Brokeback Mountain: It's Time to Boycott Hollywood

[Al_Masetti]

Ortho:

If you actually saw the movie, that’s the best way to know if the trailer is wrong.

I wonder how people who have not seen the movie know.

But if you see the movie first, then you are giving “THEM” your money.

The key thing is not to give anti-Christian movie makers our money.

 

[jebojora]

Ortho:

If you actually saw the movie, that’s the best way to know if the trailer is wrong.

I wonder how people who have not seen the movie know.

I now know that the trailer for the Family Stone is wrong because Jennifer123 just told me! Do I really need to go see it in order to be able to say…yeah…it’s wrong! I believe her and she just saved me $8.00!

 

[kaymart]

Al Masetti:

But if you see the movie first, then you are giving “THEM” your money.

The key thing is not to give anti-Christian movie makers our money.

Exactly, whetever you agree with the movie or not you are giving them the money and they use that figure to show “How Popular” the movie is. The Previews are enough to keep my money in my pocket. If this film and others like it had a “poor showing” maybe they would re-think the type of movies they make.

 

[miguel]

Ortho:

What are the Hollywood standards for financial succes of a movie?

Is Narnia a financial success? If so, by what standard do you judge it? Narnia revenues are 3.25 times production costs.

Brokeback revenues are 2.5 times production costs. If Brokeback revenues grow to 3.25 times production costs, will it be a success?

I agree with you that it’s in the black, for now. In terms of propaganda success, and that’s the whole point of this film, total revenue translates to cheeks in the seats. Since people aren’t lining up around the block to see it…

 

[BlindSheep]

Ortho:

Subtle? I don’t think so? Do you?

If you click on the smilies button, you’ll see that rolleyes: = sarcastic. So no, I didn’t find your little dig at those who choose not to watch the movie to be particularly subtle. Furthermore, as long as we’re questioning people’s intelligence, I would be more likely to suspect a lack of it in those who plunk down $10 to see a movie just to “find out what it’s really about” than in those who refuse to waste money on a movie they don’t expect to enjoy. But I suppose some people have more curiosity (and more money) than others. To each his own.

 

[Jennifer123]

Ortho:

If you actually saw the movie, that’s the best way to know if the trailer is wrong.

I wonder how people who have not seen the movie know.

I did see the movie, and that’s my point. The trailer and advertising make no mention of a huge part of the story, or in the case of Brokeback Mountain, disguise the premise. My in-laws wanted to see the “cowboy movie” when it first came out, they only figured out the real story after all the news about the controversy.
People have a right not to view movies that would affect their sensibilities, but IMHO Hollywood isn’t being honest because it’s a liberal propaganda machine, and like most things liberal, it hides its agenda for “our own good”.
I guess one could read reviews and ask for one’s money back if lulled into an objectionable movie, but let’s be honest, it’s not a level playing field. Don’t get me started about what they proffer to children, at least adults can make these decisions responsibly.

 

[rlg94086]

BlindSheep:

If you click on the smilies button, you’ll see that rolleyes: = sarcastic. So no, I didn’t find your little dig at those who choose not to watch the movie to be particularly subtle. Furthermore, as long as we’re questioning people’s intelligence, I would be more likely to suspect a lack of it in those who plunk down $10 to see a movie just to “find out what it’s really about” than in those who refuse to waste money on a movie they don’t expect to enjoy. But I suppose some people have more curiosity (and more money) than others. To each his own.

 

[Jennifer123]

jebojora:

I now know that the trailer for the Family Stone is wrong because Jennifer123 just told me! Do I really need to go see it in order to be able to say…yeah…it’s wrong! I believe her and she just saved me $8.00!

Just my opinion, it’s not as funny as it looks like it would be…I guess there are better ways to spend $8…or $12 in my case!!

 

[Al_Masetti]

I don’t know about other people, but I REALLY don’t want to expend time driving to the movie theater, sitting there for two hours, being sociable by going someplace to eat and then driving home. That’s a lot of time I could be using for other more worthwhile activities.

If the movie is really good, I will still have time to see it OR rent a video or DVD or download it.

But I have seen more stinkers than good movies.

No longer am I willing to waste my time and no longer will I give the anti-Christian crowd my money.

 

[tamccrackine]

Ortho:

It’s interesting that the people posting who have seen the movie describe different themes than the people who haven’t seen it.

I don’t need to play with fire in order to know it burns.

When you’re out picking a car, do you read reviews or do you go to any ol’ dealership and say “wow, that one looks mighty purty… I want that one.” without testing it first, reading reviews, asking others that own a similar vehicle? I don’t need to own a Kia to know I don’t like it. (no offense to real Kia owners… I personally just don’t like them)

I understand your logic, but it seem that the people that HAVE seen the movie are trying to justify their actions because others find the movie not worth wasting their money on. To me, it seems like some of the people that have seen it, feel a bit guilty for wasting money on a movie that has a not so great subject, therefore they give us that haven’t seen it the line of “you’re judging a movie you’ve never seen.” to some how validate that they are right and we are wrong. (Please notice the operative word SOME)

I have a right to my opinion, regardless of how it came about, as do the rest of you that have seen the movie. I just don’t feel it right for me to waste more than $10 on a ticket to get homosexuality and it’s negative effects passed off as a “love story” thrown in my face.

 

[tamccrackine]

siamesecat:

I dont know where you got this logic. I said the movie did not glorify homosexuality, saying it was necessarily right, so it isnt blatantly against the church teachings. I dont know how that related to your analogy. I did not feel it had an agenda or really glorified it. If I see one happy gay couple, it doesnt make me believe that all gay relationships are great. This particular couple did not have an especially supportive relationship, it was more sexual, and the way they treated their families did not make me ‘side’ with them . It was a good movie, but i was sympathizing with the wives and children more than them. I understand your objections to the movie and im not trying to make you see it, I just wanted to explain that the movie does not glorify homosexuality as everyone says.

Go back to the post you just quoted of mine and you’ll see where I highlighted the comment I refered to with the logic of abortion. I also highlighted your similar comment here. The Church teaches against any type of homosexuality that is acted upon… sexual gay couples or being in a homosexual relationship. There is no “isn’t blatantly against Church teachings” here. It either is or it isn’t.

I apologize I didn’t clarify my line on abortion. I used the abortion line because there are alot of people, that try to split hairs on abortion to suit their own opinion. Does that explain what I said a little better? It’s a subject the Church is pretty clear on, yet people want to give it a little wiggle room when there is none.

Again, I’m sorry.

 

[Ortho]

OhioBob:

Gee, I can’t imagine. Maybe they read the trade press. Maybe they have friends who have seen the movie. Maybe they have visited the web site.

I said that the trailer of BM did not show any images or include any language that would imply that homosexuality played any role in the plot of the movie. The significant role of those themes was discussed ad nauseum in interviews with the cast and executive staff as well as mainstream media reviews of the film. Having worked in advertising, I found the absence of such allusions in the trailer to be less than forthcoming.

OK. So besides seeing the movie and trailer, and comparing the two, one can use the thinking of others?

Horrors! Advertising that was less then fothcoming? Fetch the smelling salts!

 

[Ortho]

Al Masetti:

But if you see the movie first, then you are giving “THEM” your money.

The key thing is not to give anti-Christian movie makers our money.

Keep in mind the theaters, studios, actors (is this THEM?) all get your money when you go see another of their works.

The same theater that shows the Passion also shows Brokeback.

I doubt the people who made the movie care about Christianity. It’s hard to be against what you don’t pay attention to…

 

[Ortho]

jebojora:

I now know that the trailer for the Family Stone is wrong because Jennifer123 just told me! Do I really need to go see it in order to be able to say…yeah…it’s wrong! I believe her and she just saved me $8.00!

Actually, you know that jennifer told you it differs from the movie. But since you didn’t see the movie, you don’t know if you agree with her. Or do you?

 

[Ortho]

kaymart:

Exactly, whetever you agree with the movie or not you are giving them the money and they use that figure to show “How Popular” the movie is. The Previews are enough to keep my money in my pocket. If this film and others like it had a “poor showing” maybe they would re-think the type of movies they make.

If it wins the Oscar, do you think it will have a poor showing?

 

[OhioBob]

Ortho:

OK. So besides seeing the movie and trailer, and comparing the two, one can use the thinking of others?

Horrors! Advertising that was less then fothcoming? Fetch the smelling salts!

A trailer typically tries to capture the thematic and stylistic essense of a film (usually magnified, embellished or exaggerated) to appeal to it’s target audience. Considering the media’s love of all things gay, I was surprised they forgot to mention it in the trailer.

And there is certainly nothing wrong with considering the opinions of others, particularly those whose opinion you might value. Although in your case, it doesn’t seem that you value anyone’s other than your own.

 

[kaymart]

Ortho:

If it wins the Oscar, do you think it will have a poor showing?

Explain the remark please, If you read my post I said "They use that figure (how many seats they filled) to show how “popular” the movie is. In other words if people know its about the “gays” don’t even go see it to check it out unless this is the type of movie you wish to see more of. Personally I don’t care if it shows them in a “good light” or a “negative one” I have no desire to watch two men in love, and I hope and pray that none of my children go to see this.

 

[miguel]

kaymart:

Explain the remark please, If you read my post I said "They use that figure (how many seats they filled) to show how “popular” the movie is. In other words if people know its about the “gays” don’t even go see it to check it out unless this is the type of movie you wish to see more of. Personally I don’t care if it shows them in a “good light” or a “negative one” I have no desire to watch two men in love, and I hope and pray that none of my children go to see this.

Of course the Hollywood ideologues will delude themselves and try to equate propaganda success with an Oscar win. But the real measure of that is seats filled. And that’ll be disappointing…due to the offensive subject matter. How many heterosexual males are chomping at the bit to go see this? They’ve turned off half the potential audience right there. I can’t imagine too many heterosexual females filling those seats either. And then there are those who’ll skip it for moral reasons…those pesky Christians who take their faith seriously…you know, those folks who came out in droves for The Passion. They’ll be staying home. It’s all very predictable, unless you’re a Hollywood ideologue.

 

[siamesecat]

tamccrackine:

Go back to the post you just quoted of mine and you’ll see where I highlighted the comment I refered to with the logic of abortion. I also highlighted your similar comment here. The Church teaches against any type of homosexuality that is acted upon… sexual gay couples or being in a homosexual relationship. There is no “isn’t blatantly against Church teachings” here. It either is or it isn’t.

I apologize I didn’t clarify my line on abortion. I used the abortion line because there are alot of people, that try to split hairs on abortion to suit their own opinion. Does that explain what I said a little better? It’s a subject the Church is pretty clear on, yet people want to give it a little wiggle room when there is none.

Again, I’m sorry.

I understand about what you’re saying more clearly now. What I mean is, the characters are acting against the Church teachings. But the overall message of the movie isn’t promoting gay relationships as positive, so I don’t think the overall ‘theme’ or whatever is anti-Catholic. It’s not a preachy movie about accepting homosexuals, as I heard the Family Stone was.

 

[Ortho]

OhioBob:

A trailer typically tries to capture the thematic and stylistic essense of a film (usually magnified, embellished or exaggerated) to appeal to it’s target audience. Considering the media’s love of all things gay, I was surprised they forgot to mention it in the trailer.

And there is certainly nothing wrong with considering the opinions of others, particularly those whose opinion you might value. Although in your case, it doesn’t seem that you value anyone’s other than your own.

I’d say a trailer typically tries to get people to go see the movie. If capturing the thematic and stylistic essense helps, then the trailer will do that. If it doesn’t, it will use some other method to sell tickets.

I truly do value my own opinion. However, I will value someone else’s if they have some expertise which I lack. I lack little in expertise, but occassionally do run across an intellectual Titan whose opinion I will value.

Given the high value I place on my own opinion, I’ll be seing Brokeback for myself. I will then be one of the few people here who will have actually seen the movie so many others have judged without seeing.