Brokeback Mountain is the resident, talked-about/blogged-about movie of the moment. With its excess of critical praise (including mine), Golden Globe nominations and box office record (highest per-screen gross of any non-animated movie in history), it's being touted as the film that'll take over the Oscars.
But that's not what people are talking and blogging about. In the midst of all the Brokeback brouhaha, men seem to be going out of their way to say they won't see it -- and then dispensing a really good reason why.
Some say Ang Lee's cowboy love story is not their cultural cup of tea. They hate romances of any kind. Or they hate cowboy films.
PHOTO: NY TIMES NEWS SERVICE
"I'm not really all that interested in cowboy life," Houston poet Eric Blaylock told me. "It's just something [African-American males] don't relate to."
Others say they're resisting a liberal media trying to guilt-trip them. On his blog, Vanity Fair columnist James Wolcott called out several such guys, including Slate's Mickey Kaus, who invoked the name of liberal media king Frank Rich of The New York Times in his statement of contempt.
"When the film's national box office fails to live up to its hype and to the record attendance at a few early screenings," Kaus writes, "prepare to be subjected to a tedious round of guilt-tripping and chin-scratching by Frank Rich and every metropolitan daily entertainment writer who yearns to write about What the Movies Say About America Today. (Wild guess: They say we're still homophobic!) ... Maybe if we all go see it, Rich won't write about it!"
PHOTO: NY TIMES NEWS SERVICE
And James Lileks (at www.lileks.com) complained about Entertainment Weekly's giving the cover to Brokeback Mountain (plus an inside story to Transamerica) over The Chronicles of Narnia, as if the editors felt that they needed to "encourage movies about cowboys in love, because somewhere in some small town a gay youth looks at the box office grosses, and decides to stay in the closet out of fear he will be eaten by a computer generated lion who manifests the stigmata. Or something like that." (For the record, the magazine did its next cover story on Narnia.)
Leave it to Larry David, co-creator of Seinfeld and star of the HBO sitcom Curb Your Enthusiasm, to boldly go where no straight man would even think about going: He said he's afraid the movie might turn him gay.
In a New York Times op-ed piece headlined Cowboys Are My Weakness, David describes himself as a "susceptible" person -- "easily influenced, a natural-born follower with no sales-resistance."
"If two cowboys, male icons who are 100 percent all-man, can succumb, what chance to do I have, half to a quarter of a man, depending on whom I'm with at the time?" David writes.
Later, he admits that there are perks when you are part of "the gay business": "I know I've always gotten along great with men. I never once paced in my room rehearsing what to say before asking a guy if he wanted to go to the movies. And I generally don't pay for men, which of course is their most appealing attribute."
David's piece was funnier than nearly all of Curb's recent season. But you can't deny that there is some truth in it. After all, in this country, some people think homosexuality is an epidemic -- scarier than Communism, folks! -- and some even consider Brokeback a recruitment film.
If anything was more predictable than the hype for Brokeback, given its credentials and strategic release, it's the backlash. And the backlash is bubbling away.
Baltimore Sun critic Michael Sragow recently revisited Howard Hawks' 1948 western Red River, starring John Wayne and the notor-iously closeted Montgomery Clift, and called it a more striking gay cowboy movie than the "all-too-sane and tasteful" Brokeback. In LA Weekly, writer/critic/gay historian David Ehrenstein called Brokeback a "saddle-packing same-sex equivalent of Guess Who's Coming to Dinner."
Ehrenstein also clocks off a list of truly groundbreaking "queer films," including works by gay filmmakers Gus Van Sant (My Own Private Idaho), Todd Haynes (Velvet Goldmine) and Gregg Araki (Mysterious Skin). It's similar to what New York Press critic Armond White did when he slammed Brokeback and gave shout-outs to lesser-known films such as Son Frere, A Thousand Clouds of Peace and last year's Loggerheads, made by North Carolina filmmaker Tim Kirkman.
True, there are films that are more captivating and compelling when it comes to capturing gay culture (and thus never get seen, much less hyped). But you've got to give Brokeback props for getting people talking. Hey, I don't see people debating all over the place about Cheaper By The Dozen 2.
Films with touchy subjects are meant to be debated, discussed and dissected -- by the people who see them, of course. If there is a film you don't want to see, like Cheaper by the Dozen 2, it doesn't necessarily mean you hate kids or families or Bonnie Hunt or whatever. It just means you're not interested in seeing it, and you might not be equipped to join the discussion.
And remember, no film is going to single-handedly destroy the moral, traditional fabric of our country. (That's been gone for quite some time now, and for those of you who still think there's one, you're just as in the closet as the two cowboys in the movie.)
Besides, a friend of mine, a man who has been married for 10 years, saw it, liked it and is just fine about the whole thing.
However, he does keep telling me he wishes he knew how to quit me.
May 6 to May 12 Those who follow the Chinese-language news may have noticed the usage of the term zhuge (豬哥, literally ‘pig brother,’ a male pig raised for breeding purposes) in reports concerning the ongoing #Metoo scandal in the entertainment industry. The term’s modern connotations can range from womanizer or lecher to sexual predator, but it once referred to an important rural trade. Until the 1970s, it was a common sight to see a breeder herding a single “zhuge” down a rustic path with a bamboo whip, often traveling large distances over rugged terrain to service local families. Not only
Ahead of incoming president William Lai’s (賴清德) inauguration on May 20 there appear to be signs that he is signaling to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and that the Chinese side is also signaling to the Taiwan side. This raises a lot of questions, including what is the CCP up to, who are they signaling to, what are they signaling, how with the various actors in Taiwan respond and where this could ultimately go. In the last column, published on May 2, we examined the curious case of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) heavyweight Tseng Wen-tsan (鄭文燦) — currently vice premier
The last time Mrs Hsieh came to Cihu Park in Taoyuan was almost 50 years ago, on a school trip to the grave of Taiwan’s recently deceased dictator. Busloads of children were brought in to pay their respects to Chiang Kai-shek (蔣中正), known as Generalissimo, who had died at 87, after decades ruling Taiwan under brutal martial law. “There were a lot of buses, and there was a long queue,” Hsieh recalled. “It was a school rule. We had to bow, and then we went home.” Chiang’s body is still there, under guard in a mausoleum at the end of a path
Last week the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) released a set of very strange numbers on Taiwan’s wealth distribution. Duly quoted in the Taipei Times, the report said that “The Gini coefficient for Taiwanese households… was 0.606 at the end of 2021, lower than Australia’s 0.611, the UK’s 0.620, Japan’s 0.678, France’s 0.676 and Germany’s 0.727, the agency said in a report.” The Gini coefficient is a measure of relative inequality, usually of wealth or income, though it can be used to evaluate other forms of inequality. However, for most nations it is a number from .25 to .50