The Brokeback Post
03.29.06Okay… I’m sick of hearing about how “fabulous” brokeback mountain was. I didn’t want to even recognize it as post worthy.
Why is this movie getting awards? Obviously because the acting was superb, the effects and cinematography were outstanding… no wait. That can’t be right.
First off, I haven’t seen the movie. And I never will. That said, lets pretend that this movie wasn’t freakin gay. Some cowboy guy… falls in love with some other cowboys wife. They both abandon their current families and responsibilities, and run off together. Would that be a good movie? No.
That would be horrible. They just abondoned everyone who cares about them, for their own selfish lust or whatever you want to call it. Thats a party foul. If I had a friend who did that to his family… I’d bust his jaw.
“Okay Chad, I get what yer saying… it wasn’t actually a good movie… then why is it winning all these marvelous awards? Answer me that, smarty pants.”
I thought you’d never ask. And the answer:
Because it’s gay.
So this is what we’ve come to, And it brings my mind to that first chapter of Romans.
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened…
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen….
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion…
28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
Well, you just called it “love,” not lust, in the previous paragraph. And although I certainly don’t promote infidelity, there is a difference between people making bad decisions because of love and people making bad decisions because they’re horny.
I also won’t disagree that a good deal of people’s ravings over the movie is because it’s about gay cowboys. However, you claim that it wouldn’t be a good movie if it was just about two people falling in love with someone they weren’t supposed to and running off together. But all throughout film history, classic, amazing movies have been about exactly that: people falling in love with people they weren’t supposed to, and making bad decisions, and all the bad things (and good) that can come from it. Hell, forget movies, look at centuries of poetry, literature, and other art too.
Brokeback is just a new take on an age-old genre: the love story. Doomed love. Love that makes people do dumb stuff. And that’s a large part of why people think it’s great, it’s an original version of the classic. I mean, come on … gay cowboys HAHAHAHAHA.
I haven’t seen it though. I was supposed to go, but JJ stood me up.
# March 29th, 2006 at 7:53 amhaha. JJ. Thats rude.
Guav - I see your point. I guess my overall point is that the only reason it has won any kind of award, is because its gay.
I mean, the Kevin Costner film, Open Range was an awesome movie. And it only won the Western Heritage Award. And who has ever heard of that award?
# March 29th, 2006 at 9:12 amYes, you’re probably right. But I think that’s because it’s faggotry is what makes it original, not neccesarily because everyone loves gayness so much. Because let’s be honest—most straight people are not like, into gayness; they may be completely tolerant of it, but most straight people I know do NOT enjoy watching two guys kiss, no matter how progressive they are.
This is my theory: the movie is a hit because chicks loved it. Girls, for some reason, love gay dudes, and are way into seeing dudes kiss. Don’t ask me why, I don’t understand it (don’t understand them in general), but I’m willing to wager that the majority of people who saw the movie were chicks.
Girls are weird.
# March 29th, 2006 at 9:19 amBeing gay is original?
(As I channel surf past 7 channels playing reruns of Will and Grace)
# March 29th, 2006 at 9:23 amNo JJ, being gay is not original, a gay cowboy love story is an original take on the genre—unless there’s like, a whole bunch of other gay cowboy love story movies that you know about that I haven’t heard of …
# March 29th, 2006 at 11:03 amHaha, theres a part in Shanghai Noon thats pretty gay, just because Jackie Chan’s charachter is drunk out of his mind :beer::beer::beer:
# March 29th, 2006 at 12:21 pmSo if it is just a spin on homosexuality it is considered original? Speaking of Jackie Chan, each and everyone of his movies is a neat spin on the same exact thing… so does that make every Jackie Chan movie original ground-breaking hollywood genious? Not.
# March 29th, 2006 at 1:36 pmJJ, anytime you want to point me to examples of previous gay cowboy movies, I’ll concede your point.
But for you to continue to claim that a movie about GAY FRICKIN’ COWBOYS is not a new, original take on the classic love story is just stupid.
You don’t have to like the subject matter or the movie to acknowledge that it hasn’t been done before. It hasn’t, that’s all.
# March 29th, 2006 at 4:13 pmEver think it hasnt for a good reason?
# March 29th, 2006 at 6:03 pmDude, why is it that you get your undies in a bunch everytime I make an observation? I am not challenging your great and vast wisdom… I am just making a point. I was just making a simple observation that just because it is a movie with homos in it doesn’t make it some original masterpiece.
# March 29th, 2006 at 9:54 pmIt just comes down to the point that this world is unrighteous and the characteristics of the unrighteous are fornicating, idolatrous, adulterous, homosexual, thieving, covetous, drunk, reviling, sodomizing extortioners (I Corinthians 6:9-10) So what do you expect. You can gasp in horror that a gay cowboy movie was made, and you can be surprised that it won tons of awards. American Society is just rewarding themselves for their bad behavior. As christians we dont have the luxury of expecting something good to come out of the world because we know that its inherently evil. So until we either die or Jesus comes back we can just realize its only going to get worse.
# March 29th, 2006 at 11:53 pmi’m a chick and i didnt see humpback mtn. watchin’ gay guys is not my thing. i’m not a big fan of PDA’s be it homo or hetero, and gay cowboys on the big screen is too over the top for me. i’m not against gays, but neither do i wanna see them makin out. i dont know any other girls who saw the movie either. i mean really, cowboys are supposed to be all muscles and hot and stuff. but to turn ‘em gay and have ‘em leave their families? no girl i know wants to see that, no siree.
# March 30th, 2006 at 4:04 ami haven’t seen brokeback mountain either, but i think the fact that the brokeback cowboys are not “muscles and hot and stuff” is what makes them so interesting (to the people who like this sort of thing) Personally, I’m not too bothered by the movie’s success. I think it’s good that our society can allow this kind of behavior to occur and be safe in the knowledge that at the end of the day, everything will be more or less OK. As I’ve said, i don’t consider homosexuality an important issue.
# March 30th, 2006 at 8:52 am
# March 30th, 2006 at 12:14 pmI think this is the most stupid idea for a movie that was ever made. hollywood is trying to get this country to accept the fagafornia lifestyle. I don’t think there could ever be a gay cowboy except for in the “Village People” from the 70s. Its a little known fact that a horse will not let a fag sit in the saddle.
# March 31st, 2006 at 6:54 am:razz:OOOOOO my god u guys!!!! Totally F-A-B-U-L-O-U-S!!!!!!!!!!! U guys have said gay a record 31,233,473,125 times! Because of your facination with gay dudes I’m assuming your all queers. O…and chad coleman, I saw that sassy pic of u with your lushous hair and beautiful tan skin. Let me guess, your a mix of portarican, and….blackanise! Yeaaaa!!! I’m so happy and fabulously facinated that I finnally found a huge group of gay dudes that make out with each other and play with each others nip-nips!
# April 2nd, 2006 at 8:50 pmYou fag. I know you missed checking my site everyday, since you’ve been in long beach. btw - I bought a house. I took king schullzie there sunday. We get the keys next weekend… so we’ll have to break er in, with a kegger or something. You should bring Jessica.. haha.
# April 2nd, 2006 at 9:45 pmdude, i wanna come to a kegger!
# April 3rd, 2006 at 8:22 am:beer:X10^250
# April 3rd, 2006 at 1:37 pmIll be in shortly
# April 3rd, 2006 at 2:48 pmIt’s not F-A-B-U-L-O-U-S….. it’s F-A-G-U-L-O-U-S!!!!
Which is sick. 
Yes it is helliewoods taste so whatelse should we expect. Just becuase it has never been filmed doesn’t mean some sick homorific website doesn’t have some twisted cowboy love story. Heck, iffin’ I were a betin’ man I’d say the writers scrapped the idea off just a site.
I was just starting to wear my cowboy hat again. The queers took the word gay and turned it into a bad word. Now they are gunning for an American image and are going to ruin it. My .02 worth.
I’ve been away… feels good to be back!
# April 3rd, 2006 at 4:24 pmHey, Welcome back CS! Nothin special goin on. But I’m sure there’s something I can find to write about. Just too dern busy these days.
# April 3rd, 2006 at 10:13 pmIt seems that many Christians have a couple different perspectives on gays or any other people who’s lives do not align perfectly with conservative Christian doctrine:
1) we must save them in the name of our lord and savior Jesus Christ or
2) they are the enemy and must be destroyed.
If your interest is to save, then you must know enough about those you’re trying to save to be of any real use. Although I don’t see any real evidence of this most prominent of Christian values anywhere in this chain of posts.
If your interest is to destroy then you need to subscribe to the age-old wisdom “know your enemy.”
You don’t know your enemy. Rent the movie.
# July 6th, 2006 at 10:11 amsorry, JB, but yer full of horse sh-t. And I don’t think anyone is “trying to save” the fags. The fags know what they’re doing… they aren’t listening to anyone’s belief on what salvation is. So to spell it out… you can’t save someone who doesn’t want to be.
And next… If you knew anything about “age-old wisdom” like you pretend you do… then you’d know that the saying “know thy enemy” refers to knowing their fighting tactics, and intent.
So why don’t you find somewhere a bit more rudimentary to post your “pearls of wisdom”.
# July 6th, 2006 at 2:04 pm“you’d know that the saying “know thy enemy” refers to knowing their fighting tactics, and intent.”
does this mean that you think you do undestand their “tactics and intent”?
# July 6th, 2006 at 7:54 pmC’mon simon. It means that JB doesn’t know jack. and why are you putting words in my mouth?
# July 6th, 2006 at 9:34 pmI don’t care for that.