Brokeback Mountain and the USCCB

  • Thread starter Thread starter Starsweeper
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don’t detect a sin by the original poster by seeing this movie. However, wanting to limit the amount of moral pollution that passes through one’s mind is not retreating from the world, nor repression, it’s the virtue (gasp!) of prudence. Thus, it is both seemly and just to enquire about the content of a film to make an informed judgement.

Scott
 
bump for the people who bemoaned the fact that I took it out of circulation.
 
40.png
Starsweeper:
I’m sure you’ve heard all about the “gay cowboy” movie by now.
gay sheepherders I thought
40.png
Starsweeper:
This movie is about approval of homosexuality plain and simple. It’s being called the “love story” of our time and the homosexual community is salivating. I couldn’t believe however the USCCB review for this movie. Not only did it not get an O rating
Odd, the review you linked to had an O rating
Perhaps it was changed?
In several places it explicitly mentions the moral objections to the movie.
40.png
Starsweeper:
which it deserves just on its subject matter and its potential for cultural damage, but the review itself is actually *glowing. *………
I haven’t seen the movie and I don’t plan on seeing it (I prefer movies with less ambiguities and more explosions) BUT Starsweepers objection to the glowing review raises an interesting question: Just because something may contain offensive material does that automatically mean that it can’t be a good movie?

Let’s leave aside the lighting rod gay issue and consider say “Birth of a Nation” or the “Godfather” for example. Both movies that are wonderful pieces of art even thought the stories portray terrible behavior.

If we believe in the fallen nature than sin is a reality of life and since conflict makes for a better story than everything being hunky dory the it seems to reason that good well-crafted stories may contain objectionable material.
 
If Leonardo Di Vinci sculped a minature statue of David out of dog poop, would it be art or just a beautiful piece of poop?
 
Peter Wright:
If Leonardo Di Vinci sculped a minature statue of David out of dog poop, would it be art or just a beautiful piece of poop?
Begging your pardon, but what does that have to do with anything?
~ Kathy ~
 
Peter Wright:
If Leonardo Di Vinci sculped a minature statue of David out of dog poop, would it be art or just a beautiful piece of poop?
Artist dog poop.

That might be a good metaphor for this film (if only it was artistic).

BTW - Artist Dog Poop would be a cool name for a rock band.
 
Peter Wright:
If Leonardo Di Vinci sculped a minature statue of David out of dog poop, would it be art or just a beautiful piece of poop?
Artists have used many mediums throughout history

Clay is after all soil and soil is just and quick step (physically/chemically speaking) removed from poop.
So your question is perhaps specious?

But I’m not sure what that has to do with my question

Films and literature are loaded with murder, sex, jealousy…you name it. The seven deadly sins and all their lesser brothers and sisters are there. Even the bible has its share of incest, lust, polygamy, murder and a host of cautionary tales

Does that mean that a story can’t be told? :confused:
 
Steve, I agree with the point you’re making – I haven’t seen the film but everything I’ve read about it indicates it was very well done, the homosexual aspect as far as titillation was very downplayed, and the focus was on the emotional harm these men inflicted on their families and themselves. Everyone I’ve talked with who has seen it said it was emotionally gripping and a beautiful film. If I were a more artsy sort of person, into “film” instead of just movies, maybe that would be enough to make me overlook my main problem with the movie.

I won’t see the movie for the same reasons another poster touched on – I really think it’s a beautiful, well done film with a manipulative agenda behind it. I don’t like being manipulated. I’m pretty good at seeing it coming and avoiding it and I won’t willingly subject myself to it. I believe the film is an insidious and very effective attempt to work mainstream America’s emotions and make them more sympathetic to the idea that homosexuality is a morally neutral alternative lifestyle and to the idea of same sex marriage. I have had homosexual friends, I dated a guy who it turned out was trying to overcome his same sex attraction with me ( I failed miserably:o ) – I know real life, genuine people who struggled in so many ways with this. That’s different from being fed a set storyline which I strongly suspect is intentionally promoting a certain agenda.

Like others have said, I’m also very sympathetic to those who struggle with their sexuality. I’ll probably get flamed for this, but I also believe that some people are just born homosexual and don’t choose it. These people carry a burden that seems so unfair to me that it’s one of the first questions I’ll ask God if I ever get to meet Him. I am very upset to hear of hate crimes and nastiness and discrimination against homosexuals – that is just wrong. But, it is also not just an alternative, morally neutral lifestyle and same sex marriage is an oxymoron.

Anyway, that’s my take on it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top