Saw Brokeback Mt. last night (WOW!):My take on its central theme

[liberalhistorian]

Having read the Annie Proulx short story the movie was based on several years ago, I'd been anxious to see it. Given that I live in Rapid City, SD, however, I was thinking that I would probably have to travel to Sioux Falls to see it, since I didn't think it would be shown here. I was pleasantly surprised to find out that a local theater began showing it, so I went to see it last night.

It was every bit as good as the short story, and even better in some ways. In the hands of a master director like Ang Lee, it was beautifully and movingly done; needless to say, I was in tears at the end. The theater was nearly full and there were no jeers or walkouts; people seemed to really be absorbed in the movie. The direction was so good that even if you don't like gays, you'd be likely to become involved with and care about the characters portrayed by Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhal, and appreciate the central themes of the movie.

The central theme of the movie is not to "push the gay agenda", or even a gay love story. Indeed, there are no gratuitous love scenes, and the ones there are serve only to explain and move the story forward. It's not even mainly about the universality and power of love, although that is, indeed, a sub-theme. It's really about how, when two people are in love, the barriers and obstacles put up by society to thwart that love and the possiblity of their being able to be together, really hurts and damages the people involved and affects their lives in ways that often alter its course, and usually not for the better. About the inherent and gross unfairness of such barriers and obstacles. About the fact that such barriers and obstacles are put up by people who don't even know you, whom you will never meet, and who feel they have the right to determine your choices in love and the subsequent course of your life for you. About the fact that, if two people are in love, they should be able to be together regardless of what the situation is. And about the terrible pain suffered by those who cannot be together because of such barriers and obstacles or who, like the character Ennis in the movie, lack the courage to overcome such barriers and obstacles and follow his heart and the true course of what his life was meant to be.

THAT is what the central theme of the movie appears to be to me, and the writing, direction, and acting was such that you literally felt Jack and Ennis's pain and got a true sense of what they were really going through. And such a theme doesn't just apply to gay relationships. Like all really great, timeless movies, the central theme applies to all kinds of relationships, from interracial and interreligious relationships to intergenerational relationships, etc., etc. Remember, it really was not that long ago that interracial marriages were illegal in many states, and severely frowned on in most others, and it was a long and hard fight to overcome just the legal barriers.

The cultural and social barriers were much harder to overcome and, indeed, in many areas of the country are still not fully overcome. Such barriers make life extremely difficult for two people who only want to be left alone in peace to share their love and their lives together. NOTHING MORE. The SUPCO case that struck down miscegenation laws, Loving v. State of Virginia, was brought by an interracial couple, a white man and a black woman, who married in the late 50's and who were arrested and jailed for daring to fall in love and for actually wanting to be together to share their love and their lives. Imagine that. How dare they!

In our own time, we're dealing with people who think they have the right to, yet again, determine for certain other people who they have the right to fall in love with and marry based, yet again, on their own standards, beliefs, and "morals", and who are, yet again, causing tremendous pain and suffering for those whom their so-called "standards" affect greatly. I've always had a hard time understanding why people think they have the right to determine, based on their own standards, beliefs, and "morals", the personal lives and private decisions, such as who to love and who to marry, for other people whom they don't even know and will never meet. So, what Brokeback shows is that love is love and it shouldn't matter for whom you feel it; people who are in love should be able to be together regardless of what "society" thinks.

The scene that most movingly showed this was when Jack and Ennis had been meeting a couple times a year for nearly twenty years and Jack finally explodes, wanting to actually be able to share his daily life with Ennis. Ennis, however, is too afraid to take that leap and Jack's frustration built up over twenty years, twenty years of having to be married to others, finally boils over and explodes. Several years prior to this scene, he'd told Ennis that "sometimes I miss you so much I can hardly stand it." "We can't fix it," Ennis replies. "If you can't fix it, you gotta stand it." Right then, you really begin to sense the pain these two are going through at not being able to fulfill their true heart's desire and be together. The movie seems to be asking here "why should they have to "stand it?" Why shouldn't they be able to be together if they want?" It is an ageless, timeless question when it comes to love.

"Do you realize the life we could have had these past twenty years?" Jack asks Ennis, after finally exploding in frustration. "I wish I knew how to quit you." Indeed, people in love CANNOT just "quit" each other, and the movie again does a very moving job of showing the kind of pain that results from that when barriers and obstacles are put in the couple's way. Ennis suddenly breaks down, and Jack ends up holding him as they cry together for a lost life, a lost past, a lost future, and the fact that their love is hated and misunderstood by their own culture and society. One can imagine this scene being played out in real life thousands of times over, and the thought of so much pain and anguish is overwhelming.

And THIS is why it's so important to fight for the right of people who are in love to be able to be together, sharing their love and their lives, without the ridiculous, ludicrous, hateful barriers and obstacles put in their way. And that includes ALL couples, not just gay relationships. That is the central message Brokeback Mountain wants us to leave the theater understanding. And let's hope as many people as possible see it and that they do, indeed, come away internalizing that message.

[xchrom]

1. thaank you for such a thoughtful review

tiomintib posted this article yesterday -- please read -- i think you will really enjoy it

and there is some beatiful carry over between the two of you.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/01/20...

[liberalhistorian]

3. Thanks for posting that link!

I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who saw the movie the way I did. I just hope as many people as possible see it and come away from it with that understanding.

[msongs]

2. actually they CAN fix, they just choose not to.

and it is nobody's fault but theirs.



Msongs
www.msongs.com/dean2008.htm

[liberalhistorian]

4. Really?

How do you figure that? Both of them were married at the time, because that's what you did, especially at that time. The social and cultural barriers and disapproval were so strong as to make even the most independent-minded person not want to go through that. And they're still very strong. It takes a lot of courage to overcome that, and people in love should not HAVE to overcome them.

And look what happened to Jack-that is a very real possibility, even in this time. It's society's fault for creating such barriers and obstacles in the first place.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

7. About 10 years into his marriage Ennis got a divorce. Jack wanted Ennis

to start a new life with him, but Ennis was afraid. As a child he knew of a possible gay man who was tortured to death and his fear of that happening to him stopped him from going away with Jack. He could have if he wanted to, he chose not to. Jack on the other hand was willing to walk away from his marriage to be with Ennis. His marriage was not going to hold him back.

[liberalhistorian]

9. And I repeat that

Ennis was terrified of that BECAUSE of the very real social and cultural barriers that exist, and his fear was justified. I also repeat that it takes great courage to overcome that, and most people don't have that kind of courage. And they shouldn't have to have it, because the barriers shouldn't even be created by society, and therefore shouldn't even exist. Why is that so difficult to understand?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

14. I agree with you entirely there shouldn't be any barriers between anyone

either it a love relationship, friendship, etc. The human species on a whole has not evolved, and at this point in my life, with my experience, I don't think it ever will. Too many people "connected to the matrix", and as long as the collective conscious teaches us fear, we will never be fully realized.

[Surya Gayatri]

5. Enjoyed this thoughtful

review very much. Thanks for posting it, liberalhistorian. Wasn't sure about going to see BM (it hasn't come to France, yet), but now I certainly will. SG

[liberalhistorian]

6. Oh, definitely go see it,

you will not be disappointed, I guarantee it!

[mike_c]

8. wow-- what an excellent and moving movie review...

...I'm a bit choked up just from reading your REVIEW! :applause:

I probably won't see the movie. To be frank, I have difficulty approaching movies that deal with personal unhappiness, especially in relationships. Perhaps I empathize with the characters too much. It's very difficult for me to watch realistic depictions of people hurting one another emotionally, or even to watch them being tortured by circumstances. I suppose that's the POINT and the hallmark of good drama, but I find it too wrenching. I know people who are disturbed by movies with lots of violence, who refuse to watch them. I don't have any problem with most dramatic violence as long as it isn't utterly gratuitious-- I don't empathize with it, don't imagine suffering it, at least not in any sense that makes me too uncomfortable, and I can sympathize with the characters without feeling too connected to them. But movies about hurtful relationships grind me down.

Writing this, I keep thinking about one of the most amazing, affecting movies I've ever seen, an absolute train wreck of a movie about wasted lives and bad relationships-- Once Were Warriors. By the closing credits I felt like my emotions had been worked over with baseball bats, but I'll never forget that movie-- nor am I ever likely to watch it again.

[liberalhistorian]

10. Thanks, Mike!

You'll have to tell me more about that movie you mention. And I know what you mean about movies that greatly affect you and that you'll never forget, yet you don't think you can handle seeing them again. I feel that way about Saving Private Ryan. It was a wonderful movie and you really felt and appreciated the service and sacrifice of the WWII vets, especially on D-Day, but I don't think I could ever handle seeing even the opening battle scene again.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

11. Thank you for a very sensitive and thorough review of this film.

I saw it last night, and wasn't as moved by it as I thought I would be, although I did cry at the end.

It was beautifully directed and photographed, and although it was wonderfully acted, I never felt the chemistry between Ennis and Jack. I think that might have been because I found their sexual relationship more like who was fighting to be the dominant male than more of give and take. Yes, there were some tender scenes, but I think the rough housing scenes blew some of it for me. I don't know what goes on in the privacy of male gay relationships, and it could have be an actual depiction, so it is my ignorance playing here.

The ending was so sad. Oddly, afterward, I thought of the 1991 film, Defending Your Life, starring Albert Brooks and Meryl Streep. The main character is a man, whom after he dies in a car accident, winds up in a place I would categorize as purgatory. There he has a review of his past life which shows that all the chances that he didn't take, would lead him back to being reborn for more lessons to be learned. Ennis did not take the chance with Jack, and at the end I felt that he would live his life in solitude, forever mourning his lost love. His own kind of purgatory.

[liberalhistorian]

13. Yes, I felt that at the

end as well, and that was even more heartbreaking. It really takes a special kind of courage to be able to smash through the cultural and social barriers and overcome them, and most people just don't have that.

One of my former bosses, who's still a friend, is now 55 and his wife is 81. Yes, you read that right, she's 81. Here's the kicker-they married when he was 25 and she was 51! That was back in 1975, so you can imagine what they had to go through and the prejudices they're still facing even thirty years later. But they are truly in love and will be until the day one of them, most likely her, dies. And that's all they care about, that they're in love and that they're together to share that love.

But they've known too many other people who weren't able to muster that kind of courage, and that's the really sad thing. There shouldn't ever be barriers when it comes to love, it's really none of society's business.

[saracat]

12. I am planning to see the movie but I must admit

I feel that I will be pissed at the lack of concern given to the straight spouses, the women that were lied to and married these men. I think the lives of the women(or men) in such relationships are equally important and too often they are treated as disposable and sympathy is only given to the gay partner who "lost his? her life or future"! What about the husband or wife that was forced to build their life unwittingly on a lie? Is it a question of it isn't as hard for them because they aren't gay? Baloney. Cheating is cheating and it doesn't matter what the sexuality is! You don't ever have the right to deliberately cause another pain to satisfy your desires.They had no right to marry these women to begin with no matter how society viewed them. They made an innocent person victim to their problem. I believe that gay marriage should be legal but at a time it wasn't it is wrong to subject unwitting spouses to a sham marriage to present a false front. It is wrong and not to be "explained way or "glorified" in the name of "love".
It would be nice if being honest with your spouse is the message people left the theater with!

[liberalhistorian]

15. You make a very valid point,

and I think the movie did a good job of showing the pain of Ennis's wife and what she also went through. I think Ennis and Jack really did think they could love and make a go of it with their spouses, I don't think they were just doing it to put up a front.

Many gays did and still do that, thinking they can somehow "overcome" their true orientation and be happy in a marriage. You have to understand how strong the cultural and social norms and expectations really are and how hard they are to overcome. I don't think people truly realize this until they're on the "outside" of the cultural and social norms.

And as for not having the right to cause pain to satisfy your own desires-yes, that's certainly true. However, would YOU want to be married to someone who didn't really want to be married to you, who really wanted to be with someone else? I wouldn't. THAT would be pain. Yes, there'd be initial pain upon the breakup, but it's better than the kind of constant, daily pain that would come from knowing you're with someone who doesn't really want to be with you, who really wants to be with someone else.

That's also what it was trying to say-that EVERYONE suffers from these kinds of cultural and social barriers, not just the two people in love, but those around them.

[saracat]

17. I agree. Which is why I think that they have no right to marry these

people to begin with. I am actually more sorry for the spouses in such situations because they have choice taken away from them. The gay partner alone knows that they do NOT want to be with them. Much of the pain comes from the lie. And the fact that the spouse isn't, and will never be, significant in a meaningful way. The husband or wife is such a relationship would most likely never have allowed their love to develop had they known the true orientation of their partner.It is best not started.

It is fine to say "However, would YOU want to be married to someone who didn't really want to be married to you, who really wanted to be with someone else? I wouldn't. THAT would be pain. Yes, there'd be initial pain upon the breakup, but it's better than the kind of constant, daily pain that would come from knowing you're with someone who doesn't really want to be with you, who really wants to be with someone else."

But the straight partner was not given the choice to make. Many times that are committed to the person through bonds of not only love, but family and children, by the time they know the truth.I believe that emotional pain is far worse than anything the gay partner feels about not being able to be with their "true" partner. The pain is worse because it was inflicted deliberately. That being said, It is still better to break up and bring truth to the relationship. Perhaps allowing the unfortunate victim to rebuild their life.

All this makes me wonder if some of the anti gay marriage folks viewed it from the perspective of the straight spouses of gays would still see gay marriage as so awful. Not allowing gays to marry hurts everyone! JMHO!




I am sad for the gay partner but outraged at the same time that they would take advantage of another in such a manner.

[MoonRiver]

29. The intimate scenes indicated that these two men, especially Ennis,

were truly bisexual. They each seemed very physically drawn to females, but their love for each other was much stronger than what they found in heterosexual relationships. I believe this was a love (in it's purest and most sincere form) story.

It was kind of difficult for my husband and I to watch parts of the movie, because we felt a little grossed out by the male on male sex scenes. However, the movie worked through that and it became very clear that these men were deeply devoted to each other in a way that transcends the physical. They were definitely soul mates. The movie was so depressing, but also beautifully uplifting. What a wonderful film.

[liberalhistorian]

34. That's very true, and that's

why it's so powerful and one of the many reasons that I think the right is having such trouble with it, besides the usual reasons, of course. And that is also one of the main reasons why it was such a heartbreaking film, you really felt their love and their pain at not being able to be together more than a few times a year.

I was also uncomfortable at first with the love scenes, especially the first one, and I've never had any problems at all with gays. I think, though, that that is more a matter of deeply entrenched cultural conditioning than genuine dislike or disgust. The direction was pitch-perfect, too; this kind of movie, and especially those kinds of scenes, require it. So, it's a good thing that Ang Lee was the director!

[ruggerson]

16. I'm assuming

that you did not grow up gay.

If I'm wrong, forgive me.

I understand where you're coming from, Sara, but try to understand what is was like to grow up in a society where, as a child, boy or girl, your ENTIRE FUTURE expectations were built around finding a spouse, getting married, having kids and creating a family, when you were not hotwired biologically to fit that model.

Imagine being a little kid who is gay in the 1960's. You don't know anyone who is gay. The little you hear about the subject is in hushed tones, and the message is that whatever this is, it is very, very bad. Yet, you know you have these feelings, you know they are very powerful, but you know that if you act on them, you would be doing something terrible. It must remain your own deep, horrible secret.

So, you fake it. You fake it to fit in. Society has demonized who you are to such an extent that there is not even the OPTION to pursue your life honoring who you really are. SO you try to do what society expects you to do: date and marry people of the opposite sex.

This is what life was like for gay people pre- 1970.

Now, I do agree with you that TODAY, it is very different for a kid growing up gay. He/she has role models in the media. There are support groups. There are movies and tv where they find themselves depicted. Yet, even today, it takes a strong adolescent/young adult to buck society's norms and be themselves.

If today it takes a strong person, imagine what it was like in the mid 1960's in Wyoming!

I empathize with your remarks, but they do not reflect the reality of the world which this movie depicts.

Peace.

[liberalhistorian]

18. Thank you; you explained

it far better than I could have because you've actually been there. It's hard even today, I can't imagine what it must have been like earlier. I remember when a teenage boy committed suicide in my hometown just because he couldn't stand the thought of being gay, and that was just a few years ago. It was absolutely heartbreaking.

[ruggerson]

25. We will never know

the generations and generations of people who were forced to live miserable lives throughout the centuries.

Essentially, we are the first generation in the history of the planet where gay people could openly live their adult lives true to themselves and their nature. It's pretty astounding, historically.

[liberalhistorian]

26. That may seem to be the case,

but actually, from what I understand of ancient Greece, homosexuality was openly accepted in many cases and even expected at times. But that's the only other example I know of throughout history.

[ruggerson]

27. My understanding of Grecian times

is that homosexuality was merely an adjunct. Men were expected to be married, procreate, and they could have boys on the side. That was the norm.

There were not adult, gay relationships as we have today. There were not accepted adult gay couples living next door to straight couples.

I'm by no means an expert on Grecian history, but from what I've read, the "acceptance" of homosexuality back then was limited to certain culturally approved relationships.

[xchrom]

30. it depended on the city.

i.e. sparta's view was different from athen's which was different from thebes.

sparta being the most open and accepting.
in a really, really rigid societal kind of way.

[saracat]

20. Thanks for your response.You are correct.

But one person's pain does not justify inflicting it on another. Many of my closets friends are gay and my parents had some gay friends who grew up in the 1930's. They never married.
Many things are indeed different today but nothing ever justifies deliberate cruelty to save your own butt.
I will know more my opinion of the movie when I have seen it but I can say that the characters did NOT HAVE to marry anyone.
My mother was a lawyer at the time women did NOT go to law school. She was mocked and attacked frequently by other women. (And yes, she was called "gay"!) . But she never responded in kind or treated other women poorly as a result of her treatment.All I am saying is their is no justification for false marriages. It is selfish and cruel.And the time period is irrelevant. Cruelty is cruelty, whatever the reason. I keep thinking about someone like Mrs. McGreevey. I think her huband was slime. JMHO :pals:

[ruggerson]

22. I understand your thoughts about the spouse

but it's important to remember: much of the time this is not deliberate "cruelty" in these kinds of situations.

Many times the gay partner is telling him/her self that if he/she finds someone of the opposite sex and marries, the homosexuality will go away. If they get into a straight relationship, it will make them straight.

Many times, the gay partner is not even fully aware of his/her homosexuality. They repress it so deeply as a child that they believe they are straight. They fight their real feelings, submerging them, and convince themselves that their straight marriage is a good one. Passion is overrated, they tell themselves. Deep, deep feelings of love and desire only exist in romance novels. Their marriage is like every other, they tell themselves: mundane and routine. But the reality, as you and I know, is that they are not living the life their biology intended them to live. They are fighting their true nature.

So, their intentions are not bad or cruel. They are just trying to do what society expects them to do and they hope that by living that life, somehow, they will BECOME that life. Which, of course, will never happen. (sidenote: this is why the religious rightwing is so destructive when it comes to this subject. They are not propogating their belief system, as the media would have us believe - they are actually propogating black and white LIES about sexuality and identity).

I would hazard a guess that there are very, very few gay people who know they are gay and intentionally inflict cruelty on an unsuspecting straight person by getting involved in a relationship with them.

Most of the gay folks who today get involved with members of the opposite sex, I would guess, have not yet accepted the truth about THEMSELVES. They have not acknowledged their basic truth to themself, so how can we expect that they will acknowledge it to someone else?

It is a complex subject, and individuals all have different reasons and motives.

*personal disclaimer: I came out when I was about 17, deciding that it was society that was totally fucked up, not me. So, I inflicted no pain on anyone, save for a few high school girlfriends, who have since forgiven me. :)

[saracat]

23. And you make a very valid point. That is very true for many people.

I have friends who have been in both situations! And I am truly sympathetic to those who think they can "change" or "convert " themselves. That is a whole other story from what I am referencing.I think my issue is that gays are people , like anyone else and should be evaluated as such.Being gay shouldn't entiltle you to be treated with either more or less equality or understanding than anyone else.I have gay aquaintance whose "hobby " is seducing so called "straight men and he prefers married men and the highlight of his "career' doing this was being caught by a "wife". I told him I consider this amoral. But the same person is also always cheating with patrners of gay couples and thinks that is fair game as well. I always tell him that wrong is wrong and cheating is cheating.He is just an amoral person, not an amoral gay person.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saracat]

32. This is tolerance?? ?????

In the day, so called, most people weren't killed for being "confirmed batchelors or "spinsters". I also believe being straight doesn't give you the right to either more or less equality than anyone else. And I am going to see the movie. Rigid moral code? Are you kidding? Loyalty and honesty are "rigid"? Not hurting people is "rigid" ? Believing ALL people are entilted to marry their chosen partner is rigid? Well, I guess by your definition, that would be "rigid". And BTW, I am NOT a "breeder".

[karlrschneider]

36. I know at least 3 of my contemporaries (grew up in the 50s) who now

acknowledge they married (and all had children) because of societal pressure and only came out after the kids were grown. I suspect there are a LOT more people like that than we will ever know about.

[liberalhistorian]

37. I suspect the same thing, too,

and that is just really, really, sad, for everyone involved. Again, it gets back to the gross unfairness of the cultural and social barriers and obstacles created by society that is the cause of all of this and that has wreaked so much pain and emotional anguish for so many, many things.

I remember a friend of my parents back in the late 60's, when I was very young. He was gay, open about it, and suffering terribly. My stepdad once had to talk him out of committing suicide because he just couldn't take it anymore. My parents had other gay friends whose suffering I saw first-hand, and I've also had gay friends who've suffered terribly emotionally; one was totally rejected by her family once they found out.

[BR_Parkway]

43. I could not have put that reasoning any better, and unlike you, I

was one of those who thought being married would 'fix' it or I'd outgrow it or something. It wasn't how I was raised, it was wrong and there was no way I could be that way. Fortunately, my ex wife and I have managed to remain friends - she understood where/who I was and that it wasn't deliberately to hurt her or to have some type of "cover".

That doesn't excuse the pain I caused any of us, but it's the reality of it. I was trying to be someone that I wasn't and it took it's toll. But no, the person who is married shouldn't be slipping around with anyone else, regardless of the gender involved. To me, that's the line crossed between an unintentional and intentional hurt.

[monarch]

19. Please see the movie before you accuse anyone of "lying."

I really don't think that you will be pissed.

[saracat]

21. I am not accusing the chracters of "lying" as I haven't seen the movie

yet. I am only saying I have no tolerance for those cases where people do misrepresent themselves!

[liberalhistorian]

24. I agree, and I think

she'll change her mind once she sees the movie. They both genuinely thought it would all "go away" once they were properly married like society insisted they were supposed to be.

[Bridget Burke]

40. Unfortunately, forbidden love is a classic theme.

Why couldn't Guenivere & Lancelot just get over it? Weren't Romeo & Juliet acting like stupid kids? Helen was an idiot for running off with Paris. These stories will never die.

Why don't you write a story from the viewpoint of a betrayed wife? Make your anger into art.

[liberalhistorian]

41. There are already plenty of stories

from the viewpoints of betrayed spouses; that's one of the things that makes this movie rather unique is that it focuses on the two characters and not the usual "betrayed spouse" theme.

[proud2BlibKansan]

28. This is a wonderful review

May I borrow it for an email group I belong to?

[liberalhistorian]

33. Of course,

check the response to your PM. Sorry it took so long, I was working at my part-time job all afternoon and evening.

[proud2BlibKansan]

35. Thanks

and please don't apologize.

:hi:

[burrowowl]

38. Central theme

"Do you realize the life we could have had these past twenty years?" Jack asks Ennis, after finally exploding in frustration. "I wish I knew how to quit you." Indeed, people in love CANNOT just "quit" each other, and the movie again does a very moving job of showing the kind of pain that results from that when barriers and obstacles are put in the couple's way. Ennis suddenly breaks down, and Jack ends up holding him as they cry together for a lost life, a lost past, a lost future, and the fact that their love is hated and misunderstood by their own culture and society. One can imagine this scene being played out in real life thousands of times over, and the thought of so much pain and anguish is overwhelming."

And, Ennis saddness at not following his heart because of his fear and jobs. He did learn something since he agrees to go his daughter's wedding. The end jerked some tears from me.

[liberalhistorian]

39. Yes, he did, but unfortunately

it was too late for him and Jack. I did find that the ending scene with his daughter, where she says she's getting married and he then asks her if her fiance really loves her, really reinforced the theme of cultural and social barriers causing such pain in people's lives.

Ennis realizes that his daughter will have the kind of happiness that he had wanted with Jack all just because she's within the cultural and social norms of society, and he once again feels the tremendous sense of loss and sorrow. Heath Ledger did a wonderful job of emotional acting in that scene.

[liberalhistorian]

42. Hey, I just noticed that this

has 4 votes for the Greatest Page! I'll pay ten bucks to the person who kicks it over to the magic five vote within the next few minutes, since you can't nominate threads over 24 hours old! :evilgrin: