Falls short on quality

Rating: 5/10 (15 March 2006)

I agree with many critics/viewers that this is an important film in terms of content. But good content might write a good story, but not necessarily make a good film, and I hope subsequent filmmakers will make better use of this type of story.
My problem with the film is that it was so built-up by advertisements with no results. I knew it was about two cowboys who fall in love while herding and who subsequently carry on a homosexual relationship for years afterward. I came out of the film with no more gripping way to describe it, minus a few undramatic spoilers, and nothing to rave about.
I expected, considering the R rating, that the film would take more risks with nudity and sexual situations. I expected the film to show the passion that can exist between two individuals, regardless of sexual orientation, and, in cases like this, show how it develops over time. But I see very little passion; the only 'sex' scene is about 90% editing, 10% passion. After that we only see a few over-the-top kisses and some suggestive behavior that is not atypical of male bonding in general. I guess one just has to take the love between the two men for granted, and I couldn't do that. Indeed I almost wonder if the film further damaged the reputation of homosexual relationships because it skirted facing the real dynamics of the issue while the two men never received any understanding from the other characters.
The cinematography was disturbingly ineffective. I've seen postcards that were more compelling. This was a massive blow to my expectations; the filmmaker behind "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon", unleashed upon the North American wilderness: I couldn't wait! Yet, the landscapes were too static, the close-ups were too close up, therefore dissolving the opportunity for textual association, and whenever a shot seemed interesting, they'd cut away from it quickly. It made me want to weep: it was that disappointing.
Acting was also quite disappointing... I expected a lot more from the leads. It definitely didn't help support my approval for the men's relationship when I was more compelled by, and identified more with, the female characters.
Lastly, some people have referred to "Brokeback Mountain" as melodrama, comparing it even to Sirk, but it lacks not only Sirk's very sense of image, not to mention his symbolism, but what he called the 'melos' of melodrama which promote how and why lovers and families can come together... nothing like that here, just cold fish, if there are any fish at all. 5 out of 10 stars