Brokeback Mountain: It's Time to Boycott Hollywood

[buffalo]

** Brokeback Mountain: It’s Time to Boycott Hollywood

** “Brokeback Mountain,” the controversial “gay cowboy” film that has garnered seven Golden Globe nominations and breathless media reviews – and has now emerged as a front-runner for the Oscars – is a brilliant propaganda film, reportedly causing viewers to change the way they feel about homosexual relationships and same-sex marriage.

And how do the movie-makers pull off such a dazzling feat? Simple. They do it by raping the “Marlboro Man,” that revered American symbol of rugged individualism and masculinity.

more…

 

[Penny_Plain]

Can I still go to LA or Santa Monica?

Didn’t Hollywood also give us movies like we approve of, like Narnia and THE Passion of THE Christ? If we’re going to boycott, maybe we should target our boycott at the companies that made and distributed the thing we object to?

Or maybe we could just, you know, not go see it. Not watch the Oscars and Golden Globes and shows like that where it’s praised.

“Hollywood” does good things, too. Why throw out the baby with the bathwater?

 

[Riley259]

Brokeback Mountain: It’s Time to Boycott Hollywood

“Brokeback Mountain,” the controversial “gay cowboy” film that has garnered seven Golden Globe nominations and breathless media reviews – and has now emerged as a front-runner for the Oscars – is a brilliant propaganda film, reportedly causing viewers to change the way they feel about homosexual relationships and same-sex marriage.

And how do the movie-makers pull off such a dazzling feat? Simple. They do it by raping the “Marlboro Man,” that revered American symbol of rugged individualism and masculinity.

more…

Pleas don’t see this movie. The secular left (especially) Hollywood has gone ga ga over this movie but virtually ignored The Passion of the Christ - their agenda is clear and it’s frustrating. Go see the Chronicles of Narnia instead.

 

[miguel]

Riley259:

Pleas don’t see this movie. The secular left (especially) Hollywood has gone ga ga over this movie but virtually ignored The Passion of the Christ - their agenda is clear and it’s frustrating. Go see the Chronicles of Narnia instead.

It may be raking in the awards. But all that demonstrates is the bias of the award givers. Maybe I’m being premature, but this movie won’t make anywhere near what The Passion and Narnia have made. So the good news, is the propaganda will be limited to those who already believe it.

 

[siamesecat]

Just because a movie makes a lot of money (Chronicals of Narnia) does not make it a good movie. Mr and Mrs Smith was a smash because of the whole Brangelina thing. Whereas I can totally see your problem with Brokeback Mountain and agree the Academy has a liberal bias, it was a very well done and well acted movie, I didnt feel like it was shoving anything down my throat. It wasnt as though the men were portrayed as a forbidden lovers, great people who couldnt be together because of the cruel homophobes. They were portrayed as kind of jerks, cheating on their wives, one paying no attention to his kids, violent tempers. They were very human and believable characters,and there actually wasnt much homosexual activity after the initial relationship was established – it became more about the impact the secret had on their families and the rest of their life. I think it was very deserving.

 

[Al_Masetti]

Penny Plain:

Can I still go to LA or Santa Monica?

Didn’t Hollywood also give us movies like we approve of, like Narnia and THE Passion of THE Christ? If we’re going to boycott, maybe we should target our boycott at the companies that made and distributed the thing we object to?

Or maybe we could just, you know, not go see it. Not watch the Oscars and Golden Globes and shows like that where it’s praised.

“Hollywood” does good things, too. Why throw out the baby with the bathwater?

The Passion of the Christ was a private venture financed with the personal savings of Mel Gibson. It was made in Italy. It was ridiculed by the MSM and the Hollywood crowd because obviously no one would go to see it.

Boycotting “Hollywood” (and New York and Toronto and Vancouver) and the sponsors of obnoxious TV shows would be a good idea. I’m trying to see if Accuracy in Media has a list of sponsors that could be contacted to tell them we have had enough and we are not going to buy their products.

 

[tamccrackine]

siamesecat:

Just because a movie makes a lot of money (Chronicals of Narnia) does not make it a good movie. Mr and Mrs Smith was a smash because of the whole Brangelina thing. Whereas I can totally see your problem with Brokeback Mountain and agree the Academy has a liberal bias, it was a very well done and well acted movie, I didnt feel like it was shoving anything down my throat. It wasnt as though the men were portrayed as a forbidden lovers, great people who couldnt be together because of the cruel homophobes. They were portrayed as kind of jerks, cheating on their wives, one paying no attention to his kids, violent tempers. They were very human and believable characters,and there actually wasnt much homosexual activity after the initial relationship was established --** it became more about the impact the secret had on their families and the rest of their life.** I think it was very deserving.

I quoted something interesting… the secret the two characters hold is immoral… breaking the vows of matrimony isn’t something to be trivialized and the gay spouse be made to be some type of hero for the audience to “feel sorry for” while the heterosexual spouse portrayed as some antagonist homophobe. Any actor can play a role… fine… but why should this type of material be glorifed? I personally am just not going to waste my hard earned money on a pathetic movie regardless of how “well” it was made.

As for this “…and there actually wasnt much homosexual activity after the initial relationship was established…” any indication of homosexual activity is bad enough. Implied or direct, it’s bad and I shouldn’t be subjected to having to watch that stuff.

Just my two cents.

 

[siamesecat]

tamccrackine:

I quoted something interesting… the secret the two characters hold is immoral… breaking the vows of matrimony isn’t something to be trivialized and the gay spouse be made to be some type of hero for the audience to “feel sorry for” while the heterosexual spouse portrayed as some antagonist homophobe. Any actor can play a role… fine… but why should this type of material be glorifed? I personally am just not going to waste my hard earned money on a pathetic movie regardless of how “well” it was made.

I’m guessing you didn’t see the movie but the homosexual spouse was NOT glorified, and the heterosexual spouse was certainly the victim and the one to feel bad for. Everyone felt a lot worse for the wife than for the gay man (it also wasnt as much a love story as i suspected, you didnt feel he was pining for the other man so much as trying to fight the feelings) It really wasn’t glorified, it was just a very interesting story. It didnt justify the behavior. It was not a ‘pathetic’ movie. Immoral according to Catholic values, yes, although not too much because it didnt really make it seem ‘ok.’ But very well acted/directed and an interesting, engaging story? Yes.

 

[WanderAimlessly]

Penny Plain:

Can I still go to LA or Santa Monica?

Didn’t Hollywood also give us movies like we approve of, like Narnia and THE Passion of THE Christ? If we’re going to boycott, maybe we should target our boycott at the companies that made and distributed the thing we object to?

Actually, both were independantly producted without the help of Hollywood. Only the distribution was through Hollywood (and I am not 100 percent sure on that for the “Passion”).

PF

 

[Ortho]

Riley259:

Pleas don’t see this movie. The secular left (especially) Hollywood has gone ga ga over this movie but virtually ignored The Passion of the Christ - their agenda is clear and it’s frustrating. Go see the Chronicles of Narnia instead.

I went to see the Passion just to see what all the fuss was about. I’ll be seeing Brokeback for the same reason.

 

[Ortho]

miguel:

It may be raking in the awards. But all that demonstrates is the bias of the award givers. Maybe I’m being premature, but this movie won’t make anywhere near what The Passion and Narnia have made. So the good news, is the propaganda will be limited to those who already believe it.

It probably won’t make as much as the movies you mention. It was intended for limited distribution and is in only 450 theaters. Narnia is in 3,500.

However, if it wins the Oscar, it will be in 3,500 and will make lots of money.

 

[Ortho]

I am always amazed at how people who don’t see movies or read books can tell the rest of us about them.

 

[jebojora]

I won’t be seeing it.

I have to say it may be hypocritical of me, because I have seen movies that promote living together, adultery, fornication, etc. etc. I won’t see a movie who producers “sell” the movie based on those things, but many sins are treated as “normal and fine” even “adorable” in a lot of movies. Hollywood…loves sin and as we all know they make most liberals look like conservatives.

On the other hand, I’m just plain tired of the politically correct gay scene and everyone trying to jump on the band wagon and prove that they are not homophobic. Right now it’s cool to be “gay-friendly.”

The first critic I read said the movie wasn’t all that great and that it was leaning heavily on the subject matter as it’s main selling point. Many people want to see a gay-cowboy movie because it’s a “gay-cowboy” movie. If it didn’t have the homosexual twist…would it be something so many would clamor to see? Could it just be that controversy is good publicity? I wonder. Of course, I haven’t seen it so I’m not saying I know or trying to do a review on the movie.

 

[buffalo]

It is rated “O” morally offensive by the USCCB. This means if you are a 'practicing" Catholic you should not see it.

 

[miguel]

Ortho:

It probably won’t make as much as the movies you mention. It was intended for limited distribution and is in only 450 theaters. Narnia is in 3,500.

However, if it wins the Oscar, it will be in 3,500 and will make lots of money.

I am always amazed at how people who don’t see movies or read books can tell the rest of us about them.

I see movies and read books. But on principle, there are certain movies I won’t see and certain books I won’t read. Is it really necessary to drink from the sewer before concluding it’s toxic? If I pay good money to Hollywood to crank out propaganda, am I elevating the culture or tearing it down? I highly doubt an Oscar will turn around the box office on this one. It deals with a fringe subject that alot of movie goers find offensive. IMO, a balanced review (high marks for film making artistry, low marks for moral content)…

decentfilms.com/sections/reviews/2645

 

[Orionthehunter]

buffalo:

It is rated “O” morally offensive by the USCCB. This means if you are a 'practicing" Catholic you should not see it.

I won’t see this movie. However, the rating “O” does not equate to a ban on the movie. Granted, the rating is an indication that the movie should be avoided by most and only viewed by those whose conscience is properly informed regarding Church Teaching on the subject matter. If a viewer comes away with the movie with a disposition regarding the subject matter contrary to Church Teaching, they need to take this disposition to prayer and repentance as it indicates a weakness in their conscience.

 

[buffalo]

Orionthehunter:

I won’t see this movie. However, the rating “O” does not equate to a ban on the movie. Granted, the rating is an indication that the movie should be avoided by most and only viewed by those whose conscience is properly informed regarding Church Teaching on the subject matter. If a viewer comes away with the movie with a disposition regarding the subject matter contrary to Church Teaching, they need to take this disposition to prayer and repentance as it indicates a weakness in their conscience.

Gosh - splitting hairs

 

[BlindSheep]

I won’t watch it. I see enough things on the news and in my day-to-day life, that offend me. I don’t need to waste good money on something that will only raise my blood pressure.

 

[Orionthehunter]

buffalo:

Gosh - splitting hairs

Not splitting hairs. Clarifying. This movie is not banned. Your post saying “It is rated “O” morally offensive by the USCCB. This means if you are a 'practicing” Catholic you should not see it." is incorrect and misleading.

“Mein Kampf” is also morally offensive. However, it is not banned. Whether one reads a book, listens to a speaker, or watches a movie that is morally offensive, a Catholic is called to engage their properly formed conscience when absorbing the information to ensure that they reach appropriate conclusions and interpretation of the subject matter. When I read “Mein Kampf” I was in college where I had many Jewish friends. As I had been raised in a rural setting, I had had virtually no experience with anti-Semitism. The book gave me insight in the mentality and warped sense of self that underpins anti-Semitism and gave me greater empathy of my Jewish friends sensitivity on the matter.

For me, I have no desire to see this movie. It will not enhance or add to my understanding of the impact of homosexual acts, adultery, or fornification. But, for example, for one who has a friend who has struggled with this subject matter (either as the principal actor who engaged in the immoral behavior or as a wronged spouse or family member) this movie might give the viewer the gift of empathy (more valuable than sympathy) and better aid them in their abilty to be a friend.

I saw “Million Dollar Baby” (I wish I’d seen the review before I had but it was a Clint Eastwood movie so I just assumed it would be good). While my Catholic conscience allowed me to see the offensiveness of the premise, I was appalled by how the story line made a case for euthanasia. Even so, I think that if I ever am faced with a friend or family member contemplating euthanasia, this movie better arms me for properly ministering to them the wrongness of euthanasia. In other words, even this “O” rated film had a redeeming effect on me.

 

[fix]

Orionthehunter:

Not splitting hairs. Clarifying. This movie is not banned. Your post saying “It is rated “O” morally offensive by the USCCB. This means if you are a 'practicing” Catholic you should not see it." is incorrect and misleading.

“Mein Kampf” is also morally offensive. However, it is not banned. Whether one reads a book, listens to a speaker, or watches a movie that is morally offensive, a Catholic is called to engage their properly formed conscience when absorbing the information to ensure that they reach appropriate conclusions and interpretation of the subject matter.

When is it reasonable to expose oneself, intentionally, to morally offensive entertainment? Reading a work for educational purposes is one thing, popular movies are another.

I saw “Million Dollar Baby” (I wish I’d seen the review before I had but it was a Clint Eastwood movie so I just assumed it would be good). While my Catholic conscience allowed me to see the offensiveness of the premise, I was appalled by how the story line made a case for euthanasia. Even so, I think that if I ever am faced with a friend or family member contemplating euthanasia, this movie better arms me for properly ministering to them the wrongness of euthanasia. In other words, even this “O” rated film had a redeeming effect on me.

I think one can inform themselves quite well without knowingly exposing themselves to morally offensive material.