Brokeback Mountain - Review

"I think we really need to see this movie," my wife says. "It's supposed to be an important film."

"Yes, but movies are first and foremost about entertainment to me, and I just don't know how entertained I'm going to be seeing a couple of cowboys roughing it up in a tent," I reply.

"Well sometimes you have to get out of your comfort zone to grow as a person," she concludes. And we go.

In the end, I think we were both right. Brokeback Mountain is an important film in the sense that it marks America's official acceptance of the reality of homosexuality - mainly that it is not chosen, but that it is biological. Now, I'm not saying that there aren't plenty of homophobes still out there, or that many of them wouldn't just as soon come up with some "final solution" for the "gay problem" as let things continue going the way they're going. However, when a movie like this can come out, receive critical acclaim, not be widely labeled as pornographic, and not have the puritanical among us protesting incessantly at all showings, you have to admit that the acceptance of biological homosexuality is now completely mainstream. So my wife was right. And so was I. Sort of.

I normally like to begin reviews by either recommending or not recommending the work in question. However, in this case, I really can't do that. Yes, I think the film is important, and I'm glad it was made and has been widely distributed. And, to a certain extent, I'd say it was worthwhile for me to see it, if only because it threw yet another log onto a fire that was lit for me many years ago - the fire of disgust at how some humans, when faced with ideas and lifestyles that are different from their own, choose to trample the rights of other humans to assuage their inner turmoil. But should you see it? I can't say.

Brokeback Mountain is essentially the story of two cowboys who fall in love but have to carry on their relationship secretly for twenty or so years. They try to deny the situation in the beginning, choosing to take the traditional path for men of their ilk - they marry and have children. Alas, their need to be true to themselves and their love drives them to periodic clandestine trists in the wilderness, which ultimately result in their undoing. It's all very sad, really.

As far as entertainment goes, I'm willing to endure some sadness for a point. For example, Schindler's List is, in some ways, the saddest movie of all time, but the value of the movie surpasses any selfish desire to use the big screen as an escape. So we go, we cry, and we come away different, aware of how bad it can get on this big blue marble. But I'm not ready to say the same for Brokeback Mountain. In fact, it has a very "preaching to the choir" feel to it.

You see, I already knew that homosexuality is biological, and I already knew that homophobes have been destroying the lives of good people forever. So I can't say I came away from the film with some new perspective on things. I would venture to say that this is probably true for most everyone who saw and appreciated the film. But could this film change anything for people who are either mildly homophobic or just prefer not to think about such issues? Doubtful.

There are admittedly only a couple of, shall we say, uncomfortable scenes in Brokeback Mountain, but these would be enough to throw a gay issues fence sitter right over the edge into the land of, "I really don't need to see this." The emotional repulsion in the unprepared mind would likely over-power the rationality needed to come to grips with the point of the film. In the end, the fence sitter walks out feeling a little violated, and the idea that these two cowboys should have been able to live honestly without fear of reprisal from the community falls to the ground as a seed for which there is no water and no sunlight. So here we are - those of us who already "get it" are treated to a film that offers a more picturesque and depressing view of a scene we've encountered many times before.

That's what I mean when I say that my wife and I were both right. She's right to say that the film is important, but I am right to say that the price of admission (the sad theme and the uncomfortable scenes) probably didn't the hit the mark of good entertainment on a Saturday night. Of course, this is a little troubling to say because I'm focusing almost exclusively on the theme. But that's not my fault - the theme is the raison d'etre of the film. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that it was extremely well done. And maybe, just maybe, there is a silver lining in all this.

Aside from the gay issue, there is something to the film that I think illuminates a real human issue. That is the idea that you have to choose who you love in life, and you have to do so rationally. As I mentioned, the characters in this movie tried to live the lives that were expected of them, but their addiction to the warm fuzzies that could only come from interacting (and, ahem, other stuff) with one another ultimately led to their demise. One could ask a very serious question - should they have recognized that their love, though it was real and more meaningful than anything else in their lives, was not worth the costs?

I have long argued that our lives should be goal oriented and that the goals we choose should be rationally conceived. So, supposing that one's goal in life is happiness, is it not reasonable to suggest that sometimes love is not the answer? John Lennon said, "All you need is love." I say, "All you need is healthy love." Reigning in our emotions is perhaps the most difficult challenge we face as humans in a modern world. They were not designed for this environment, and they routinely push in directions that do more harm than good. Love is no different.

I'm not saying that these cowboys should have simply succumbed to the expectations of society and been happy breeders. But the fact is that they made commitments to people, and there were children involved. To give in to their love was immoral in that context - not because they happened to be gay - but because they were cheating, plain and simple. The right answer would have been to honorably sever their marriages and move somewhere that was more accepting of their lifestyle. I'm just not willing to give these guys a pass because they happened to be gays in a world that persecutes gays. We all have our crosses to bear.

I will freely admit that this is pure Monday morning quarterbacking, and I know that there are many who would disagree with me. That's a good thing. That means that Brokeback Mountain isn't just about the homosexuality thing. It is also an excellent case study in the relationship between rational commitments and emotional restraint. There's ground to be gained in that discussion, so maybe the price of admission was worth it.

You can see that I'm still a little conflicted on this movie, which is why I can't make a recommendation one way or another. I will, however, say that you should see it if you like a good emotional story in a sometimes breathtaking and sometimes heartbreaking setting, and if you can stomach some rough gay sex on the big screen. Brokeback Mountain is cinematically beautiful and the story is well told. Furthermore, there's no question that Gyllenhaal and Ledger are fantastic actors who have done what would seem to be very difficult roles a great deal of justice. Indeed, I find myself wondering if gay isn't going to become the new retarded. Think about it - for years, it has been well known that the way to become considered a serious actor is to do a retarded role. Maybe now, you can do a steamy gay role and get the attention of The Academy. Only time will tell - but you heard it here first.