Can "Brokeback" Break Through?

So, what exactly is the "gay agenda?"

Although I haven't seen this movie (or even heard about it until this post), the discussion around it reminds me of The Hours. The only good thing about that movie was that I saw with my wife-to-be on our first date. The "gay agenda" part of the movie didn't offend me, but it was as if the movie relied wholly on that aspect to emotionally affect the audience. Yes, these women were connected through a book and had similar experiences with lesbian activity. Yes, the direction and acting were good. But, I spent the entire film waiting for something to happen - something meaningful and moving - that never came. Maybe one needs to sympathize more with the plight of a gay person in a mostly straight world to appreciate the movie, but personally I think that's a shallow way to make a movie that hopes to move audiences... like they are using PC sentiment to make up for actual content.

I personally have no desire to see this movie, but I find it interesting to watch the reaction to its release and praise, especially from various groups that claim homosexuality is wrong in the name of religion. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe our society loves entertainment containing:

• murder, often quite graphic
• dramas in which someone cheats on someone else, especially in marriage
• theft of items of all sorts
• fantasy lands ruled by random gods
• people lying freely

That's just 5 violations of the Ten Commandments. I just don't understand why other films are release, watched, and praised but a movie about gay dudes makes everyone flip out. The way I see it, if you've ever watched and enjoyed a movie that does anything on the bullet list above, you've really no room to talk unless you state your hypocracy up front, or find a better reason to say that being gay is wrong.

Who cares if Hollywood acclaims a movie about a couple of gay cowboys? If you don't like it, don't watch it. The fear of gay becoming 'okay' in the US is silly. What's to fear?

Is Hollywood, through its praise and many award nominations, simply attempting to propagandize a particular social agenda?

Yes.

Next Question?

The movie is a heartbreaking portrayal of the consequences of lying to yourself and the dangers of living outside the norms of a society that doesn't accept you. And as much as I hate to say it, Brokeback Mountain is but a flash in the pan.

Lets face it - the people seeing the movie are the ones who aren't scared of the "gay agenda" (whatever the hell that is) not the James Dobsons or Pat Robertsons (or my parents for that matter).

The movie has been propelled into the forefront of the public because it's new and different. The media is the one hyping the movie and the ones most benefiting from the controversy. I doubt this will start a trend of realistic gay movies - sadly the public seems to enjoy their gay stereotypes ala Will and Grace not the more realistic Brokeback Mountain.

It has been interesting to read the various commentaries regarding the characters' ultimate fate in this movie: death and misery. Who is responsible for such a tragic end? Proponents for two opposing social agendas have weighed in on the issue.

The more liberal writers attribute the sadness of the ending as a result of society's bigotry and disapproval of love between two men. Judith Salkin writes in her commentary, "in Brokeback Mountain, it is society’s Puritanical attitude and taboos about homosexuality that are the obstacles neither man can overcome." Such statements are quite common in many reviews I have read.

The conservative view is that homosexuality is itself a destructive force, and by engaging in such activity, the lives of the characters were put to ruin. Steven Isaac, a reviewer for Focus on the Family, objected to the portrayal of the characters' tribulations as consequences of an intolerant society rather than of "the destructiveness of acting on homosexual temptations."

In the end, the debate seems to rest on the crux of what I have termed the "gay agenda." Does homosexuality=normal and healthy, or abnormal and destructive? Your answer to this question, of course, determines which way you spin, and thus, your support or opposition for movies such as Brokeback Mountain.

But, what would John Wayne say?

Much of this thread seems to be going on the assumption that "the church" as being morally opposed to homosexuality. However, my experience is that there are at least a couple major denominations that accept the practice. After some searching online, however, I had a hard time locating official positions. Perhaps everyone would like to help make a list? I'll start:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

• Official stance on the family laid out in The Family: A Proclamation to the World (introduced by President Gordon B. Hinkley in General Relief Society Meeting held September 23, 1995, in Salt Lake City, Utah).
• Specifics are explained well by Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in Same-Gender Attraction (Ensign, Oct. 1995, 7.)

The results of the Golden Globes are in. Brokeback Mountain won in several categories including best screenplay, best original song, best director, and best motion picture drama.

With these results in hand, it will be interesting to see how Brokeback fares in the Oscars. Can we expect a similar outcome, or will Hollywood go straight?