| December
2005
Brokeback Mountain and the internet
|
|
|
Normally, one does not write about a movie until one has seen it. But with
Brokeback Mountain, the phenomenon that is worth writing about is
happening now; there may be much less to write about by the time it
reaches Singapore's cinemas in February 2006.
For starters, how many senior citizen fathers tell their grown sons, "Hey, have you heard about the gay cowboy film?" Mine did. And how did he know about it? From the internet. You can even download the trailer from the internet, regardless of whether the movie is permitted to be shown in your country or not. Most certainly, you can read reviews and news about the movie's awards. Sure, a country can still ban a film, but imagine how more unhappy its citizens are going to be if it's one that they have seen the trailer of. And how long will it be before entire movies can be downloaded from the internet? Censors face an uncertain future, as all information gatekeepers do as the internet spreads and matures.
But Brokeback Mountain is, say the critics, a watershed movie. By many accounts, the story socks it to you, and the acting and direction are superb. From the moment word came that it had won the Golden Lion (Best Film) at the 62nd Venice Film Festival in September 2005, the buzz has been growing exponentially.
With that, even those who are not plugged in to the gay grapevine or entertainment news will be given a glimpse of the movie. Some of them will want to find out more, most of whom will go onto the internet. And there, they will find a tidal wave of information. Again, that is not unusual for blockbuster movies, except that Brokeback Mountain was not produced as a blockbuster. It was a small independent production costing only US$13 million. Real blockbusters cost over a hundred million dollars each, what with car chases, explosions and laborious animation.
|
|
|
 But even a simple internet
capability marked
Brokeback Mountain as different. The short story, by prize-winning
novelist E Annie Proulx (black and white photo), had first been published in the New Yorker
magazine in 1997. For a short while in December 2005, the magazine
re-released the story on its web edition, so people from around the world
could read the story. (Naturally, a fresh paperback has also been
released. You can get it at Kinokuniya and other bookstores in Singapore.)
Another thing that was different about Brokeback was the online forum on its official website. Most movie forums contain reviews from people after they had seen it, talking about the acting, the special effects, the music score and so on. Brokeback's forum was unusual in that there were hundreds of postings from people who had yet to see the movie. Even after the movie opened in a few US cities, the postings continued in the same vein: not about the technical aspects of the movie, but about how the story affected them. Here are a few, particularly well-written ones (slightly edited to correct spelling mistakes):
Although most of the postings were from Americans – they are after all the most numerous English-speaking internet-connected people – there were also messages from other parts of the world. These remind us of the universality of love -- and the global reach of the internet.
But it only shows how deep is the well of longing the movie taps into, and what an opportunity the film opens up for emotional release.
|
|
|
|
Yet we shouldn't expect that
heterosexual audiences in the main would go for this film. Most will
merely hear the label "the gay cowboy movie" and think it's got
nothing to do with them. Many of them are likely to associate the word
"gay" with sex and think it's going to be just a sordid romp. Or
else, some will think they cannot afford to be seen entering the
cinema hall lest other people think they're lesbian or gay. Yes,
homophobia is that silly, and often about self-preservation.
The internet for all its power, is a self-selecting medium. People choose to read what they want to read. For all the words and raw emotion poured out there in the wake of -- no, in advance of -- the movie, only those who are for whatever reason, already partly interested will read and be affected by them. But the impact of this movie will still be considerable, for there is a wide middle group between the unthinkingly heterosexist (and often homophobic) world who most likely will dismiss this film, and the gay audience who have it on the "must-see" list.
For that, we can only partly credit the internet.
The true credit should go to art: Proulx' original short story, the screen
adaptation by Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana, director Ang Lee (seen
above, holding aloft the Golden Lion prize), actors Heath Ledger and Jake
Gyllenhaal and the supporting cast. It is a reminder that for all the power of
technology, it can never replace art. © Yawning Bread
|
|
|
|
Footnotes None Addenda None
|
|
The phenomenon is both global and local. In fact,
they are two sides of the same phenomenon: the impact of the internet on
prospective movie audiences.
Of course, this is not a new realisation.
The internet has been growing, reaching into homes, for about 10 years
now. Deploying its technology to support the marketing of movies is not
new either.
Two whole months before its scheduled Singapore
release, The Straits Times (14 and 15 December 2005) and Today (14
December 2005) have carried write-ups about the movie. News of it winning
the New York Film Critics' Circle awards also made it to our local
television screens, both English-language and Chinese-language channels,
complete with a few seconds of footage from the trailer.
In
this middle group are people who are heterosexual, but whose life
situations include gay people. Perhaps their son or husband is gay.
Perhaps they're straight, but they have two or three friends who are gay.
They will be intrigued by Brokeback Mountain, and I think they will be
blown away by it. Many will come out of the theatre convinced, as
heterosexual Antonio Fernando of Brazil felt (see his posting above), that
love denied is a life denied.
