USCCB reviews Brokeback Mountain ["The universal themes of love and loss ring true. ..."]

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops ^ | Dec 12 2005 | usccb

[RobbyS]

The reviewer seems to be a homosexual. If he is not, then his take on it shows why the Church is having such troubles.

[therut]

There is something very wrong with the USCCB. I do not understand why something is not done. They give me a very bad feeling of things to come. I'm not Catholic but I have had great respect for the Catholic Church but I am beginning to waver. The Pope needs to excommunicate many priests and nothing will change till a Pope does. The Church is becoming too soft on many issues for me. It is like he is afraid of offending people.

[TradicalRC]

Sorry. My comment didn't post. Derivative? From What?

[TradicalRC]

Having read through the first hundred posts I must say that I'm in agreement for the most part with all here. That said however, I will posit that the reviewer may have a point.

[Darkwolf377]

Philip K. Dick and H.R. Giger, for starters. Giger for the "biomechanical" look, PKD for the reality-is-an-implant stuff.

And that doesn't even count the successful lawsuit against the creators for ripping off an unfilmed screenplay.

When I finally saw The Matrix I was so bored, and the phrase that kept coming to mind was 'This is IT? The movie everyone's telling me is so great?' And then when I got to that nauseating massacre in the building foyer, I wanted to smack everyone who suggested I'd love it. (And I LOVE action movies--I just don't consider incessant, laughble violence good action movie making.)

[Darkwolf377]

Please take your meds. If you can find one phrase where I acclaimed this film, you win. If not, I deserve an apology you don't have the guts to give, I'm wagering.

Where have I "promoted" this film? By discussing it? OK. Sorry I didn't follow in lockstep with the incorrect comments made about it. Or did I promote it when I wrote I had no intention of seeing it, and that doing so is an admission of one being gay?

Just because someone doesn't invent lies about a movie doesn't mean they like it or even care to see it. Just because someone points out the facts about a film they have no intention of seeing doesn't mean they're "promoting" it.

Go on, prove me wrong: Cut and paste where I acclaimed this film (which I haven't seen and don't intend to see) and where I promoted it (where did I urge anyone to see it, or say it was worth seeing?).

I'll await your next BS-filled post, like the last one.

[DBeers]

Your posts speak for themselves -my obsservation stands regardless your threats and disparaging remarks!

[fragrant abuse]

Absolutely spot on. The irony is that the publicists of this movie are begging for a controversy - you can't buy that kind of publicity. Wanna help this movie tank? Then ignore it, don't shout about it.

[Darkwolf377]

In other words, you couldn't cut and paste the comments you claim are there, and you are a liar.

And where exactly did I "threaten" you? You're such a drama queen--instead of just answering direct questions, you get all fluttery--and you accuse someone who's never said a positive word about this movie of promoting it, that one can only conclude there's some "hiding in plain sight" going on.

You enjoy your next viewing of Brokeback Mountain, now.

[Darkwolf377]

You got it. I know that some people around here say it's "letting them get away with it" or something when we ignore this.

My answer to that: The Last Temptation of Christ

The church-bashers piled on that movie to such an extent that people who might not have seen it came out in droves. If there'd been no controversy it would have still been a hit, but the incessant hatred poured at the movie by the New York press (remember how they tried to make Gibson somehow guilty for his father's words, and used the term "anti-semitism" in every damned piece on the movie?) riled up the right, and made it the mega-hit of the year.

People want to see The Movie THEY Don't Want You To See, whoever "they" happen to be.

You'd think we'd learn by now that when it comes to movies there's no such thing as bad publicity, since one of "our" movies BENEFITTED from the attempts to quash it.

[Antioch]

It turns out our lovestruck reviewer is not so mysterious after all. It is Harry Forbes, the new director of the Office for Film and Broadcasting of the USCCB.

Since he's been hired, gay themed movies, which usually garnered an "O" rating by the USCCB, have received his bizarre imprimatur of ok-ness. Some examples:

RENT
Synopsis. An imaginative expansion of the late Jonathan Larson's long-running Broadway musical -- an updating of "La Boheme" -- about the lives and loves of New York's East Village artists, several of them HIV-positive. Director Chris Columbus has remained largely faithful to the original -- and many of the original cast members reprise their roles here -- while the dissolute lifestyles of some of the characters take second place to the overriding themes of love, connection and fellowship, and the film encapsulates a significant cultural era. Implied drug use, same-sex relationships, suggestive dancing and movement, some rough and crude language and an anti-establishment outlook

USCCB rating: L - limited adult audience

Saved!
Synopsis: Tart teen comedy about a senior (Jena Malone) at an evangelical high school, who, after her boyfriend (Chad Faust) tells her that he thinks he is gay, sleeps with him in an attempt to "cure" him and winds up getting pregnant, sending her into a spiritual tailspin and putting her at odds with her sanctimonious best friend (Mandy Moore). Directed by Brian Dannelly, the film uses satire to offer a scalding critique of hypocrisy and puffed-up piety, but its wall-to-wall bashing of conservative Christians, which at times stoops to irreverent lows, displays the same sort of insensitivity which the movie purportedly decries. Religious stereotypes, an implied teen sexual encounter, homosexual references, recurring rough and crude language, profanity and several blasphemous jokes.

USCCB rating: L - limited adult audience

Monster:
Synopsis: Fictionalized drama about real-life serial murderer Aileen Wuornos (Charlize Theron), executed in Florida in 2002 for the death of six men, and her dysfunctional love affair with a young lesbian (Christina Ricci). In sympathetically portraying Wuornos, first-time writer-director Patty Jenkins walks a fine line between telling a fact-based story and justifying her horrific acts by painting her as a victim, but this unexceptional film is really about Theron's exceptional performance, which captures both Wuornos' inner turmoil and outer mannerisms, packing 30 pounds onto her frame for the role. A few lesbian sexual encounters with partial nudity, recurring violence including a rape, stereotyping of conservative Christians, as well as pervasive rough and crude language

USCCB rating: L - limited adult audience

I think its high time for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith to send in a HazMat team into USCCB headquarters.

[DBeers]

LOL

[saradippity]

I am willing to bet that our esteemed,sexually inverted priest,movie reviewer at the Sun wrote this. It is so reminiscent of the hearty yet sensitive endorsements of "Eyes Wide Shut","American Beauty" and "Huck and Buck",or whatever. Lets try to find out.

He probably got his knuckles rapped and has taken to peddling his crap at the USCCB. He also panned "The Passion of the Christ".

[dangus]

Na-a-aa-aahmeen?

[By the way, Jeers to google. I typed in "3-dollar bill" with filtering on, and got hundreds of indentical pictures of mutilated male genitalia, thanks to Limp Bizkit.]

[dangus]

IOW: I haevn't seen a film critic looking that frickin' gay since Fox cancelled "In Living Color." (Does my memory serve me correctly? Did "Men on Film" from "In Living Color" feature Academy-Award winning actor Jamie Foxx?}

[cielo]

otb@msn.com : email address of Mr. Forbes at USCCB.

[Aquinasfan]

Can ANYONE defend the USCCB in this case?

No! The fact that this review made it onto the USCCB website indicates that there are serious problems with the USCCB, even if the problem is limited to negligence.

Looked at from the point of view of the need for love which everyone feels but few people can articulate, the plight of these guys is easy to understand

"Easy to understand"?! Sheesh.

[Aquinasfan]

The ONLY thing being lauded and commended about this film is that it's a pornographic film being sold and marketed in family neighborhood theatres. THAT's what the homoseuxual and otherwise, liberal groups is lauding: that they're making a "breakthrough" attempt to bring these terrible character faults into popular acceptabilty.

Bingo! And it marks a very significant milestone in our culture's continuing descent.

[Aquinasfan]

My answer to that: The Last Temptation of Christ The church-bashers piled on that movie to such an extent that people who might not have seen it came out in droves.

It was a box-office dud, despite the critical acclaim and enormous free publicity.

Budget
$7,000,000 (estimated)
Gross
$8,373,585 (USA)

In contrast, "The Passion" was critically assailed and also received enormous free publicity.

Budget:
$55,000,000 (production and marketing)
Gross:
$370,274,604

[Fury]

No! The fact that this review made it onto the USCCB website indicates that there are serious problems with the USCCB, even if the problem is limited to negligence.

I just read the review on the USCCB web-site. Disgusting. As others have stated, it's incidents like these that compromise the credibility of the USCCB, and the ability of the USCCB to be an effective organization in the mind of many Catholics.