Posted on 12/14/2005 2:10:55 PM PST by Cinnamon Girl
Michael says Paula Zahn found a gay cowboy to interview for her show and that there's a gay rodeo league or something.
He says the movie ads hide the fact that the film is anti-marriage. It breaks up two marriages with kids and yet is described as "a wonderful love story."
Michael Medved reminded us today that last year they pulled the same stunt with "Million Dollar Baby" by not going anywhere near the real subject of the film, knowing that a lot of people would be turned off by it.
Go here to read the whole plot, and the ending, of this movie and other new films, so you won't be fooled by the glitzy (and misleading) ads:
http://www.themoviespoiler.com/Spoilers/brokebackmountain.html
Actually it doesn't promote splitting up families at all -- It's much more a tragedy for all parties involved, including the central gay characters and their wives.
I think this movie is getting unfairly prejudged *purely* for the sake that it's about gay people. I've read the short story since the author has written other very good literature, and it's actually quite revealing as to the real experiences of some homosexuals. I honestly recommend you read it before you bash gays for the sake of being jerks to them.
I for once would like to see WAAAY more actual compassion and understanding for gay people. I'm ashamed how many of you claim to Christians and are so quick to insult without rational thoughts -- in this case, insulting gays, this story, and the film. If the film is true to the short story, and I've read that it is, then it is very much NOT some simplistic promotion of homosexuality. It explains the complete tragedy of being gay in an environment with no understanding of being gay (much like freerepublic, unfortunately.)
In the 1950's, this movie would have had Hopalong Cassidy kissing his horse and then walking into the barn with Dusty at it's conclusion.
George Orwell award winner: wanting to get married is making war on marriage. lol!
What about the complete tragedy of marriages being broken up and children abandoned by fathers?
What about the tragedy of trusting, loving women being lied to, cheated on and betrayed by their husbands?
That's Michael Medved's whole point.
I had similar problems with Shakespeare in Love, which we were supposed to embrace as this heartwarming love story...involving Shakespeare doing Gwyneth Paltrow while his wife and kids are out of town.
As I read the synopsis of this movie in moviespoiler, it is a story about two lovers who have a brief passionate affair in their youth. They go their separate ways, marry and have children. Then they find each other again. Fanning the flames anew, they engage in an extramarital affair lasting years. One divorces because of the affair. The other is killed while seeking more extramarital sex while the lover is absent. The movie makes the lovers the sympathetic characters while soft-pedaling the tragedy of the broken families and fatherless children.
Sorry, I don't find that to be an uplifting movie, but then I also refused to see Titanic and Bridges of Madison County for the same reason I will not see this movie: it glorifies immorality. And the gay aspect of this movie is only a small part of what makes it so wrong in my book. And I couldn't care less about technical perfection, emotional satisfaction or Academy-grade acting.
This message of this movie is not the tragedy of a society which doesn't understand and accept homosexuals but of homosexuals not understanding and honoring fidelity and covenants.
"I'm parked over by the commissary."
What are you talking about? When you're able to make some sense please join back in.
Why do you have to generalize about people who don't care for the subject matter of the film? You sound like a liberal in that anyone who doesn't agree with you is intolerant and therefore bad.
The film has been praised for it's R rated approach to a male on male sex scene. Yet Roger Ebert had a problem with known "conservative" Vincent Gallo including a scene of male/female oral sex (with his former real life lover) in Brown Bunny.
In fact, Rog trashed that film completely and discussed audiences at Cannes booing. When the film came around to general release, he dropped his pissing contest and said it was a decent film.
Who cares what the critics think? Rog has had that thumb where the sun don't shine for the past decade. His "votes" are worthless without Siskel.
Michael Medved says that the film is about families that are torn apart.
He asked a homosexual caller if he would support a 42 year old man with kids who left his wife for a 22 year old woman.
Same issue of "being with who makes you happy".
Nothing but a selfish act.
La la la la live for today.
I know, I never really liked Roger Ebert either, when he was with Siskel or with Roeper. They just seem rather out of touch with the common movie goers. Plus, Ebert is way too hard on most of Adam Sandler's films. Instead of just having two pretentious old guys review a movie, they should have a show with a kind of "Review group." It could have 6- 10 people of different ages, genders, and races each giving their own opinions on a film.
"I for once would like to see WAAAY more actual compassion and understanding for gay people. I'm ashamed how many of you claim to Christians and are so quick to insult without rational thoughts -- in this case, insulting gays, this story, and the film. If the film is true to the short story, and I've read that it is, then it is very much NOT some simplistic promotion of homosexuality. It explains the complete tragedy of being gay in an environment with no understanding of being gay (much like freerepublic, unfortunately.)"
As much as the idea of 2 guys creeps me out, I have to agree with some of your posts. I might get flamed for this, but I do believe most gay people are just "born that way" as they claim. (some, maybe not) Part of me believes that because what guy would CHOOSE to be attracted to another man's hairy a**? (excuse my graphic description)
I am offended by alot of the pro-homosexual agenda being pushed by modern media, but at the same time I really don't care what people choose to do with their private lives, or if they want to go see some gay ass cowboy movie. There is alot of hate towards homosexual people that seethes here on FR. I guess I disagree with that, because, well.. I just don't care what gay people do, as I don't care about things that don't affect me. If people want to be gay, that doesn't really bother me. If they wanna see this faggety movie, that doesn't bother me either.
Lighten up, folks. It's just some homo cowboys. We have alot bigger problems in the world.
Yes they do. Thats not an exaggeration.
The first line of Laura Ingraham's book Shut Up and Sing is "They think you're stupid".
Never underestimate the power of conditioning because anyone could be conditined to eat a pile of s**t or to be homosexually inclined.
No, no, that's what I'm saying -- it's a "tragedy for all parties involved" -- that's what I said. The point I wanted to make was that it's not about gays throwing themselves in other people faces. It's that the tragedy is so hard to avoid for ALL those people when the environment is so repressive and unsympathetic. Now I'm not saying you should go and let homosexuals do whatever they want -- but the seriously, when pressure is put on them to pretend they're not gay (violence toward gays, general stigma, etc), that's when all the problems erupt, just like in this movie.
I want people to accept that the solutions to these problems are not so easy. You can't just say "gays are evil and gross, and we should never ever talk about them rationally. Let's make fun of them!"
Having actually read the story, I disagree. Yes, the infidelity is a tragedy, and it was caused by the initial tragedy of the two gay men being forced to act like they weren't gay (act like they didn't have sexual and emotional love toward each other when they really did). The story is more complex than you seem to consider it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.