OK! The perfect Gay Film Is...What?

Brokeback Mountain was a short story! All of a sudden, folks who clearly haven't lived enough are trying to suggest how it should have been done....as a Hollywood Blockbuster.

I am tired of reading "there's not enough romance," " there's too much development of the wives and families," " there's too little sex between Jack & Ennis." Jeebus!

This is a story about people who carry too much CRAP with 'em to allow themselves to connect. CRAP from the time. CRAP taught as the only acceptable resolution to their life questions. CRAP offered as the ONLY POSSIBLE summation of a life together. 60's CRAP built upon CENTURIES OF CRAP.

Why should all "Gay Crap" be 2006-sensibility Gay crap? Aren't perspectives allowed anymore? This is a beautiful movie about folks who don't know how to connect to each other, save through the way they connect to each other.

And the bits of YOUR relatioship are sanctioned by whom?

IMHO.

it's a good movie, well made, -- and more important -- it's just a good story well told.

there's seems be some forgetdulness -- this is a period piece.
it's not about 06 sensibilities.

there are seems to be a huge lack of recognition of alienation and being gay and what that means to self discovery -- that i'm really not getting.

are gay people afraid of saying i am or i have been alienated in my life?
what modern human hasn't?

how can you tell a GOOD story if every one in it is perfect? where's the tension?

well, i have some other thoughts about all this --- but i'm not sure i want to talk about them right now.

this past week - not sure if I like it or not. I CAN say I thought BOTH Heath and Jake were incredible. Not sure why Heath is getting all the accolades when Jake was just as powerful. I also can say that for any gay man who has married a woman to try and cover, there are some powerful, pertinent points.

Anyone who claims they have not been alienated at some point or anotyher is lying. We homos more than some but we don't have the market cornered on that one.

there is no perfect movie - there might be a perfect movie for YOU or ME but not for everyone

i think you caught on to what i was trying in my inelegant way, i'm frustrated at some of the reasons for disliking the movie that i've read.

it's a little like some folk need both an art primer and a primer on the psychic{not the clairvoyant kind of psychic} condition of being human and more importantly, gay.

some of the reviews have just been disingenous -- trying to sound intelligent -- but masking a kind of homophobia -- some of it internalized.
which is ironic in the extreme considering the movie and the lives of the characters, no?

no idea what being gay meant in 1963. It wasn't like coming out in 1993 or even 1983. It was a cold, cruel unforgiving world, especially in the rural west and south. Ennis and Jack inhabited a world where such behavior simply was unacceptable. They did as best they could in the society in which they found themselves.

it exists -- depending on where you are yet today.

and might i add great classic works have to deal with this issue as well.
before street car is over -- stanly has to realize he is broken -- deeply and unalterably broken -- what brings him to his knees is that brokeness is revealed before stella.

boticelli's venus rising from the see -- the goddess is born of an act of horrifying violence, genital mutilation.
one the goddess's accompanying her, is there with her love -- who had RAPED her.

it's the imperfection that makes us human -- and really worthy to talk about -- chekoff brings to life ordinary creatures in all their alienated, broken glory -- and gives ''birth'' to realism in the theatre.

the movie doesn't have to be anyone's cup of tea -- but it's a good film and deserves to be dissected, ''critisized'' appropriately.