About 1980 a colleague remarked to me that she thought feminist film theory and criticism provided men and women within our culture an opportunity to have a conversation about sexual topics that they would not otherwise have. In other words, we were talking to each other about topics of importance in our lives that we could not speak to each other about directly, so we talked about them indirectly through film. While we seemed to be talking about sexuality in films, we were in reality talking about our lives.

Brokeback Mountain, a film by Ang Lee, potentially offers an opportunity for Singaporeans to have this kind of conversation. Its charity premiere (full house, according to friends there), organised by Fridae.com to raise funds for Action for Aids, was held on 8 February 2006, following which there were a few preview screenings before general release on 16 February.

It's still early days yet, but I am intrigued to know what Singaporeans, particularly heterosexual ones, have to say about the film and its theme.

As if to prove itself equal to the bigger newspaper, the tabloid-sized 'Today' also had a 2-page spread a couple of days later, plus a half-page film review.

In the second of the 2 Straits Times articles, Tay Yek Keak wrote

I cried. At the end of Brokeback Mountain, I broke down.

Let me tell you this. I haven't cried at movies where boy breaks up with girl. Not even when boy breaks up with girl and the dog dies, the car is repossessed and the ship sinks.

Tay made sure his readers knew he was a straight male. Two of my friends felt that he made it so clear, he "doth protest too much".

However, I was more interested in what ordinary Singaporeans, not professional film critics, and straight ones particularly, were saying about the film. So I trawled through online forums and blogs for their opinions, not so much about the technical aspects of the film, but for what they had to say about the impact of the story on them.

Admittedly, this may be too early. At the time of writing, it's been in general release for only two days (not counting the preview screenings), and anyway, are straight people even going to the film?

A comment by a 21-year-old female in her blog suggested they were.

.... the crowd was far from satisfactory.

It was the constant laughing throughout the movie. Ok, some scenes ARE meant to be funny. Cos even if it's a Lee Ang film, very serious and solemn and all, you can't really expect him to make a 134-min film that's all talk and no laugh, so there are some scenes that have funny dialogues and actions. BUT not all scenes are funny. This is NOT a fucking comedy. 

-- http://shishoi.blogspot.com/2006/02/ta-tah.html

This sniggering strongly indicated a straight audience, particularly a straight male audience as some of them tend to cover their discomfort at watching homosexual situations by treating what they see as a joke.

Another comment may show the scale of the interest:

Just got back from a midnight screening. Full house! Last week's midnight preview of 'Constant Gardener' was not as popular, and it was not of a R-21 rating!

-- anti_oxymoron in movieexclusive 

Of course there are those who make it quite clear online that they have no intention of seeing Brokeback Mountain.

i think i would give this a miss, not so much for the gay content, as much for the mushiness factor.... i prefer those oscar winners with a little more excitement such as:Gladiator, The Godfather, TLOTR: TROTK, etc

-- TheSaint888, SPUG forum
(the nick suggests that he is male)

Others saw it, but thought it was too arty for them

Can only say the show is not for everyone. Think it's more of a golden globe award movie. Don't really like to show. Slow and don't really feel anything about the characters.

--ekin101, SPUG forum (male)

the movie had a languid swagger towards the end, so slow that some of the movie-goers almost fell asleep ... did i enjoy watching the movie? yes. but it was too slow and felt incomplete in the ending. what about the gay issue? to each his own. if you are homophobic, watching the show will probably leave a bad taste in your mouth. but if you aren’t, perhaps watching the show will give you an insight into why the gay issue is so explosive (and not just in America).

-- www.samaryn.com (a gecko's tale),
appears to be straight male

One guy however was interested because his female friends were telling him to go see it.

some of my female co-workers saw this movie already. they all gave it a very, very, very good review. haven't seen it personally but trust their recommendation.

-- ianrush, SPUG forum
(the nick suggests he's male)

Generally, the more reflexive comments come from women, and in this respect, it's exactly the way the producer foresaw it.

I feel that the general public would just figure that this is a movie about gay cowboys getting it on, and it get a little difficult to see... that this movie... really speak of true love, forbidden love.

Forbidden not only in the sense that it is sexual love between two men, but that they have their own families out there. An affair, you may say. But I rooted for them because of my perception that the world should be free for love and sex between both sexes. I was unable to really grasp that this is a movie which glorifies an affair despite it being true love until the end of the movie when I got home. It is about true love, yes, but it is wrong simply because it was a betrayal to their wives. And then Jack Twist's 'infidelity' throughout... it was quite a ride.

I root for them, yet I get confused because of the potential hurt their respective partners would face if they should find out, and then eventual hopelessness that not everyone feels homosexuality 'normal'.

There are many scenes which struck me hard, because you simply feel their affection and love for each other. I am probably the only one but I thought the quiet scenes from the beginning to almost the end had a very subtle sexual awakening tension. You just sit there and try to feel for each of the characters and the dilemma they face, quite wonderfully scripted.

It could easily be another movie with a heterosexual couple but it would probably not be the same because there is the issue of humans not being able to cope with handling homosexuality. They make up lies to cover up what they find shameful, they make it seem like a sin more than what it is. It is not even a simple affair anymore.

It would be comforting if the world has changed since then but there are always homophobics inside most people, a demon even in the proclaimed gay-rights people.... Feeling rather down at the moment because of this movie... I don't know. I don't know anything, not even what I have typed in this comment.

-- anti_oxymoron (female?) in movieexclusive 

 

It's like a summer love, and after an hour into the film, we explore how this love affect them as they try to ease themselves back to normalcy. Except that things are never going to be normal anymore. While they establish families - Del Mar with his fiancee Alma (Michelle Williams), and Twist with rich Lureen Newsome (Anne Hathaway in another role which she shows off her assets), they cannot forget their throes of passion they had sparked back in summer of 63. Before long, they get together again to reignite their passion for each other and continue over a period of 20 years.

One thing's for sure, the story will still play out decently if you substitute gay love with heterosexual roles, like the countless of movies on cheating spouses, but there'll be a very distinct lack of punch. You'll notice that the male couples share similar trials and tribulations of any relationship - the love, passion, how much one party is willing to give the other, and how much the other will reciprocate, and unfulfilled dreams. What gives this movie the edge is how the characters are compelled to look for each other for solace, and the deceit and lies they have to go through in order to be together.

...

Perhaps something which I thought was pretty neat, was the idea brought forward from Kinsey, that there is a degree of homosexuality in all of us, and it depends on how gay you are, or have the courage, to come out of the closet. What's interesting is when you think about whether the notion of gayness stems from nature, or nurture. If you'd seen the movie, you'll know what I'm talking about, and how passion can consume someone, that it takes over all sensibility, and about the propensity of risk you're willing to take.

Homophobes will probably give this movie a miss, but to generally brand this as a gay movie will be missing the point. I'd recommend it to everyone I know to watch this with an open mind. It's an out-and-out dramatic story on relationships, and it's classic storytelling at its best....

-- daface, movieexclusive
(difficult to guess whether male or female)

This is NOT a fucking comedy. It's, for eg, not meant to be funny when Alma happened to open the window, only to see her hubby Ennis and his lover Jack, whom he had not seen for 4 years, kissing passionately at the stairway. Her startled expression was NOT meant to be funny. If you laugh, it only means that you only look at the surface of the issue. Haven't you think why had she looked so shocked? Why had you not feel sad for her? Couldn't you feel her grief. She wasn't heart-broken only because her hubby of 4 years seemed to love a man. But because the passion that she had witnessed Ennis and Jack to share way surpassed that between Ennis and her. I suppose if you marry someone, it means that you love the person a lot. And it doesn't matter if she had seen Ennis with a guy or a girl, it would mean the same to Alma.

On the surface, most of us might say that "oh I'm ok with gays and lesbians" because it sounds ethically correct to say so. I've known many guys who either openly or privately voice disgust over the issue of homosexuality. The male species doesn't seem capable to handle such an issue, probably because of the stereotyping of males and being gay just seems "wrong" to them. I'm not going to act all noble and say that I support the homosexuals. I only know one to be exact and she's a close friend of my sister. And I must admit that I quite disliked her initially when I knew that she was hitting on my sister because I was scared that she might influence my sister to become a homosexual (if it's even possible to influence anyone like this in the 1st place) and it would upset my parents if things really turned out that way. It wasn't until my sister assured me that she would never fall for a girl even if she never finds a boyfriend, that I could really accept them as just being friends.

I am ashamed of my train of thoughts at that time because I thought that I'm fine with people being homosexuals. I guess I am too, cos I can accept my siblings being homosexuals if they show such inclination since they are young and if my parents allow. To me, homosexuality is innate. You are born into it, and you can't control it. Whether the society likes it or not, they have to accept it and learn to respect it. You might find gays funny or weird because you are not them. Put yourself in their shoes, experience the way some people like yourself look at them in despise. Would you have liked it. Some countries and some states in USA have already legalized marriages of homosexuals. Singapore would never, not in at least 50 years. But even in a country as liberal as America, brutal gay-bashing still occurs, especially in some of the more conservative states and towns. Just last year, a student of University of Wyoming Matthew Shepard (photo on right) got killed in such a bashing. Matthew was not only beaten but tied to a fence and abandoned there in near-freezing temperatures for as much as 18 hours before he was discovered, comatose, by a passer-by. He never regained consciousness and died five days later. This is barbarian. No human rights at all. And it's not much of a coincidence that this murderous gay-bashing happened in Wyoming, the same place where the movie "Brokeback Mountain" was based on.

Now I understand why my sister constantly commented that she's ashamed of fellow Singaporeans because of their ill behaviour. And I've always talked in favour of Singaporeans because I know that my sister is an extremist and tends to look at the more extreme cases. I will tell her that not all of us are like what she thinks because I think that in general, Singaporeans have kind hearts. I still think so, but now I see more of the dumps and sewage of the Singapore society, and I agree with more of what she says.

-- http://shishoi.blogspot.com/2006/02/ta-tah.html

In a completely unscientific poll of some of my friends and acquaintances in Singapore, I can't find a single straight guy who's willing to watch Brokeback Mountain. The most common reason proffered is a reluctance to watch a gay relationship between men portrayed onscreen. I'm ... surprised, to say the least.

The first time I saw gay men kiss onscreen was in the movie Jeffrey, which someone rented at some point in my college years. I don't actually remember anything of the movie now. But without fanfare, hullabaloo or anything remotely resembling an epiphany, it normalised for me the sight of kissing between men. The first time I read about love and sex between gay men with the same intensity we've grown to accept and even expect in heterosexual couples, was in the Alan Hollinghurst novel The Swimming Pool Library, which I read a few years ago.

...

Hollinghurst's descriptions of what gay men can feel for each other were an eye-opener, not because I didn't expect men to have such feelings for each other, but because I didn't expect myself, upon my first encounter with gay fiction, to so easily disregard the characters' genders to read about those feelings. ...

Is it easier in our culture for me, as a woman, to accept images of homosexuality because it doesn't threaten me? That's what conventional wisdom would have us believe, anyway.

...

Is it acceptable today to declare disgust at seeing people of different races exchange kisses, or people from different classes? How about if one finds abhorrent the image of a woman depicted in a position of power? And at what point does discomfort become so strong that it manifests itself, outwardly or not, in discrimination, prejudice and a complete lack of understanding of the Other?

-- http://www.toomanythoughts.org

Anyway, the movie was good, though sadly I missed like the first few minutes of the show because I was extremely late... Anyhow, the show was still touching and even though I cringed at certain scenes in the movie, I felt overall it was still well shot and the whole story is indeed award quality. It feels kind of sad though, that both of them though so deeply in love with each other, they had to suppress their passion and carried on with their respective lives. It was such a shame that they weren't born of the opposite sex, but yet it was because they were both men that made this story so beautiful.

-- appears to be a straight girl,, at
http://koyume.blogspot.com

 
As you can see, Singaporeans are indeed conducting a conversation about the subject raised by the film, and eyes are being opened.

How representative is all this? you might ask. Probably not representative at all, but social change is a multi-step process. It first begins when a point of view is articulated by just a few people and in its first articulation it will come across as dissent -- by definition, it has to be because if that view were already widespread, it would be the "received wisdom"; it would not have the potential of being an agent of change.

Singapore has probably come further than that first stage. Almost all articulate opinion is gay-friendly, witness the movie reviews in the press (see Brokeback Mountain in Singapore) and the samples above. They don't sound like dissent anymore. It's as if our intelligentsia is forming a kind of consensus as to how to approach the subject.

No doubt, the majority of straight men, and maybe even a majority of straight women, will have no motivation to see the film, but even then, it's often expressed in the form of "this kind of movie doesn't interest me," which is of course a valid reason -– no movie interests everyone. But the thing to note is how there is no impulse to make homophobic remarks.

Generally speaking, the only time we see homophobic remarks in public is when fundamentalist Christians speak up. Unfortunately, there are quite a few of them, and Yawning Bread has repeatedly pointed out how poorly argued are their points of view, but I don't want to get sidetracked into a discussion of this here.

The other source of homophobia is the government. Even with respect to Brokeback Mountain, we see this in action. In a story dated 15 February 2005, The Associated Press said,

Amy Chua, director of media content at the state Media Development Authority, said the Board of Film Censors allowed "Brokeback Mountain" to be screened because the film did not "promote or glamorize the lifestyle."

Further on,

The popular Taiwanese movie "Formula 17," about two teenage boys falling in love, was banned in 2004.... The government said the Taiwanese movie was banned because it showed homosexuality as "normal, and a natural progression of society."

This is proof of what gay Singaporeans have noticed for some time, that if a movie shows happy, well-adjusted gay people, it will be banned or severely cut. If the gay or lesbian characters are sick, despairing or end up dead, then the film is approved.

That Singaporeans are even able to carry on an intelligent conversation given such attempts at thought control is a small miracle!

© Yawning Bread 

Yawning Bread has a request: If you're heterosexual and (a) living in Singapore, or (b) Singapore citizen living abroad, and have seen Brokeback Mountain, please write in with your comments via the comments page. Do state your sex, sexual orientation, age group and geographic location, please.

If I publish the comments received, I will take care to strip away any information that may identify you (this is standard protocol for Yawning Bread).

For the reviews and reflections received so far, please see Brokeback Mountain: a Singaporean conversation, part 2