At the risk of annoying you all with more news about Brokeback Mountain…
Fox News has released Roger Friedman’s the top 10 movies of the year (actually it is 12) and their number 1 is Munich.
Capote and Transamerica are both included but guess which critic favorite Golden Globe nominee didn’t make the top 12. Maybe, unlike Munich, Brokeback can’t be described thus:
…a superb hero, easy to follow as he is drawn by loyalty to God and country into a thankless assassination plot.
Oh, but the movie wasn’t entirely ignored. The comments for the number 8 movie:
8. “Broken Flowers” â Focus Features has done a good job ignoring this brilliant Jim Jarmusch film so they could give us gay cowboys mumbling and tumbling together in “Brokeback Mountain.” I do think that Bill Murray’s sublime performance in “Broken Flowers” is going to outlast “Bill and Ted’s Excellent Romance,” and that video viewers are going to wonder why Murray, director Jarmusch, supporting actor Jeffrey Wright and a trio of Murray’s ex-flames â in cameo â Sharon Stone, Jessica Lange and Frances Conroy â weren’t shown more respect.
Sounds to me like fair and balanced Friedman thinks Focus Features erred in “giving us” gay cowboys and thinks the movie is the emotional and intelectual equal of a silly buddy comedy. Sorry Friedman, I think your bias is showing.
FYI, save all your favorite obnoxious quotes about Brokeback for a coming infographic!
You obviously take things way too seriously. So what, he doesn’t like the movie. Big deal. Get over it. How does that make him biased against gays? You have any other proof. Also, is your self esteem as a gay man so low that you are affected by Friedman’s pointless, irrelevant comments?
Also, aren’t you showing a bias yourself against “buddy movies” by writing them off as not being praise-worthy?
To coin a phrase, there’s no news on Faux News
I stopped paying attention to Faux News in the spring of 2001, after the Chinese forced down the US surveillance plane. There was a TV monitor in the changing room at the gym I go to, and they were tuned to Faux News. This was early in the morning. They seemed to be “covering” the incident virtually 24/7. I was changing at about 6AM. The Faux News commentator (I hesitate to call her a reporter) basically said that they had no idea what was going on, but they would continue talking about it anyway. I literally rolled on the floor, laughing. I didn’t have much respect for Faux News previously, but after that I lost what residual respect I had for them.
For Timothy: “allegedly”
Munich? Who are they kidding? It was all over the news in–1972. Somebody actually made a movie out of it, now? Why don’t they just show the old news footage? I guess there’s no money in that.
“Also, aren’t you showing a bias yourself against “buddy movies” by writing them off as not being praise-worthy?”
You’re right, Marcus. Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure was robbed Oscar night. I can only assume voters were so evenly split between Keanu Reeves and that other guy who played the other guy that a dark horse contender managed to sneak through.
If all the critics don’t like or accept BBM, I don’t care.
I just saw it this morning. It was a very early screening and the theater was only half full. But there were lines for the next screening.
It’s a GREAT movie. Like “Tender Mercies” and “Places in the Heart” great.
The screenwriters were utterly faithful to the story and it’s meaning and all the people involved.
I was talking to three women who had come together…all of us dabbing at our eyes and blowing noses.
Indeed, there weren’t that many dry eyes. So all those throwing a hissy about it being about gay men, set in cowboy country or because they can’t get over the fact that Jack and Ennis fell in love BEFORE they ever married, and if Ennis hadn’t been taken to see the lynched body of a gay man…then that’s just too bad.
It’s a fine movie experience, so affecting. Instead of being a special effects extravaganza that makes me feel beat up when I leave.
And kudos the the CAST. Ang Lee got amazing performances out of EVERYBODY.
So, all the praise IS well deserved.
And, btw….I’m not that easy to please.
BTW, Marcus.
To describe the film BBM in those terms, that’s a giveaway to someone with a problem.
And it’s not about not being able to take an insult.
It’s about the immaturity of the person who feels compelled to utter it.
Bill Murray has some stiff competition.
And he’d only win because he’s older with a body of work behind him worthy of Oscar consideration.
BBM, so far in the short careers of Gyllenhall and Ledger, is their BEST work.
And it’s not that easy or often that straight men are THIS credible as their gay characters would warrant.
Let alone a good story about gay men and their lives in the period the story is set.
I thought I would mention that Christianity Today actually gave BBM 3 out of 4 stars. There are some understandable (for that publication) moral caveats but I have to say, the review is fair and thoughtful.
https://www.christianitytoday.com/movies/reviews/brokebackmountain.html
David
” I just saw it this morning. It was a very early screening and the theater was only half full. But there were lines for the next screening.”
Regan, where was this? I hope the box office numbers aren’t declining already.
Reason, many of the anti-gay voices have given the film fairly reasonable reviews (Focus on the Family, Michael Medved). I think they might enjoy the movie on some level because they think it might teach people that you will be miserable if you are gay or involved in a homosexual relationship.
James,
Nope it isn’t dropping off yet. This weekend it jumped to number 8 in the box office even though it’s only showing in 69 theaters. Weekend average per theater will be about $34,000 per theater which is roughly 2.5 times King Kong’s average.
The roll out plan has aparantly changed for BBM. They were going to wait for Jan to expand to 300 more screens but I read they will be increasing to 120 next week followed by about 500, and 750 following. This suggests to me that they are seeing this movie as being WAY more successful than their wildest dreams.
You make a good point about the reasonable reviews (other than insanely homophobic Dr. Ted Beahr at MediaWatch). As David mentioned, ChristianityToday gave it 3 stars. To touch on what you said about how the right could interpret the film, ChristianityToday said:
“It’s quite possible that no matter what the viewer believes about homosexuality, he or she will be able to read their own stance on the issue into this story. … And though it’s presented as a story of thwarted loveâof ache and longing and regretsâit’s also ultimately a story about the relationships that shape us ⊠for better and for worse.”
James,
As I mentioned, BBM is number 8 with only 69 theaters. I just read that no movie has been in the top ten with less than 100 theaters in the past four years.
From Variety:
This about the records BBM continues to make:
“Expanding from five theaters last weekend, per-play average for “Brokeback” was $34,194. That’s the best ever for a non-Imax film on more than 50 playdates.
Ang LeeAng Lee-helmed short story adaptation is the first film since 1995 to break into the top 10 while in fewer than 100 locations. Cume is $3.3 million.”
and
“As expected, best perfs came in more liberal cities, including Toronto, New York and L.A., where the film’s best per play takes reached over $70,000.
However, “Brokeback”‘s best per play takes in other cities included an estimated $56,000 at a theater in Atlanta, $50,000 in Phoenix, $49,000 in Houston, $35,000 in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., and $33,000 in St. Louis. In some of those cities, it was playing on only one screen.”
Not exactly deep red country, but certainly not “hollywood liberal elite”, either.
https://www.variety.com/article/VR1117934870?categoryid=1236&cs=1&s=h&p=0
Finally got to see it last night. The theater in Evanston sold out shortly before the 7:10 showing. There was a diverse mix of people–married people of every age, students, and gay couples. Being a farm boy, originally from Oklahoma, I have to say that Jake and Heath looked and acted just like the kind of people I grew up with–just on that level they were very convincing. The older he got, Ennis reminded me more and more of my own father. Laughter…applause…audible weeping in the audience. Was in some pain myself…hit me almost physically. I went with my friend Ryan, who is also a transplant from Oklahoma. The funniest thing was listening to ourselves as we waited for the train afterwards…both drawling in Oklahoma accents that we never really ever had. Hahah!!!
I saw Brokeback Mountain today. It was ok, but I think a bit over rated. The story line and the lives of the characters would be interesting to examine from the perspective of reparative therapy theory.
Patrick said:
The story line and the lives of the characters would be interesting to examine from the perspective of reparative therapy theory.
How so?
David
Thanks for all that information, Timothy. I hope those numbers keep going. I wonder how the film did in Austin. Austin is pretty liberal, you’d think they would have had a lot of support for the film.
I do worry that some people may get sick of hearing about the film and that will cause a backlash, so maybe it’s best they are opening the movie in more places now before that kind of backlash can take effect.
LA Daily News hinted O’Reilly might start attacking the movie after Christmas…I’m not sure if they were joking or not.
In terms of numbers and per screen averages, the film is doing amazing business (if it keeps up, it might be considered the most profitable film of the year based on its limited number of screens and averages). With Oscar nominations, it will do even better. The filmmakers have already recouped their money and the studios are happy.
I saw it on Friday. For the first 45 minutes, I thought it was overrated and somewhat forced, but then something happened. I can’t remember a time in years when this occured, but something grabbed me and would not let go. I have only cried in two other films in my lifetime, and this made me cry. I watch all types of films all the time (saw Kong tonight) because of the film classes I teach, but there has been rarely a film that has haunted me like BBM has. My spouse was also very affected by it. I have had trouble getting it out of my mind. The film itself is very, very simple plotwise, but there is a timelessness to the film that seems to transcend trends. I think this is a film that is going to last a long time in the public consciousness.
Desperately off topic:
Aaron at December 19, 2005 05:23 AM
You said that you saw what was apparently the latest remake of King Kong because of the film classes that you teach. Within the last few weeks we rented the DVD of the original Kong movie and found that, at approximately 1 hr 40 minutes the story was excellent–particularly from a pacing standpoint. We subsequently rented the DVD of the mid-1970s remake with Jessica Lange (who is an excellent actress) and found it, at 2 hrs and 15 minutes to be boring. Now there is yet another remake by director Peter Jackson of LotR fame that clocks in at over 3 hours. That sounds absolutely self-indulgent.
My question to you is this. The first Kong movie was excellent. Why the re-makes? Have the movie makers largely run out of script ideas?
Let me say, I am not adverse to lengthy movies. I found Jackson’s LotR movies (each of which clocked in at about 3 hours) interesting, but they weren’t re-makes. And I do believe that Gone With The Wind was the best American movie ever made, and that clocks in at 3 hrs and 45 minutes (although that is really two movies separated by an intermission).
On the point of the post, who the heck is Roger Friedman? And why should anyone care what his opinions are?
Over the last couple of nights, we have rented DVDs of some rude, crude and otherwhis histerically funny DVDs of the “Blue Collar Commedy” group, whose shows have been broadcast on Comedy Central. Rude? Yes. Crude? Oh, yes. Funny? Defintely yes. You would have to adjust your hearing, since the actors (!) affect far southern accents. (They are from the South, and I’ve heard accents along their lines.) Worth watching? Most definitely yes.
We rented the DVD of Ron White’s concert, and then the DVD of the entire group’s Blue Collar Comedy Tour, which included bits from all of them. They were funny as heck.
Who cares what Roger Friedman thinks?
This LA Times article says the movie is doing well in the suburbs so far.
https://www.latimes.com/business/custom/cotown/cl-et-brokeback19dec19,0,6272223.story?coll=la-utilities-business-cotown
Raj, the remake question (and I hope nobody gets upset that I am discussing somehting other than BBM). I get the remake question a lot in classes, and I see some rmeakes as good, some pointless, and others just bad. Remakes are cheap for the studios because they do not need to pay rights. That said, I think that Jackson remade Kong as an homage. THere are different technologies, so he can do things the original could not. He was also able to show the relationship between the female and ape, which was really subtle. Remakes can be great, and Hollywood has been doing remakes for 105 years, so that is nothing new. Hitchcock remade two of his own films. Sometimes, and I think Kong may fall into this category, they are self-indulgent (Psycho, for example).
Aaron at December 19, 2005 03:06 PM
Thanks for the response. One quibble:
Remakes are cheap for the studios because they do not need to pay rights.
Not necessarily. If the original was based on a copyrighted novel, for example, the studios may have to pay the copyright holder of the novel. There is a weird aspect of American copyght law whereby the copyright reverts to the copyright holder (or his or her heirs) after 28 years or so. IIRC, that was one of the problems with the re-releases of Hitchcocks movies based on Wollcott’s novels, such as Rear Window. In the US, the original copyright holder cannot sign away the copyright rights after the original 28 year period.
Regarding BBM (to give an homage to the topic), that is playing on two screens here in the Boston area. We’ll wait for the DVD. Given my engineering background, the added features on the DVD for Crouching Dragon, Hidden Tiger was well worth the wait. And given what has become the typical DVD schedule, it will probably be out in a couple of weeks đ
Raj, you are right about that, and I made a faulty generalization. For movies like Kong though, Universal already held the rights from what I understand.
Hi James,
I saw it at the Sherman Oaks Galleria 16 at 10:20 am. That’s in the San Fernando Valley area of Los Angeles.
As for Patrick…
1. You’re not paying attention. These were rural men, and psychiatrists were antithetical to EVERYONE back in the period this was centered.
There was a serious stigma for whoever was seeing a doctor like that.
2. What the RT people and ex gay people constantly try to sell is, marrying women and having babies is supposed to validate you as a heterosexual. That, and maybe taking in some Bible verses to make others think you’re serious.
But what they don’t admit is, there is no cure for homosexuality. It’s not a disease or mental illness to begin with. Jack and Ennis functioned JUST FINE as homosexuals, it was trying to live as and be heteros that messed them up.
3. When will heteros get over the fact that gays and lesbians don’t need to act like them? Shouldn’t be like them, AREN’T and never SHOULD be them?
The story itself was about how heteros are always messing up gay people, and that’s essentially true.
Straight intervention on gay people is ALL OVER LIFE AS WE KNOW IT!
And from my chair, heteros aren’t getting the message that they simply aren’t supposed to interfere with gay people, nor are they in any way better than gay people just because they aren’t gay.
Messing up gay people is no sign of natural superiority.
Little update:
Estimates for the weekend were coming it at around 2.3 M for an astonishing 34,000 per theater. As it turns out, the actual weekendbox office was closer to 2.5 M.
The final numbers were not enough above expectation to move the film from number 8, but the weekend theater average has now been adjusted up to $36,354.
They’ve yet to spend a cent on TV advertising.
To address the issue of whether BBM will play in small towns, the jury is still out. But Variety reports:
“”It’s too soon for us, but we are following it closely,” said Michael Patrick, CEO of Georgia-based regional exhibexhib chain Carmike, of the “Brokeback” phenomenon so far. “If it continues to gross anywhere near what it has, it will play with us.”
A Fandango exec said that the ticket-ordering Web site is getting a significant amount of emails from fans wondering why the pic isn’t playing in their town, a phenomenon he said rarely happens.”
https://www.variety.com/article/VR1117934946?categoryid=10&cs=1&s=h&p=0
Meanwhile the critics in Dallas-Fort Worth and Las Vegas have named BBM best pic. At this point it’s pretty much a given that this will get a nomination for Oscar.
By the way, this whole phenominon has raised the profile of something I was only vaguely aware of. Aparantly there are a significant number of straight women who (for lack of a better term) get off on watching guys make out. I did know that Queer as Folk had as many women watching as it did gay people (hence the odd casting decisions) and that Japan’s market for gay film is straight teen girls. But still this came as a bit of a surprise.
If I were a straight guy wanting to improve my odds of gettin’ a little, I think I’d be buying tickets for me and my gal.
Raj:
You said: “For Timothy: “allegedly””
What’s your point??
Mike Airhart at December 20, 2005 03:18 AM
Mike, it was a satire on a comment elsewhere, I believe it was from Daniel, who chastised me for not using “allegedly” often enough, when I don’t provide a link to substantiate a point that I post in a comment.
I’ve been around the Internet long enough to know that, if I wanted to, I could find a link to a web page to “substantiate” virtually anything. That doesn’t mean that the Internet isn’t useful, but it does mean that the Internet isn’t reliable.
Mike,
I think raj has forgotten the particulars.
Raj made claims of illegal activity by Rush Limbaugh and speculated on further illegal activity in one of his posts (dealing drugs).
Since this was a string I initiated, I removed the one sentence and recommended that raj be more circumspect in his allegations unless he could substantiate them.
While I do not know the libel laws very well, in the current political climate I am not as confident of civil liberty protections or the rights to free speech as I once had been. I would not want this site endangered simply to accomodate baseless supposition.
I suggested that if raj disagreed with my decision, he should take it up with you as this is your site. I am assuming that he has not done so.
Since that time, raj has generous in his use of sarcasm or satire. It has not been a problem to me so far.
Timothy at December 20, 2005 01:19 PM
I think raj has forgotten the particulars.
Actually, no, I didn’t forget the particulars. And I didn’t take it up with Mike because the material that you deleted here isn’t a major issue with me here. I’ve raised it on other sites, where it was more relevant. That was sufficient for me.
Actually, I’m quite familiar with laws regarding libel. On the other hand, I will cite you to a report of a case out of the 9th circuit that you might find interesting.
https://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,59424,00.html?tw=wn_story_related
I don’t have a citation to the opinion in that case, but I haven’t seen that it has been overturned.
Raj said:
I’ve been around the Internet long enough to know that, if I wanted to, I could find a link to a web page to “substantiate” virtually anything. That doesn’t mean that the Internet isn’t useful, but it does mean that the Internet isn’t reliable.
Come now Raj, we parse through references from others all the time, deeming them to be authoritative or not. And there are plenty of materials that exist outside the Internet that are at least referenced there. You’re not getting lazy are you. Go ahead and post your references, we can muddle through đ
David
ReasonAble at December 20, 2005 09:34 PM
Come now Raj, we parse through references from others all the time, deeming them to be authoritative or not.
So? That is a different issue.