While reading Salon.com this morning, I found this article on director Ang Lee's upcoming project, Brokeback Mountain. Based on a short story by Annie Proulx, the movie will mesh together the Western with queer cinema. Yes, I'm talking gay cowboys, folks, and Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger are rumored to be playing the parts of the cowboys in love. It sounds like a lovely attempt at opening eyes and liberating minds, but I'm afraid that, as usual, Hollywood will get it all wrong.
As far as American movie theatre and film goes, homosexuality is receiving more and more exposure. We are seeing more gay characters than ever before -- just look to the latest installment of The Lord of the Rings (Sam and Frodo, hello!). However, the quality of this exposure is not acceptable as it presents audiences (which are deemed mostly as heterosexual) with a false picture, or rather, an incomplete picture of homosexual life. The problem is, as Gary Morris asserts in his article Queer Kisses, that "Mainstream audiences want their homosexuals but not the details."
Scratching the details results in these false portrayals of homosexual life and love in film. In his article, Morris goes on to cite films like Philadelphia and The Birdcage, which may present gay characters, but ultimately rob them of "their own basic human, homosexual urges."
I'm curious to see if Lee can produce a good film and provide a fair representation of gay romance without causing an uproar. Lesbian romance seems more acceptable to mainstream audiences (ie: the Madonna/Britney stint), but perhaps Jake and Heath will help in reshaping Hollywood's take on gay love.
Posted by Kate Cielinski at January 14, 2004 9:24 AMI've nothing against homosexual characters in movies Kate, but Frodo and Sam aren't the two that stuck in my mind after watching ROTK. It seemed more likely that Pippin and Merry were a little more close than they should have been.
I'm a bit let down now that the LOTR trilogy is over with. What movies am I supposed to get excited about now? Spiderman 2 looks interesting (DOC OCK!) and I really want to see Kill Bill Vol. 2, but those don't seem as important as Aragorn and Frodo.
Any thoughts?
Posted by: Ed at January 14, 2004 2:29 PMI object!! I passionately defend the innocence of relationships between two male hobbits. ;) Maybe it's just a cultural thing. I mean, here on "Real" Earth, we have collectivist and individualistic . . maybe in Middle Earth there are special allowances for 'queer' behavior. It would sure explain a lot about those boy elves' hair and glittery robes.
Posted by: Katie :) at January 14, 2004 7:22 PMI remember reading "Brokeback Mountain" for a my Contemporary Women Writers class, and although it was a good short story, I too wonder how it will be adapted to fill 2 hours worth of screen-time.
As I read the Salon article, it really did become apparent that I've never seen gays portrayed as anything less than campy stereotypes on tv shows or in movies. However, I'm not familiar with the alt. lifestyle genre, where I hope true-to-life representations are depicted.
As for Sam and Frodo, I'm not into LOTR, so I can't weigh in. ;)
Posted by: Julie at January 15, 2004 4:34 PMPippin and merry are cousins there ment to be close.
Posted by: liz at March 13, 2004 2:42 AMPippin and merry are cousins there ment to be close.
Posted by: liz at March 13, 2004 2:42 AM