> And Jack isn't in agony because he's gay--or desires to be gay.
> He's tortured because he's in love with Ennis, who doesn't know
> what he wants.
That point raises a question: why does Ang Lee kill Jack and have Ennis live? Once again, the gayer you are, the quicker you die in a film -- reminiscent of a low life expectancy of Blacks in action films (as discussed in another thread: <http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/ pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20060130/030311.html> and <http:// mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of- Mon-20060130/030300.html>)?
Emily wrote:
> Another thought: If you reread the story, you notice that Proulx
> hardly includes anything about the cowboys' wives. But there they
> are in the movie, with lots of tear-jerking loneliness, hotter than
> beans in a campfire and shirtless! I sympathize with anyone trying
> to make a full screenplay out of a short story that's as much about
> atmosphere as it is about narrative, but who do you think those
> boobies were for if not for box-office-boosting, freaked-out
> straight men?
I found the wives distinctly unappertizing. If given a choice between Jake Gyllenhaal and Michelle Williams (or choice between Heath Ledger and Anne Hathaway), even straight men and lesbians would prefer the former to the latter. What's the message here? :->
In any case, I haven't read the story, but Ang Lee once again turned the story into that of parents and children in the end (Ennis Del Mar and his daughter, Ennis Del Mar and Jack's parents), just like The Wedding Banquet.
Yoshie Furuhashi <http://montages.blogspot.com> <http://monthlyreview.org> <http://mrzine.org>