Good, but Best Picture material?

Rating: 5/10 (20 February 2006)

For the sake of full disclosure: In case my diatribes about the Bush administration's incompetence, atrocious behavior and fear-mongering aren't an ample indication, I am a liberal. I'm pro-choice and pro-gay rights. I see no reason why homosexuals should not be allowed to wed and enjoy the same privileges married couples do. The whole protect-the-sanctity-of-marriage argument from the right comes from sanctimonious politicians who have no qualms about keeping mistresses.
That having been said, on to "Brokeback Mountain." This is a good film. But it's also rather flawed and, frankly, undeserving of a Best Picture Oscar nomination. Of course, with all the accolades being tossed on it, instead of better, more compelling films, it appears Ang Lee's film will walk away with the top Oscar prize next month.
"Brokeback Mountain" doesn't get cooking until Michelle Williams shows up as Ennis' (Heath Ledger) wife, Alma. However, this doesn't happen for about an hour into the story and that's just one of the film's myriad problems.
Screenwriters Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana - and director Lee - take about an hour to set up what they easily could have accomplished in, say, 20 to 30 minutes, if that. Lee spends so much time trying to introduce us to Ennis and Jack (Jake Gyllenhaal), but neither he nor the writers do anything substantial with that time. We're treated to gorgeous views of vistas, shepherding - yes, these cowboys herd sheep - and shots of Ennis and Jack spending the hours together in the hills, seemingly bored.
Trouble is, there's nothing compelling about these scenes or the characters in these initial moments. And despite all this time together, there's never any sense of Jack feeling any closeness to Ennis. They chat - OK, Jack chats, Ennis mumbles. Often unintelligibly. (If you thought Marlon Brando mumbled his dialogue, wait 'til you get a load of Ledger.) At some point we had to feel a sense that these two connected, that there's deep feeling for one another. That never happens. Come the seduction, it's more lust appeal than any sense of budding love. By the time Jack utters the film's famous line, "I wish I knew how to quit you" - you just know this one's going to be spoofed soon - you have to wonder if he really means it. Because the characters, especially Jack, never express any sense of genuine love. These guys just have the hots for each other. It's as if the writers and Lee wanted to make a social commentary, but didn't have the guts to show us anything.
The film's most interesting and exciting characters are the two women - Alma and Lureen (Anne Hathaway). Williams takes a lousily written role - you get the impression the writers simply wrote, "She mopes," "She mopes again," "She mopes yet again" - and turns it into something special. Williams makes Alma a thoroughly convincing person, a deeply complex woman grappling with alien issues she can't quite comprehend or know how to handle, a woman with an incredibly personal moral crisis. She truly deserves her Oscar nomination.
Hathaway, like Williams, gets saddled with an underwritten role. After a topless romp, the writers relegate her to a role that's not even marginal; though they do sport her with some creative hairstyles. Hathaway does her best, but she's not quite of Williams' calibre, yet, and even a stronger actress would've struggled with this lackluster role. Lureen could've been a fascinating woman and provided the plot with exciting possibilities. But that was not to be.
The lead performances are palatable, but Ledger and Gyllenhaal remain so aloof, it's downright impossible to be drawn into their love affair. This film also needed tighter editing. There's an utterly superfluous flashback toward the end that does nothing for the story.
Criticizing this movie shouldn't make you a pariah. That's just political correctness run amok. The filmmakers clearly wanted to make a socially relevant film. And this is as much about societal prejudices as it is a love story about two men. But the writers never delve into anything in any real way. They begin with a stupefyingly dull first hour and skirt the message and love story.
There've been many other much better, more moving gay-themed films that never got any attention. The wonderful Australian film, "The Sum of Us" (1994), starring Russell Crowe and Jack Thompson, springs to mind. There's more humor, genuine emotion and love in 10 minutes of that film than in all 134 minutes of the over-hyped "Brokeback Mountain."
Subject matter alone should not automatically make a film good. Which seems to be the case here. Had this been about a man and a woman, viewers would see how humdrum it is.
Interestingly, I saw this comment in Rolling Stone from Heath Ledger about the first time he saw the film: "I understood that it flowed, it was presented well. But whether it was good, whether it was bad - we walked out not knowing what we'd just watched."
What's ultimately infuriating about "Brokeback Mountain" is that this story deserved to be told, only more compellingly and movingly. "Millions," "A History of Violence," "Match Point" or "Junebug," deserved Best Picture Oscar nods before this one did. Goes to prove what a ton of hype can do to a fairly pedestrian movie.