Great Art...really depressing

Rating: 8/10 (9 January 2006)

It was not my choice. I let my wife pick the next movie after making her see "good Night and Good Luck," and "King Kong" in a single week. By the way, both of those movies are about big, hairy apes that do all sorts of damage.
I live in Eugene, Oregon, one of the most liberal places on the face of the earth, and expected to see the theater full of gay guys and "ultra-libs." Instead, the audience seemed to be made up almost entirely of middle-aged women, a few husbands, and a handful of college girls, undoubtedly there to see two popular heartthrobs get nakedeven it if was with one another.
Here are my impressions. If you have not seen the film and may want to, this may contain "spoilers"so stop reading.
First of all, the highly publicized homosexual sex scenes are quick, not graphic, but still made me squirm. I actually found myself reacting the same way as I do when there is a grizzly murder in a slasher film. I squinted up my eyes, and hunched my shoulders until it was over. I guess I am a full-blown heterosexual.
But the movie is way more than that. First, it is beautifully shot (Alberta Canada filling in for what is supposed to be Wyoming)gorgeous scenery, but a stark, and very realistic portrayal of 20th Century cowboy lifeexcept the part about the two cowboys who are hired to tend to a large herd of sheep, high in the mountain, but end up tending one another instead.
I have cousins who are 5th generation ranchers there are loads of funny stories about getting lonely on the range, and "dating" cows. But none about giving a poke to your fellow cowpoke. There is a reason for that. Cowboys tend to treat homosexuals the same way as they treat coyotes, or a two-headed calf, either as a threat to their livelihood, or an abomination of nature. In either case, there is only way to take care of something like that, make sure it is dead.
The movie is sad, there is no doubt about it. However the sadness in my opinion comes not from the end of the seemingly promiscuous and careless life of Jake Gyllenhaal's character, but from the utter destruction of the life of Ledger's character, because of the choices he makes, and his inability to come to grips with the dual nature of his personality.
Starting in 1963 and finishing in the mid-70s, there is little doubt that the movie is probably an accurate portrayal of social norms of the era and geographic area. However, with the death of Matthew Shepard in the late 1990's, would make it clear that being "different" in many parts of the country, is still not a safe thing to be.
The acting is incredible. Both lead men are amazing, as are the roles of both Ledger's wife, and young adult daughter. The pain, attempted tolerance, and unconditional love are heart wrenching.
Ultimately, I was saddened by the fact that Ledger's character was unable to put aside a relationship that was so destructive to the rest of his life. He sacrifices the love of his wife and daughters, for the sporadic, occasional meetings with his other true love, Gyllenhaal's character Jack Twist. But there is a huge difference between the two men. While Twist has an insatiable need for multiple sexual encounters, and in the end, is even revealed to have had another long-time male lover, Ledger's character Ennis Del Mar, is "true blue" to Jack (when he isn't having sex with an aggressive waitress, or trying to give his wife more babies).
It is painful to watch. There is very little about the movie that leaves you feeling good at the end. However, that seems to be the key when it comes to the kinds of films that nominations committees of the various film awards will nominate. Who can actually say that "Million Dollar Baby" or "Monster" left you feeling anything but sad and depressed. And this movie is in the same category. Great art. Really depressing story.