasties that none of us want our children copying.

I guess there is a question about art (films or any medium) should it seek to impose a moral viewpoint or should it stand up as a piece of life or fiction.  The former, to me smacks of propeganda.


----------



## Jives (Apr 26, 2006)

Paige Turner said:
			
		

> Why, it's virtually unavoidable.



Absolutely right.  Yeah, I know you were being sarcastic, but almost every show I see on TV these days has the "token gay" guy or girl.

It's the "trendy" thing to do these days. C'mon!  Everybody jump on the bandwagon! (OK, now I'm being sarcastic.)

I didn't like it when it became cool to be a violent gangster (See: 50 cent or Tupac) and I don't like it now that it's cool to be an adulterer. I don't think either lifestyle is good for society.

You're thinking right now, "Why does he think he gets to dictate the morals of society?"  

That's my right, we all set the norms, every day. It's our collective decision to make some things "moral" and some "immoral."

Honestly, It really isn't the homosexuality that got me in this movie, it was the effect on the families of the two men.

That gives me a chance to answer something, not just for myself, but for my gender. In a place and time where I know that my words will be heard and thought about.

Let's get this out of the way right now, I've never cheated on a girl in my life and I never will. Not in high school, not in college, and not in my adult life.

There is a movement afoot in this country that somehow not only is cheating somewhat acceptable, especially in hardship cases 9like in this movie), but all men are doing it. Many people assume, and this is supported by the movies, TV, and common mythology, that men are slaves to their sex drives. And it's true that there are enough prominent examples out there (even a president!) to give even the most skeptical person pause.

But nothing could be more false.

Most of the men I know, and I'd venture to bet that most of the decent men in America, have a core value system. Call it dignity, honor, personal self-worth, or even the "Code of the West", most men do not and will never cheat on a girl.

Written into the souls of the males that call themselves "men" are a few hard, never-to-be-crossed lines:

1. I am responsible for my family.
2. I will never hit a girl.
3. I will not cheat on a girl.
4. I will not compromise my honor or integrity.

The men who follow those rules, and live by them, have a heart that is what I have labeled, "True Blue." This core decency and respect for those we care for is very obvious to any who speak or interact with us. It would come through to you instantly, were you to ever meet one on the street.

As a matter of fact, I believe that most men have it, despite what you see on TV.

To us, to suggest that we betray the trust of those that we love and care for is to suggest that we betray our very nature. For one of us to break this bond we have with ourselves is to turn our backs on everything we are.

I've worked occupations that are almost virtual breeding grounds for this behavior too, fighter pilot, radio DJ, and corporate manager.

I'd be a liar if I said that the thought of cheating never crossed my mind, especially in the light of some of the incredibly attractive and intelligent women I've met in a very storied and diverse life.

But I am telling the honest truth when I say that each time that thought stuck me, I found it distasteful and appalling in a place that is at the very core of my being. I knew that to give in to such thoughts, much less the actual act, was not just weak, but abhorrent to my very soul. 

Were I to do so, I knew that I would never again be who I am.

So, to me, for these men in this movie to turn their backs on their families, even though they were gay, 


...is unforgivable.


----------



## Jives (Apr 26, 2006)

jackokent said:
			
		

> I guess there is a question about art (films or any medium) should it seek to impose a moral viewpoint or should it stand up as a piece of life or fiction.  The former, to me smacks of propaganda.




I'm actually on your side.  I think it should be discussed.  But not glorified.

If you are thinking that young children will not see this film, you're living in a dreamworld.

Recently, an ultra-violent movie came out, "Saw II."  I teach 14-15 year olds who are not supposed to be able to see that movie yet.  After the opening weekend, I asked how many kids had seen it.

Every one of them.

Heck, many of them go home and watch hard-core porn on cable at night.

The other day, we talked about manners and courtesy.  They were almost universally lost. How do you answer a phone politely?  They didn't know.  How does a man walk with a girl down a street? Should you stand up at a table when a women sits down?  Should you open a door for a woman or give her your seat on a bus? What about removing your hat in a building?They were stumped.

I guess what I'm really lamenting in this thread is a *loss of innocence.*


Can't we all agree that is a _bad thing?_


----------



## Paige Turner (Apr 26, 2006)

Hey, Jives,

You can have your opinions. Isn't that generous of me?  

It just seems to me that if this were a movie about a _hetero_  couple who find love outside of their marriages, (I'm sure there have been many) you wouldn't be quite so bent out of shape over it.


----------



## Jives (Apr 26, 2006)

the_faery_queen said:
			
		

> and from what i understood of the film was, the men were in love with each other and couldn't be together and had wives. so basically you think that they should stay with their wives,.



Absolutely.  A vow is a vow.  My wife is deathly ill.  That makes me unhappy sometimes.  Does that mean I should dump her?
 

According to this movie, it does.  The message I'm protesting is that if you don't like your life situation, just do what ever makes you feel good, no matter what effect it has on the people around you.

That's just wrong.


----------



## Jives (Apr 26, 2006)

Paige Turner said:
			
		

> Hey, Jives,
> 
> You can have your opinions. Isn't that generous of me?



Yes, Paige.  Thank you very much.  I must say, I can tell you are as passionate as myself over this, and you have a greater degree of self-control than I do.  



> It just seems to me that if this were a movie about a _hetero_  couple who find love outside of their marriages, (I'm sure there have been many) you wouldn't be quite so bent out of shape over it.



Wrong.  I'm against _negative influences_ in society pretty much straight across the board.  By negative, I mean destructive.  But after all, that's my job. Every day, for class after class of children, I have to model those values that the majority of society (you, paige) consider positive.

Honesty, integrity, decency, dignity, and honor.

I'm sorry, but I don't see much of that going on in this movie at all and I wouldn't if it was about a hetero couple either.

For the record, I didn't like "The Ice Storm" either.


----------



## Jives (Apr 27, 2006)

Sorry for heating up the movie thread, gang.  I'll bow out gracefully now. 

It was certainly a pleasure debating with such intelligent, and well-spoken people!


----------



## jackokent (Apr 27, 2006)

Jives said:
			
		

> I'm actually on your side. I think it should be discussed. But not glorified.
> 
> If yo are thinking that young children will not see this film, you're living in a dreamworld.
> 
> ...


 
Oh no, I am still posting about a film I haven't seen. Somebody stop me!

I'm going to get shot here, but I am not sure adultery is as bad as some things.  Sometimes it is and sometimes is isn't.  It would depend on the situation.  I don't think a slip or being weak means you are necessarily a bad person.  I know lots of nice people who have done it and I don't look down on them or hate them and they can be honorable in other ways.  I've been in relationships where I've been unfaithful (at college I'm not sure I was in one where I actually was faithful) but I'm not about to lose any sleep over that to be honest.  I have a moral code now that is very different than the one I had as a teenager.

There are many ways to let people down, adultery is just one of them.  I agree letting your family down is a bad thing.  But good people can do bad things.  A really clever person learns from their mistakes, but that doesn't mean they don't make any.

I do think kids are going to see this film, but I'd rather they watched this than a traditional cowboy and indian film for instance - about the wilful slaughter of indigenous natives.

I am not sure loss of innocence isn't necessarry, with it comes knowledge and wisdom and I can't agree they are bad things.

As to the glorification, I haven't seen the film, but if it does then maybe it shouldn't but again I must reiterate that I am far more disturbed with films that glorify violence.


----------



## genisis2 (Apr 27, 2006)

Total edit! I just noticed that Jives bowed out. 
For the younger crowd. Gay people do not have a hidden agenda and are not out to corrupt the hetro populace... or do they?


----------



## jackokent (Apr 27, 2006)

Yes, sorry, I seem to have posted at the same time.  I've given up on this discussion too.  But I really think I should go and see the film.


----------



## Marky Lazer (Apr 27, 2006)

Jives,

_Cowboys - known for toughness, fairness, honor, integrity, and dignity._
Are you really saying gays din;t have dignity?

_I don't buy the "Well, we need to explore this side of ourselves" thing either. Some things we don't need to explore. What's next? "A Day in the Life of a Child Molester?"_
So, now you're comparing gays with child molesters? Seriously man, just shut the hell up. I don't like to call people idiots, and I guess some moderator is going to tell me to take it easy, but you are just a person why I think there's always going to be hate in this world.

_I noticed that most of you are incensed that I don't like the homosexual aspect of this movie. Well, that's my perogative. You can buy it and watch it all you want, I'm not stopping you. But I think movies like this, along with ultra-violent videogames and music are just plain bad for people._
Sugar is also bad for people, maybe we should ban that as well.

_Now, you'll probably say that normal people don't take movies and TV seriously. I could point you to the group of five year olds that kicked a child to death on a Swedish playground after watching "The Power Rangers," but I don't have to. We all know that it *does have an effect on us.*_
That's not even proven. And you know it. Some kids with a mental disorder or more easy affected by things like that, but most _normal _people won't kick someone else senseless because the Power Rangers do. I also think you make dangerous comparisons. If people watch a movie with a gay in it, they turn gay? Is that what you're trying to say?

In conclusion, people are you make me sick.

PS, And I think it's very dangerous that you're a teacher and saying, _being gay is just bad_. I had a teacher who once told me something about respect. Ever head that word before?


----------



## the_faery_queen (Apr 27, 2006)

adultery is a bad thing. i doubt anyone here is saying it isn't, i think what people are saying more is, how awful it was these GAY men had to marry women and try and live a life that was a lie because they couldn't be together freely. that is FAR worse to me than cheating on your partner! people cheat, and they cheat for FAR worse reasons! they cheat because they can, because their wife doesn't want sex anymore, because they're having a mid life crisis, because they're selfish and just like lots of sex with random people and have no respect for their partners. these are bad reasons to cheat.

cheating with someone you're truly in love with and who you can't be with is not. ok they could have been more noble and denied themselves their love and stayed with their wives but they would STILL have been being unfair to them. pretending to love them when they really loved someone else. its a tragic love story, in my mind. the idea that two people want to be together but can't, that they have to settle elsewhere

yes its unfair to the women, but the situation was FAR more unfair on the men! after all, one DIED being with the person he wanted to be with (sorry for spoilers to those who haven't seen it) the women, from what i understand, did not. they had the chance to find someone else, find a nice straight cowboy. the surviving partner lost his lover just because he happened to be gay. he was forced to live a lie, then when he was with the person he loved, he lost him. that is FAR more tragic to me, far more impoertant a message. that people should respect and acept others lifestyles and not judge them for it. a message i think that has been lost on you jives, im afraid. its not about the adultery, no one is saying that's a good thing. its about two men who want to be together and who can't, and who suffer when they do finally get together. that should teach kids a good message, to be more accepting, to be more tolerant. i doubt it will teach any of them to commit adultery. most people don't need any help with that.


----------



## the_faery_queen (Apr 27, 2006)

oh and jives, a study was carried out in the uk (well it was a tv poll thing) when they went around and asked a bunch of kids if they had seen these horror films. they made up half the titles and most of the kids said they had seen it. you can't actually trust kids to tell the truth when it comes to what they have seen if something is considered 'cool' like a horror film, they will claim to see it when they haven't.

and personally i think kids SHOULD see this film. and if they watch porn, that's their parents fault.

personally i HATE having door opened for me, or men getting to their feet. im a woman, i can open my own door (unless im carrying stuff) its not about innocence, what you seem to like is old fashioned, restrictive 'family' values that probably insist a woman's place is in the home and a man's is out at work. that worries me just as much as your attitude towards gays, esp if you are a teacher.


----------



## genisis2 (Apr 27, 2006)

Marky Lazer said:
			
		

> PS, And I think it's very dangerous that you're a teacher and saying, _being gay is just bad_. I had a teacher who once told me something about respect. Ever head that word before?


I totally missed that he was a teacher. I was totally going to let Jives off the hook and keep my opinions to myself but since you and Faery Queen have piped up... Im stunned by your ignorance on homosexuals in general I will not berate you for it as others have done so. I cant believe the stuff you wrote on this thread and think it would not come back to bite you and not offend anyone. The fact that your a teacher and a scientist you should really research your material. more importantly its your type of thinking that leads to hatred and intolerrance against the gay community and kept so many young people in the closet. 
I urge you to reevaluate your thinking in this matter stop basing your opinions on some type of stereotype stuck in your head and do some real research. Yours are prejudices which you have attempted legitimize as harmless opinions possibly at some base level hatred and should be recognized as such.


----------



## littlemissattitude (Apr 27, 2006)

Okay, kids.  This discussion has gotten to the point where it is no longer productive.  You all need to keep in mind that everyone is entitled to their opinion, even when you might not agree with it.  Now that everyone has had their say, I'm closing this thread.


----------

