Brokeback Mountain

Missouribiguy

Literotica Guru
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Posts
2,468
Hey guys and girls, is it just me or does this sound like it could be a name for a gay porno?

If not, what strange parody names will come from it?
 
No.. haven't seen it. But I could see a movie called "Bareback Mountain" coming out.
 
First a tee hee

to all of the great plays on words!

Can't wait to see it - have heard that it's a film that stays with you long after... Would love to hear, Raimondin, what you think of it.
 
quick review

It's a worth see, not a must see. The story is quite tragic, for everyone concerned. Wonderful acting and photography. Interesting direction, which I appreciated immensely, in that contrary to most Hollywood stuff and virtually everything on tv, there is no sex in this movie that is in any way gratuitous. The minimum is present, only to let us know what is happening. (Claimer / disclaimer: I absolutely love porn - the more, the wetter, the merrier). There is some kissing, but not very much, and the physical sex acts are more implied than shown. Clearly, not necessary to do more than that. I doubt many people will find the movie erotic, although there are clearly powerful sexual and romantic aspects. I would definitely not go to this movie with the hopes of leaving the theater turned on and hot to get someplace quick, although I don't rule out its having some residual libidinous effects. The movie, the action, the dialog, the events, are all pretty subtle, except for the occasional outbursts of intense sex or anger. And some very nice, tender moments, too. All in all, probably 3 1/2 to 4 stars. xo, S.
 
Missouribiguy said:
Hey guys and girls, is it just me or does this sound like it could be a name for a gay porno?

If not, what strange parody names will come from it?

You mean like Bareback Mountain?
 
Saw it today. Only cried at the end. Heath Ledger deserves a SAG & Oscar nomination for his role. Fucking fantabulous.
 
I just saw Brokeback Mountain. A beautiful movie, and so sad. What a shame that such an incredible fuss is being made about what is, essentially, a tragic love story. There's really very little sex, and what's there is not explicit.

Heath Ledger's performance is remarkable. Jake Gyllenhall is very good too - and let's face it, he's hot.

I highly recommend this movie.
 
So I went to see the movie because I love men in cowboy hats...


Just kidding...partly. This movie is one that got better as it simmered in me a few days after I saw it. I didn't cry, but there are so many difficult and painfully beautiful emotions that come up in it. It was really nice to see Heath, Jake, Michelle, and Anne in some very mature roles.
 
i was wondering when someone would start a thread about this movie. i want to see it, but i'm going to wait until it comes out on video. i don't pay the outrageous movie theater prices unless its a movie that will benefit from the giant screen, surround sound and bass that shakes my glasses in their frames (eg, the Matrix, LOTR, The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, Star Wars, etc)

my girlfriend has a crush on jake gylenhall and she said she doesn't want to see him getting all tender with another guy.
 
I actually loved that movie. Everyone is talking about it in Boston. I loved Jake Gyllenhaal's performance in that flick. I'm so ticked that everyone is talking about Heath Ledger instead of Jake. Heath plays a monosyllabic, humorless bisexual cowboy who rushes to marry some woman instead of settling down with his dream guy. The fool !!!!! Jake's performance was funny, touching and simply amazing. He deserves an award. Heath was cute, that's his only redeeming quality.
 
Prime said:
i was wondering when someone would start a thread about this movie. i want to see it, but i'm going to wait until it comes out on video. i don't pay the outrageous movie theater prices unless its a movie that will benefit from the giant screen, surround sound and bass that shakes my glasses in their frames (eg, the Matrix, LOTR, The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, Star Wars, etc)

my girlfriend has a crush on jake gylenhall and she said she doesn't want to see him getting all tender with another guy.


This is actually worth big-screening it, I don't think the power of the environment the story takes place will have the same effect on most TVs.
 
Netzach said:
This is actually worth big-screening it, I don't think the power of the environment the story takes place will have the same effect on most TVs.


unless you have a big one.........errr TV...err Telly......geez....lol..damn acronyms can get us in touble...*wink* :D
 
So my mom was telling me today that Heath is up for Best Actor at the SAGs and Jake is up for Supporting Actor. Now I feel that both men did a great job (and yes, Heath was monotone, but I'm pretty sure that was more of a reflection of the character's personality more than his acting ability), but it got me thinking...how can they call Jake a supporting actor? Michelle Williams and Anne Hathaway were the supporting characters, not Jake or Heath. Well, I guess it all works, especially if it gives Jake a chance to win something. :)
 
College_geek said:
So my mom was telling me today that Heath is up for Best Actor at the SAGs and Jake is up for Supporting Actor. Now I feel that both men did a great job (and yes, Heath was monotone, but I'm pretty sure that was more of a reflection of the character's personality more than his acting ability), but it got me thinking...how can they call Jake a supporting actor? Michelle Williams and Anne Hathaway were the supporting characters, not Jake or Heath. Well, I guess it all works, especially if it gives Jake a chance to win something. :)

I don't get that either - they were both equally prominent. If one of them was a woman, he would be nominated for best actress, not best supporting actress. Sigh. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
 
fille said:
I don't get that either - they were both equally prominent. If one of them was a woman, he would be nominated for best actress, not best supporting actress. Sigh. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

There have been times (albeit few) where they've nominated two men (or women) who are in the same movie into the same category. It usually doesn't work out this way though.

And yet the Globes has 4 out of the 5 noms for Best TV Actress in a Comedy/Musical going to Desperate Housewives. Blech.
 
I think Best Actor should go to Jake Gyllenhaal. Heath Ledger was...okay. Michelle Williams and the other chick were...okay. Jake was like a god on the screen. He made me want to jump into the sunny landscape of the Mountains to be with him and never come back. He was awesome. All of the others had limited acting ability. Jake Gyllenhaal is like a god on the screen. His capacity for in-depth character portrayal is unlimited. He's for real. Nothing fake about this. At all.
 
Samuelx said:
I actually loved that movie. Everyone is talking about it in Boston. I loved Jake Gyllenhaal's performance in that flick. I'm so ticked that everyone is talking about Heath Ledger instead of Jake. Heath plays a monosyllabic, humorless bisexual cowboy who rushes to marry some woman instead of settling down with his dream guy. The fool !!!!! Jake's performance was funny, touching and simply amazing. He deserves an award. Heath was cute, that's his only redeeming quality.
I love Jake. I would do him in a heart beat (as if he'd have me). Heath, him too, no questions asked.
 
Oooooh! I wanna seeeee!!
I leve in Greece and I don't know if it'll be on cinemas..
I'm quite sure they'll have it on DVD, but I don't wanna wait!!
Dammit! Yeah, Jake is really good on screen :)
 
Back
Top