Comments about Utah Theater Cancels 'Brokeback Mountain'

Showing 1 - 25 of 104 comments

Mike (saps)
Mike (saps) on May 7, 2006 at 7:54 pm

More fodder for the flame war:
To some people, anyone out of the closet is a “homosexual activist.” Those same people won’t admit that gay people come from traditional families and usually support traditional values. What is the fight for gay marriage but a demand for stability and tradition? Or that the point of Brokeback Mountain is that staying in the closet is an intolerable and suffocating way of life? I find that many gay people are intolerant of intolerance. And ghamilton unwittingly supports this position: “Give [people] the right to do what they want.” What could be more traditional than that?

ghamilton
ghamilton on May 7, 2006 at 5:26 pm

I have avoided this particular blog for many reasons.The silly comments from all sides defy rationality.The real story isn’t even mentioned really.It is the personality and character of Larry Miller.There should be a movie made about his real American life,where he came from,what he has built and his sometimes odd behavior.He is such a unique charcter.There has been little or no mention of the area the theater in question is located.The SL valley is very diverse from area to area.Give some the right to do what they want.I don’t want to get into it-BUT the intolerance for traditional values by the homosexual activists is something you won’t read about in the NYT.

Mikeoaklandpark
Mikeoaklandpark on February 8, 2006 at 3:50 pm

Saps
The gay lifestyle is not destructive. What is destructive is homophobia in this country. Based on the time frame 63-83, this culd have been a heterosexual story about an interracial couple who would have probibly done the same thing.

Mike (saps)
Mike (saps) on February 4, 2006 at 3:52 am

>>Do I want Brokeback to fail? I’m not sure. If the general public sees this movie and notices the destructive nature of this lifestyle…

This could only have been written by someone who has not seen the movie and has no idea what it’s really about.

Mikeoaklandpark
Mikeoaklandpark on February 3, 2006 at 9:53 am

Hey all, I am changing my mind on my above post.After seeing Brokeback Mountain again last night at a theater where I could actually hear the dialouge, it is the best picture of the year. I missed so much the first time seeing it at this independant theater in Asheville. It has moved to Regal/UA and the picture and sound was great.

ryancm
ryancm on January 31, 2006 at 4:27 pm

Gee, I think CRASH is over rated. Story was too contrived and all that happening in the course of two nights with the same people involved seemed a bit much. A little too coincedental for my taste. Good acting though. I’m NOT gay, but BROKEBACK should win.

Mikeoaklandpark
Mikeoaklandpark on January 31, 2006 at 3:49 pm

Brokeback Mountain leads the Oscar nominations. I will say this. If I was an acadamy voter I would vote Ang Lee, best director, but my best picture vote would go to Crash. In my opinion it was one of the best films last year. It deserved the cast ensamble it won at the SAG awards Sunday. I am gay and loved Brokeback, but feel that Crash really was the best film of 2005. It also deals with racism, but in a different way.

Al Alvarez
Al Alvarez on January 22, 2006 at 7:27 pm

The non-profit grant funded Windsor Theatre in Hampton, Iowa seems to have stopped accepting suggestions from its patrons.
Hmmm.

stevenj
stevenj on January 19, 2006 at 11:16 pm

Don’t worry jn, I don’t think any reader, casual or otherwise, will have any trouble distinguihing my thoughts from yours.

markinthedark
markinthedark on January 19, 2006 at 7:25 pm

on IMDB today: “ ‘Brokeback’ Reaches Top of the Mountain

http://www.imdb.com/news/sb/2006-01-19/

To sum it up: it was the #1 film not only per screen but in receipts on Tuesday after the Golden Globes.

ryancm
ryancm on January 19, 2006 at 7:13 pm

to Jnjetsen. For your info, yes I booked Theatres in California for over 20 years….to great success I might add. A friend of mine is still booking independent Theatres accross the country and he as or will (when prints become available) book BROKEBACK..everywhere…as he does all films that are popular and profitable. I think you are living in the stone age. It’s dollars and cents my friend. If it sells tickets (which means good concessions as well) .. book it even if your totally against what ever the film is about. You cannot censor the public. They will do it themselves with no help from you.

John Fink
John Fink on January 19, 2006 at 5:28 pm

Bassicly Jnjeisen your saying your customers aren’t smart and would boycott your cinema because you showed a controversal movie? I was offended by Get Rich or Die Trying but I didn’t boycott any theater showing it. People aren’t dumb – if your customers knew how insulting you were to their intelligence essentally calling them backwards, they wouldn’t spend a dime in your theater even if you are offering popcorn, soda and a movie ticket for five bucks.

Al Alvarez
Al Alvarez on January 19, 2006 at 5:10 pm

We play all films we can get our hands on. The public votes them out by not buying tickets. To decide for them would be bad business because audiences always surprise you. For those who think that it is unfair to suggest Salt Lake City has an anti-gay bias, the story below shows that the mayor thinks it does.

http://kutv.com/local/local_story_018113841.html

jnjeisen
jnjeisen on January 19, 2006 at 4:39 pm

Do you book a theatre? Are you kidding me…“regardless of content”. The short term gain from playing some movies may not be worth the long term loss created by that decision. IN MY MARKET, it is not worth playing Brokeback, or Farenheit, or any other movie with a controversy attached because of the overall harm it could cause big movies like Narnia or Passion, or even smaller ones like “End of the Spear”. If money is the only criteria for playing a movie, we are all in serious trouble.

ryancm
ryancm on January 19, 2006 at 3:56 pm

I would like to clarify my comment. They should play any movie that is a money maker, regardless of it’s content. They should also feel free NOT to book a loser, regardless of it’s content. A persons moral likes or dislikes of judgements should not enter into booking a film. If BROKEBACK was a loser and had horrible notices, no I would not book it. But for THAT reason, not because of what it’s about. Am I clear on this?

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on January 19, 2006 at 1:46 pm

Any exhibitor should play any movie?

No, any exhibitor should choose what movies he or she thinks will appeal to his or her local market. There are always more movies available to be shown than there are places to show them, so any booking involves a conscious choice.

ryancm
ryancm on January 19, 2006 at 1:22 pm

Any exhibitor should play any movie, regardless of his or own personal taste. After all, show business is just that…a “business"
If a film is making money and some kind of noteriety, it should surley be booked. I hate the grizzly, slasher gore movies, but I’d book these films as they are money makers, especially in their first weeks. Again, this ia a "business”. Also, as a non gay person I’d rather my friends and grown children see BROKEBACK than those horrid horror and slasher films. Neither kind of film, however, is going to make people stalkers, murderers, and in the case of BROKEBACK, homosexuals. You are what you are…period. So book the damn films and get on with the “business” end of it !!!

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on January 19, 2006 at 9:24 am

Lots of movies show ‘destructive lifestyles’. Take, for instance, Walk the Line. Drunknenness, drug abuse, adultery (the last of which seems to get implicit approval from the film-makers). It’s still a great film.

melders
melders on January 19, 2006 at 4:21 am

To say the a homosexual lifestyle is destructive is stupid. It is definetly not the only lifestyle that is destructive. I am suprised to find out that Jn’s theater is showing “The Ringer”. If you want to see a destructive lifestyle, just look at Johnny Knoxville. How many teenagers have died trying to recreate his stunts? I don’t think that any theater should be forced to show a movie. I do have a problem though with people who say that they don’t like “Brokeback Mountain” because it might promote a “destructive lifestyle”. Do these people say we shouldn’t show Titanic because it shows pre-marital sex? Kate and Jack’s relationship also destroyed a marriage, remember?

John Fink
John Fink on January 19, 2006 at 2:08 am

The more postings I read and respond to I think I wonder if we’ve proved an important point or have abused this message board for attacks. I think that the fundamental importance of site like Cinema Treasures is that it studies the evolution and history of cinema exhibition. What this message board has proved is that hurdles still exist to films, but one breakout film can change that. Brokeback Mountain is a modest hit when put up against King Kong and War of the Worlds as jnjeisen contends. His theater is currently showing The Ringer, which has made less money than Brokeback Mountain.

While Brokeback Mountain is it a commercial film it’s subjected to attacks. The film, to me, doesn’t glorify homosexuality â€" it’s simply a good love story. I always find it ironic that those that attack certain films are the ones that never see them. Context is an important consideration when addressing any work of art â€" you may be offended by a lyric in a song but without the context it sits in the meaning cannot really be understood. On the surface The Ringer it appears may be making fun of the mentally retarded, it doesn’t- but someone who watches commercials casually may think the film is mean spirited. (The Ringer isn’t, it nicely develops all of its characters)

Brokeback Mountain says these things happen. If it was the story of an interracial heterosexual couple it would only be the target of the Klan. (I wonder if Focus will come under heat the way Miramax was for having an anti-Catholic agenda with Priests, Dogma, and The Magdalene Sisters because there next film is a romantic comedy about an interracial couple, Something New). I doubt this film will “convert” anyone to homosexuality; it didn’t convert me or any of the other people I know who have seen it. On those grounds I don’t think it’s controversial, it may take you beyond your comfort zone a bit (I’m not saying it’s an easy film to watch) but it’s certainly a good one for intelligent audiences hungry for bold entertainment.

Yet, if anything these posts conclude that topics are still taboo. In the South, pre-Civil Rights it used to be scenes in which African Americans weren’t portrayed as slaves. Theater owners don’t have the right to omit scenes from a print now, thankfully. The fact this film is so controversial is stupid to me. For better or worse Brokeback Mountain has become a landmark, not just in American pop culture, but also in the study of cinema exhibition. Noting that most of the posts here are valid, I still have no idea what this ‘Pooh Bear’ business is, nor why people its poster godsmonster has only chose to post on this issue. The core of the debate, however is valid and from this thread you get a sense of how cinemas are programmed â€" what its owners think will be successful and what won’t. Sadly I think the audiences’ intelligence is underestimated, I’m able to put aside personal politics and see a film that I disagree with because I’m always interested in hearing a viewpoint I’m not politically comfortable with. I don’t think it’s a sin to admit Brokeback Mountain is a good film that people want to see.

Jnjeisen runs a twin screen second run theater. I don’t know what type of product he books but I’m willing to assume that Brokeback Mountain isn’t the type of film he’d typically play unless it won the Oscar for Best Picture (even then he wouldn’t, we know). This is not because of the film’s sexual politics but because the film is a word of mouth film, not one that is booked on 2000+ screens it’s first weekend.
When a first run 17-plex doesn’t show a movie that’s been widely successful it’s not only a bad business decision but also one that is one based on homophobia. Strange personal attacks aside this has been a valuable debate on the issue proving that movies can still be controversial, debated, and shocking, even in this day and age of instant access to pornography online and uncensored satellite radio. Knowing this I’m prepared to conclude that films that are mature, honest, and frank are in danger of being considered controversial no matter how desensitized we become.

godsmonster
godsmonster on January 19, 2006 at 1:41 am

You’re not a bigot jn. You’re Pooh Bear. And I do mean pooh pooh.

Luv,
Me

jnjeisen
jnjeisen on January 18, 2006 at 11:17 pm

The casual reader is going to think I posted the above post(signed by stevenj) under an assumed name just to make myself look good. Please steven, try to come up with an original idea, the old rhetoric being repeated over and over again won’t make it true…it is still old rhetoric.
“Whats wrong with you people?”….and I’m the Bigot?

stevenj
stevenj on January 18, 2006 at 10:12 pm

Destructive nature???? Why is it destructive for 2 men to love each other? If you read the papers, watch the news,listen to the news you’ll hear the “heterosexual news”. Because 99% of it is about heterosexuals. War in Iraq, sad ethics in Washington, a 45% divorce rate among heterosexuals and warring religions is DESTRUCTIVE. You do realize that AIDS is a heterosexual disease on this planet don’t you?? (you’ve blamed your own brother’s sexual orientation on a virus – no wonder he did’t want to be around you for so long). Finally, the most destructive things that happen in this movie are caused by heterosexuals – a murder victim Ennis' father makes him look at and Jack’s murder. The fact that these 2 men could not be themselves, live happy lives together is because heterosexuals like you and your religion work very hard to make that not happen. I’m 56 years old and out of the closet for 37 of those years and you “Christians” have tried relentlessly to keep us down one way or the other since we all started coming out of the closet in the late 60’s. What’s wrong with you people?

jnjeisen
jnjeisen on January 18, 2006 at 8:33 pm

Hey, Ron
Thanks for being polite. I am not in favor of banning or censorship in regards to Brokeback. My reason for posting the above figures is to counter to spin from others who seem to think this is the next Titanic.
I knew Jack Foley from Focus when he worked for Columbia as a branch manager. I respect the outstanding job he did with Brokeback…First week only at a few theatres in heavily gay communities…generate good press for the high screen average, then a little wider and a little wider until the massive buzz causes hetero America to go. Brilliant. Also, it dosn’t hurt that it is a well made film by a world class director.

Do I want Brokeback to fail? I’m not sure. If the general public sees this movie and notices the destructive nature of this lifestyle, It serves a good purpose. If we listen to the spin we will hear how most of the problems in the homosexual community come from religious bigotry. To this I say, read the above posts with an objective mind and tell me who is behaving as a bigot with things like namecalling, false accusations, stereotyping etc.
Just watch the responses to this post. I really bring out the worst in out fellow theatre lovers.

ryancm
ryancm on January 18, 2006 at 6:42 pm

Hey, JN
Would you like BROKEBACK to flop, or are you open minded to good biz and people who want to see an adult film that’s a little…shall we say…different??