Spare me a "film fan" like this
Eddie Hargreaves of Stockton, California is referred to in Dru Sefton's editorial on straight men's aversion to Brokeback Mountain as a "film fan." Hargreaves explains his lack of interest in the film as not a discomfort at seeing a gay male romance, but a discomfort over "romance" films in general. I believe him, and anyway, my purpose here is not to analyze any homophobia that may be lurking in this man's psyche. I haven't even seen Brokeback Mountain.
Rather, my purpose is to ask: Are heterosexual men really as one-dimensional and, well, stupid, as Hargreaves makes them out to be? I'm not going to speak for everybody," he says, "but I don't know a lot of straight guys who said, "Oh, man, I can't wait to see [The] Bridges of Madison County."
That got my attention because of my own experience in seeing The Bridges of Madison County. The book, though it had all kinds of potential, was not very good, so I had little desire to see the film, despite it's starring both Meryl Streep and Clint Eastwood. Who talked me into it? A straight male, of all people. "Listen," he told me on the phone, "the film is told from Francesca's point of view; it's different from the book. You should go see it." And I did, and I liked it. My friend saw it because he is a film fan, which is different from a guy who likes to go to the movies.
Oh god, I'm being elitist again. So sue me. Fun movies are, well, fun. I could see First Wives' Club or Viva Las Vegas every week and not grow tired of them. But I do not pretend that they are art. And yes, I do realize that women enjoy romance movies more than men do, and that men enjoy action movies more than women do. In a general sort of way, of course. But if we all held to these strict hormone-driven film desires, we would wind up both ignorant and unfulfilled.
Using these guidelines--which I realize many people, and especially men, do use--only women would watch Casablanca, Annie Hall, Moonstruck, and Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore. And only men would watch All Quiet On the Western Front, Goodfellas, and The Searchers. Those who choose to ignore art because art may contain references to experiences that are foreign to them are committing two crimes against themselves: 1. They are forgetting that all art reflects common human experience, and 2. They are determined to protect their own ignorance.
There are good romance movies and bad ones, good action movies and bad ones, and a whole lot of mediocre examples of each. There are also good silly movies and many truly bad ones. Seeing a film can provide entertainment and escape, which is great. Seeing a truly good film can also provide some type of transcendent experience, though that experience may make us feel uncomfortable.
Speaking again of Brokeback Mountain, Hargreaves says, "To say that straight guys are missing out because they're unjustly turned off by the plot, well, there wasn't anything to turn them on in the first place. At least The English Patient had a plane crash."
Maybe Hargreaves needs to get out more and discover all the straight men who really do care about film. There is, of course, an outside chance that he was being ironic and pulling Sefton's leg. But I doubt it.
Rather, my purpose is to ask: Are heterosexual men really as one-dimensional and, well, stupid, as Hargreaves makes them out to be? I'm not going to speak for everybody," he says, "but I don't know a lot of straight guys who said, "Oh, man, I can't wait to see [The] Bridges of Madison County."
That got my attention because of my own experience in seeing The Bridges of Madison County. The book, though it had all kinds of potential, was not very good, so I had little desire to see the film, despite it's starring both Meryl Streep and Clint Eastwood. Who talked me into it? A straight male, of all people. "Listen," he told me on the phone, "the film is told from Francesca's point of view; it's different from the book. You should go see it." And I did, and I liked it. My friend saw it because he is a film fan, which is different from a guy who likes to go to the movies.
Oh god, I'm being elitist again. So sue me. Fun movies are, well, fun. I could see First Wives' Club or Viva Las Vegas every week and not grow tired of them. But I do not pretend that they are art. And yes, I do realize that women enjoy romance movies more than men do, and that men enjoy action movies more than women do. In a general sort of way, of course. But if we all held to these strict hormone-driven film desires, we would wind up both ignorant and unfulfilled.
Using these guidelines--which I realize many people, and especially men, do use--only women would watch Casablanca, Annie Hall, Moonstruck, and Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore. And only men would watch All Quiet On the Western Front, Goodfellas, and The Searchers. Those who choose to ignore art because art may contain references to experiences that are foreign to them are committing two crimes against themselves: 1. They are forgetting that all art reflects common human experience, and 2. They are determined to protect their own ignorance.
There are good romance movies and bad ones, good action movies and bad ones, and a whole lot of mediocre examples of each. There are also good silly movies and many truly bad ones. Seeing a film can provide entertainment and escape, which is great. Seeing a truly good film can also provide some type of transcendent experience, though that experience may make us feel uncomfortable.
Speaking again of Brokeback Mountain, Hargreaves says, "To say that straight guys are missing out because they're unjustly turned off by the plot, well, there wasn't anything to turn them on in the first place. At least The English Patient had a plane crash."
Maybe Hargreaves needs to get out more and discover all the straight men who really do care about film. There is, of course, an outside chance that he was being ironic and pulling Sefton's leg. But I doubt it.
posted by Diane at 11:27 AM
2 comments
2 Comments:
This is why I thought Pride and Prejudice would appeal to many men.
While I'm on the subject, nothing pisses me off more than men dismissing "romance" written by women but praising "love stories" written by men, which are usually trite and melodramatic (a la Bridges). Nicholas Sparks is who I'm thinking of here, who writes utter crap and it sells because he's a man, then he criticizes women genre writers. Ugh!
By
Anonymous, at
3:34 AM
I've never read any Nicholas Sparks, but several people have told me it's really bad. And you're right--he's a big-deal literary figure.
I think it's very difficult to write a convincing romance-style book; Bridges was such a good idea that it is a shame the writing wasn't better.
By
Anonymous, at
9:16 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home