Topic: Did the film lose w/o dream scenes? Spoiler

[tpe]

One of the most noticable differences between the original story and the film is the complete absence of the two scenes where the older Ennis dreams of his dead lover Jack.

These two scenes are fairly important to the original story, not the least because the first scene begins the story, while the second scene concludes it.

It is not surprising that Ang Lee and the screenwriters did not attempt to translate these two scenes into the movie.  The last scene, in particular, would have been horrendously difficult to achieve without looking a bit awkward.

My question: do you think the movie lost something in not incorporating these two scenes?



For those of you not familiar with the original story, I append the two relevant passages for your inspection.

The beginning in the original story

Ennis Del Mar wakes before five, wind rocking the trailer, hissing in around the aluminum door and window frames. The shirts hanging on a nail shudder slightly in the draft. He gets up, scratching the grey wedge of belly and pubic hair, shuffles to the gas burner, pours leftover coffee in a chipped enamel pan; the flame swathes it in blue. He turns on the tap and urinates in the sink, pulls on his shirt and jeans, his worn boots, stamping the heels against the floor to get them full on. The wind booms down the curved length of the trailer and under its roaring passage he can hear the scratching of fine gravel and sand. It could be bad on the highway with the horse trailer. He has to be packed and away from the place that morning. Again the ranch is on the market and they've shipped out the last of the horses, paid everybody off the day before, the owner saying, "Give em to the real estate shark, I'm out a here," dropping the keys in Ennis's hand. He might have to stay with his married daughter until he picks up another job, yet he is suffused with a sense of pleasure because Jack Twist was in his dream.

The stale coffee is boiling up but he catches it before it goes over the side, pours it into a stained cup and blows on the black liquid, lets a panel of the dream slide forward. If he does not force his attention on it, it might stoke the day, rewarm that old, cold time on the mountain when they owned the world and nothing seemed wrong. The wind strikes the trailer like a load of dirt coming off a dump truck, eases, dies, leaves a temporary silence.


The ending of the original story

"Jack, I swear -- " he said, though Jack had never asked him to swear anything and was himself not the swearing kind.

Around that time Jack began to appear in his dreams, Jack as he had first seen him, curly-headed and smiling and bucktoothed, talking about getting up off his pockets and into the control zone, but the can of beans with the spoon handle jutting out and balanced on the log was there as well, in a cartoon shape and lurid colors that gave the dreams a flavor of comic obscenity. The spoon handle was the kind that could be used as a tire iron. And he would wake sometimes in grief, sometimes with the old sense of joy and release; the pillow sometimes wet, sometimes the sheets.

There was some open space between what he knew and what he tried to believe, but nothing could be done about it, and if you can't fix it you've got to stand it.

[Liam56]

While I think the dream sequence was sweet and brought another tear to my eye and affirmed for me just how much Ennis loved Jack, I liked the way the story ended in the film.  I really liked the connection of Ennis' daughter's announcement of her marriage and her protestation of love, with Ennis' declaration, "Jack, I swear."  The ending was sad with Ennis all alone in the middle of nowhere, but it did basically what the short story did:  it continued the love affair after death.  From the tissues I dampened these past three viewings of the movie, I think Ang Lee was successful.

[brokebackmountain]

Great topic, tpe. I am always impressed with the topics you have come up.

IMHO, incorporating the dreams as written in the story do not add any more love Ennis has for Jack, so to speak. I went to see the movie first without reading the short story. Now having read it several times, I think the screenplay is as close as one could get from the movie. Although we have discussed in another topic about adding/substracting scenes, none of them could significantly change the movie.

What is interesting is that the introductory passage is actually the end - the life of Ennis. We don't know when it took place. It could be a few months or years after Jack's death. In my first viewing, I was actully stunned when the movie was over after the shirts, partly due to the story and partly how it ends. I kinda expected more like how Ennis coped his life without Jack. After seeing it 4th times, I am convinced that it is not necessary because the movie has accomplished its goal to convey the love between Ennis and Jack. Dramatically, it is more powerful to end it with "Jack, I swear." Adding the first dream at the end - something like "2 years later" on the screen would seem to be a drag. Maybe it can be used to start the movie and make the entire movie in retrospect.

I think the movie itself is just excellent with the ending of the shirts. The audience knows how much Ennis is in love with Jack and how much he regrets and suffers.

[*Froggy*]

Thank you tpe, great topic.

I personally did  not need these scenes in the movie...starting the movie with our boys in Signal, trying to get a job is just fine.

Somehow, Ang Lee manages to show their connection without it! We know Ennis dreams about his Jack , we just know!
Or have I read the short story too many times?!!

[daveya26]

Brokebackmountain

Am I misunderstanding this or are you saying that the beginning passage in the short story is the end of Ennis' life?  How do we know that?

I gathered that it was a few years later but nothing said to me he was about to die.

[brokebackmountain]

Brokebackmountain

Am I misunderstanding this or are you saying that the beginning passage in the short story is the end of Ennis' life?  How do we know that?

I gathered that it was a few years later but nothing said to me he was about to die.

You are correct - it was later. How much later we don't know. Sorry for the confusion - the end of story I mean. Ennis is not dying.

[daveya26]

Phew, so he could still be alive somewhere

I know they probably wouldnt have known to do this but I just wish the 2 guys had upsticks and moved to SF or NYC, mustve been a real kick to be in either city in the mid 70's!!  Though, we wouldnt have such a great story if they had done.

[brokebackmountain]

Phew, so he could still be alive somewhere

I know they probably wouldnt have known to do this but I just wish the 2 guys had upsticks and moved to SF or NYC, mustve been a real kick to be in either city in the mid 70's!!  Though, we wouldnt have such a great story if they had done.

Hehe, with Ennis, you probably need to drug him first and then transport him as a luggage to NYC or SF. If they did move to NYC, there may have a movie called "Bareback Subway?"  Sorry for the bad joke but I can't help it.

[*Froggy*]

Phew, so he could still be alive somewhere

I know they probably wouldnt have known to do this but I just wish the 2 guys had upsticks and moved to SF or NYC, mustve been a real kick to be in either city in the mid 70's!!  Though, we wouldnt have such a great story if they had done.

Hehe, with Ennis, you probably need to drug him first and then transport him as a luggage to NYC or SF. If they did move to NYC, there may have a movie called "Bareback Subway?"  Sorry for the bad joke but I can't help it.

Hahahahaha...and here comes the Birdcage!LOL

[daveya26]

Phew, so he could still be alive somewhere

I know they probably wouldnt have known to do this but I just wish the 2 guys had upsticks and moved to SF or NYC, mustve been a real kick to be in either city in the mid 70's!!  Though, we wouldnt have such a great story if they had done.

Hehe, with Ennis, you probably need to drug him first and then transport him as a luggage to NYC or SF. If they did move to NYC, there may have a movie called "Bareback Subway?"  Sorry for the bad joke but I can't help it.

lol this is true, I cant see Ennis in a pair of leather chaps in the village somehow (or maybe I can  )

Dont worry, we've been affectionately calling it Bareback Mounting!

[tpe]

Thanks everyone for the wondeful thoughts.

I apologize for being slow, as I am still recovering from my latest viewing of the movie.  That, together with listening to the soundtrack (particularly the instrumental sections), have left me a bit incapacitated.

I've always found the last sentence on the original story a bit hopeful, but otherwise overwhelmingly cruel (as if to taunt Ennis with his own saying: 'If you can't fix it, you've got to stand it.')  If there would have been some way to translate this sentence into cinema, it would have killed me, I suspect.

Nevertheless, the state of older Ennis continuously being torn between deep irrevocable sadness and a soaring and intense sense of happines ('And he would wake sometimes in grief, sometimes with the old sense of joy and release; the pillow sometimes wet, sometimes the sheets.') when at the boundary of dreams and wakefulness is such an important element of the original story's ending, in my opinion.  I sometimes think that the movie's ending could have projected this dichotomy a bit more, although the film's final scene (showing Ledger teary-eyed looking at the shirts) does achieve this in the most subtle and unassuming way possible.

I think I find myself more and more affected by the open-endedness of the film's closing scene.  It is so powerful that one does not realize how disturbing and afflicting it is -- even hours and days after viewing it.

[Kindred]

I agree.  I find that the ending haunts me 4 days after I saw the movie for the first time.  Honestly, I think the line "Jack, I swear..." is merely a tool used to draw us back into the movie.  I find myself re-playing the movie in my minds eye, and discovering new aspects each time.  The importance of this is that the movie (haven't read the story yet) has so many levels of meaning.  Each new discovery (some from reading other threads) brings greater appreciation for the piece as a work of art.

I find myself thinking, to what is Ennis referring?  I've read so many interpretations, and I've come to the conclusion that in a way they are all correct.  No one can say for sure what Ennis meant (except perhaps Ms. Proulx), but to me that is part of its simplistic beauty.  We read into the line what we want from the story, and for me that is always changing.  Although the story is a set piece of work (unless they decide to add scenes etc. in future releases) it will always remain a fluid, always changing piece of art to me.  I am sure that the way it affects me today, will be somewhat different than how I will interpret this in years to come.  And that makes the movie all the more a brilliant work of art for me.  Bravo!

[tpe]

I agree.  I find that the ending haunts me 4 days after I saw the movie for the first time.  Honestly, I think the line "Jack, I swear..." is merely a tool used to draw us back into the movie.  I find myself re-playing the movie in my minds eye, and discovering new aspects each time.  The importance of this is that the movie (haven't read the story yet) has so many levels of meaning.  Each new discovery (some from reading other threads) brings greater appreciation for the piece as a work of art.

I find myself thinking, to what is Ennis referring?  I've read so many interpretations, and I've come to the conclusion that in a way they are all correct.  No one can say for sure what Ennis meant (except perhaps Ms. Proulx), but to me that is part of its simplistic beauty.  We read into the line what we want from the story, and for me that is always changing.  Although the story is a set piece of work (unless they decide to add scenes etc. in future releases) it will always remain a fluid, always changing piece of art to me.  I am sure that the way it affects me today, will be somewhat different than how I will interpret this in years to come.  And that makes the movie all the more a brilliant work of art for me.  Bravo!

Welcome to this forum Kindred!  And I greatly enjoyed your first post!

True.  The genius of the story is its open-endedness.  It leaves you to THINK as well as FEEL about love and its manifestations.

There is a thread devoted to Ennis' last line.  Although the thru meaning of this line is open to interpretation, I am sure you will enjoy the various posts discussing the possible meanings.

[paradigm69]

I just finished reading Anne Proulx's short story (LOVED IT).  I saw BBM (just once) about 2 weeks ago, so from my perspective, the short story is a nice "additive" or "secondary source" to the movie.  It helps round out the full story, especially in regards to some dialogue that was skipped in the movie.  I say this with all due respect to Anne and her story.  It's just that the movie is SO affecting and SO moving to me, it is the heart and soul of the story.

In regards to the dream sequences, I am actually glad they were left out.  As mentioned by others, I think an ending dream sequence would have been unnecessary, for at movie's end, we all know Ennis is, was, and forever will be thinking about Jack, whether awake or dreaming.

In regards to an opening dream sequence, I appreciated the movie even more because I simply did not know what was going to happen.  I mean, before entering the theatre, I knew that the two boys would get it on and fall in love.  But I had NO WAY of knowing that Jack was going to die, and that there would be so much left unsaid, undone, and that by movie's end I would be heartbroken.  By not portending Jack's death (at least I for one did not see it coming), the movie became even MORE POWERFUL to me...

[kcristob]

I've gone back and forth on the dream sequences in the story vs none in the movie.

I guess I would like to have seen them in the movie.  Knowing the powerful writing team and director and actors -- I think they could have done them justice.  It's an important component to their relationship.

[tpe]

Hello paradigm69 and kcristob.

Proulx herself admits that seeing her story adapted so beautifully to screen left her 'knocked for a loop.'  There is no denying that the film was, by and large, extremely faithful to the language and substance of the story.

The dream sequences (especially the final one) strike me as a literary device that Proulx handled wonderfully.  Similar to the ghost sequences in Gogol's great short story 'The Overcoat', the dream sequences transport us from the painful reality and seeming finality of death to the feeling of a life after death.  In the case of Jack, he lives on in the very heart and soul of Ennis.  Jack is now under Ennis' skin (to use the analogy of the two shirts).  The dream sequences represent how Ennis' life becomes almost an extension of Jack's life and persona.  For who is to know, if I may use the paradigm made so famous by Chinese daoist thought, whether it is Ennis dreaming about Jack, or Jack dreaming about Ennis.

To have captured this in film would have been a very difficult challenge, and in some ways, I am relieved that Ang Lee did not attempt this.  In addition, I doubt if most viewers and critics would have understood Proulx's point. 

My feelings lead me to one conclusion: IT DEPENDS.  If Ang Lee would have captured the nebulous and ambiguous reality that is at the heart of Proulx' dream sequences, it would have been fantastic.  Knowing how difficult this is to pull through, I am somewhat relieved that Ang Lee did not make the attempt.

[bnjmn3]

Ang's film is our view from the outside in....including such deep thoughts and awareness as dreams would have brought us too close..closer than Ang wanted to go. I keep avoiding the short story...can't read it yet. Great thread.

[jakeofrome]

I know I'm a bit late, but thanks for this topic.
I wanted to write something about the dreams thingy - and was smart enough to make a search on the forum before opening a new topic (not that I'm snart often, LOL).

I happend to read the story for the first time in its original form as it was published on the New Yorker - without the intro. Every time I read it again now, I have a feeling I was lucky to have missed that intro the first time.

I agree that any dream scene would have been very hard to incorporate in the movie.
But I have to say it is one of my favourite part in the short story. Every time I read it, it is the only relief to a deep sense of pain. So yes, I miss it a bit in the movie. But I also like the idea that it makes me go back and read the short story once again every time I see the film.

To me, what is precious it the idea that Jack start appearing in Ennis' dream is a sort of ultimate consequence of the "I swear.." thing. I love the idea that the dead Jack is still able to "act" in the story, so to speak. Relief, even if quite small.

[tpe]

Thanks bnjmn3 and jakeofrome for sharing your thoughts.

Everytime I read the passage in the story where the can of beans beside Jack transforms itself into a tire iron -- it tears me apart.  It would have been brutal to have realized this juxtaposition on film.  The ending of the movie was sad enough.  To have added this dream transformation would have killed at least half the audence...

[jakeofrome]

To have added this dream transformation would have killed at least half the audence...

Well, considering how much the movie affect "us" all, I wouldn't have argued if it made some more "victims"