Topic: Changing faces

[babytammy7]

First of all, MPJ sorry for create a topic very similar to yours (Changing the sex of our boys); I've stolen your idea of changing things!!! 

Well, there are many brokies voting at the topic "Who the hell is more sexy, Ennis or Jack?" ; and also there are so many people thinking about Ennis and Jack weren't really in love, at least not at the mountain, and they only felt sexual attraction for each other; and this affirmation (intense sexual attraction) is understandable if you watch the incredible physical appearance of Heath's Ennis and Jake's Jack. Jake's eyes and Heath's smile have stolen the hearts of thousands of people, converting Ennis and Jack into 2 unforgettable icons of love.

However, Annie said that Jake was so much handsome to be Jack; and if you read the SS you can see that Ennis and Jack are very different from Heath and Jake; in fact, Ennis and Jack weren't nice and handsome.
Ennis was lean, lanky, with arched legs and a nose with a big bridge. When he grew old his nose was broken, being more ugly, and one of his eyes was almost closed always 'cause he had one tumor in that eyelid.
Jack was short and thick (fat?), with ugly teeth and strong sweat.
Well, as you see, they weren't very handsome......So that makes me think about they were really in love and not only was a sexual attraction, 'cause for Jack, for example (he was more bold), there was many boys to choose somebody more sexy. I mean, if you meet Heath and Jake is easy to fall in love, but if you could meet the real Ennis and Jack from the SS...it would be so different..true?

So here is my question: If they were like they were in the SS, I mean, if they had the original physical appearance described in the SS, would you love them as much as you do now? Would you be still dreaming about them everyday? Would have the film been so moving for you? Brokies, would you be still voting who the most sexy is?

My answer is YES!! 'Cause I don't believe in physical appearances (if you would know my story.....), and before watching the film I didn't like Heath and Jake's faces and bodies (I like boys really different from them), especially I didn't like Jake (those eyebrows, those moles, those thin lips.....he wasn't my type). However, after the first viewing I felt in love with Jack, really in love, and I loved (and I will love always...) his smiles, his voice, his tenderness, his crazy and sweet things, his everything!!! So I think I would have loved him although he had had another appearance 'cause he was dreamer, charming, loving, caring, moving, brave, fighter and sweet, and I really love men like him.   

So for me their faces or their bodies doesn't really matter. What about you?

[tpe]

Ah babytammy7.  I think there has been an old thread here which asked the same question: would we have responded the same way had the characters been more true to the short story?

I'll try to find this old thread and perhaps try to merge it with this one. 

I think I can remember my old response:  the reaction would be different, but I still think the power of the short story would show through. 

It is clear that the film was more lyrical than the ss, just as the ss was more visceral and raw than the movie.  In fact, we react slightly differently to the ss and film.  But just because we react differently doesn't mean that we don't love either one. 

[babytammy7]

Ah babytammy7.  I think there has been an old thread here which asked the same question: would we have responded the same way had the characters been more true to the short story?

I'll try to find this old thread and perhaps try to merge it with this one. 

I think I can remember my old response:  the reaction would be different, but I still think the power of the short story would show through. 

It is clear that the film was more lyrical than the ss, just as the ss was more visceral and raw than the movie.  In fact, we react slightly differently to the ss and film.  But just because we react differently doesn't mean that we don't love either one. 

Thank you so much Tpe!!! You always are there 

[welshwitch]

The ss is harsher and at the same time more literary than the movie - whats emphasised isn't really appearance, of people or places, or at least not their beauty. Movies have to make it in the commercial world - this was already a controversial subject, so iit was probably essential to use beautiful settings, specially now there's so much interest in unspoilt areas, and attractive actors for the two leads. You might also if you saw the story as having intrinsic beauty want to make it appear as beautiful as possible - art often surrounds the object of love with an idealised setting or presents it as the ideal of perfection.   

In life, however, the appearance of the one you love is irrelevant - you can see beauty in a beloved face when no-one else can.

[myprivatejack]

First of all, MPJ sorry for create a topic very similar to yours (Changing the sex of our boys); I've stolen your idea of changing things!!! 

Well, there are many brokies voting at the topic "Who the hell is more sexy, Ennis or Jack?" ; and also there are so many people thinking about Ennis and Jack weren't really in love, at least not at the mountain, and they only felt sexual attraction for each other; and this affirmation (intense sexual attraction) is understandable if you watch the incredible physical appearance of Heath's Ennis and Jake's Jack. Jake's eyes and Heath's smile have stolen the hearts of thousands of people, converting Ennis and Jack into 2 unforgettable icons of love.

However, Annie said that Jake was so much handsome to be Jack; and if you read the SS you can see that Ennis and Jack are very different from Heath and Jake; in fact, Ennis and Jack weren't nice and handsome.
Ennis was lean, lanky, with arched legs and a nose with a big bridge. When he grew old his nose was broken, being more ugly, and one of his eyes was almost closed always 'cause he had one tumor in that eyelid.
Jack was short and thick (fat?), with ugly teeth and strong sweat.
Well, as you see, they weren't very handsome......So that makes me think about they were really in love and not only was a sexual attraction, 'cause for Jack, for example (he was more bold), there was many boys to choose somebody more sexy. I mean, if you meet Heath and Jake is easy to fall in love, but if you could meet the real Ennis and Jack from the SS...it would be so different..true?

So here is my question: If they were like they were in the SS, I mean, if they had the original physical appearance described in the SS, would you love them as much as you do now? Would you be still dreaming about them everyday? Would have the film been so moving for you? Brokies, would you be still voting who the most sexy is?

My answer is YES!! 'Cause I don't believe in physical appearances (if you would know my story.....), and before watching the film I didn't like Heath and Jake's faces and bodies (I like boys really different from them), especially I didn't like Jake (those eyebrows, those moles, those thin lips.....he wasn't my type). However, after the first viewing I felt in love with Jack, really in love, and I loved (and I will love always...) his smiles, his voice, his tenderness, his crazy and sweet things, his everything!!! So I think I would have loved him although he had had another appearance 'cause he was dreamer, charming, loving, caring, moving, brave, fighter and sweet, and I really love men like him.   

So for me their faces or their bodies doesn't really matter. What about you?

Hi,Tammy¡Don´t worry,I´m not angry for having "stolen" a little my thread... ^^) Well,I remember that in BBM ss it´s written that Jack is a little fat in hips zone,but he was fairly good-looking in spite of his great tooth;as for Ennis,AP said Heath Ledger was so similar to her character´s appearance that she wrote in book´s dedication for him:"For Ennis",instead of"For Heath"...So,perhaps the idea of an attraction, letting aside now the love,is not so far away.
But I really agree with you in the sense that if they fell in love was esencially because both of them have a great  affection and tenderness need-also Ennis,in spite of his "macho" man shield-and in their own way,both of them are able to give all this to the other:to care for their respective past,to look after their present needs and to think about a future in which each one of them have a place in the other´s life-no matter in which sense-.And when things are like this,is easy to fall in love with this lack of explanations of WHY that love and other human feelings and reactions have,¿no?
Of course,I´ve met people who have fallen in love with the personage way of being through Jake or Heath´s appearance,in a curious and strange hotchpothch,and I  also said in another thread if we thought we have been so moving for the story´s tragedy if they had got the Aguirre´s appearance.We hadn´t fallen in love with them for his beauty,but,had we fallen for their love and the way of showing it?I don´t want to have some "ennemies"between Brokies
  but I´m afraid neither so many gay men nor so many straight women had cared a less for the story development and ending after so many months...I´m a little "destroyer" today...

[tpe]

Thank you so much Tpe!!! You always are there 

Sorry babytammy7, I can't seem to find the thread that I thought came close to what you ask here.  The only one I found that was a bit related was:

http://ennisjack.com/index.php?topic=505.msg3334#msg3334

Perhaps the relevant posts I remember were posts in a much larger thread that I have not been able to trace as of now -- else, it may have been a thread no in the "Cahracters, Quotes & Scenes" part of the forum.

In any case, we can continue the discussion here. 

[lamusica]

I understand what you  mean, babytammy, but I agree with tpe.  We quickly and readily overlook any physical problems with the person we love.
The first time I saw Yossi and Jaeger, I didn't think Yossi was very good looking.  After seeing it a few times, I saw behind or beyond his face and saw the love in it for Jaeger.
Granted, Heath and Jake are exceptionally good looking men, in my opinion, but any two men who had played the parts as well as they did would have won me over.  I fell in love with the deeds, the depth of emotion, the strength of their need for one another, much more than with their faces.
There are people who love others with serious disabilities and disfigurements.  They never see the problem -- only the beauty of the soul within.

[LuvJackNasty]

Not much to add except that I would love these two because they are Jack and Ennis. I fell in love with the characters not the looks. For me in real life, looks only go so far beauty on the inside goes much further.

Edited to add: I was asked a similar question last year by those I had to put in their place about this movie (at work). They asked me if they weren't good looking would I still like this movie. I forgot the two actors they named in their question but my answer was that I didn't care who had the roles. If the acting was as believable and as well done it didn't matter who was in it. Then I got asked if the story was about two women instead of two men would I still like it. My answer was pretty much the same in that it was the story and the emotions that it evoked in me that got me. Jake and Heath are good looking (to put it mildly) but they became Jack and Ennis in this- sometimes I try to take a step back and look at it with different eyes- looking for a hint of Jake or Heath and I can't see it.

[jackster]

This is an interesting question – isn’t it somewhat directly related to the basic differences in the two mediums, literature and cinema? Words can convey strong and powerful images, but ultimately those “images” are in ones own mind and can be made attractive or not by each of us. The features described by Proulx in the SS are not necessarily unattractive, “high arched nose, and a little cave chested” (Ennis) could be very interesting, and as pointed out, Heath is not far off this mark.

Cinema is much more literal in its projection of what is thought of as attractive. Jake & Heath and their gear are seen as attractive to our modern eyes, trained by years of advertising art, Levi’s, The Gap, A&F, LLBean, etc., but 100 years ago they may have been perceived as possibly too ethnic (Jake) or too unsubstantial (Heath). When images are crafted though detailed and careful framing they can project a broad array of emotions that are not easily conveyed in literature. The beauty and emotion of the SNIT would be very difficult to fully convey in words.

IMHO because of the cultural “baggage” that was being carried by the SS (homosexuality) it became critical for the major protagonists in the movie to be visually appealing because to many people they would be seen as socially unappealing. In this way the visual reality is used as a tool to help overcome the stigma of the social reality. This is not uncommon in cinema and generally works quite well as it certainly did in BBM. I feel this helped a broad spectrum of the population find deep empathy with the story, people who otherwise would have been unable to relate with the plight of the main characters.

Even though I would like to think that I’m as open minded as you BT7, not being affected by both the beauty of the boys as well as the beauty of the places. But I think I’d only be foolin’ myself – I was swept off my feet by this visual feast.

[tpe]

I understand what you  mean, babytammy, but I agree with tpe.  We quickly and readily overlook any physical problems with the person we love.
The first time I saw Yossi and Jaeger, I didn't think Yossi was very good looking.  After seeing it a few times, I saw behind or beyond his face and saw the love in it for Jaeger.
Granted, Heath and Jake are exceptionally good looking men, in my opinion, but any two men who had played the parts as well as they did would have won me over.  I fell in love with the deeds, the depth of emotion, the strength of their need for one another, much more than with their faces.
There are people who love others with serious disabilities and disfigurements.  They never see the problem -- only the beauty of the soul within.

It's very much like love, isn't it?  Often, we fall in love with the person who isn't exactly our ideal physical "type".  But we are won over by something deeper.

How would we have reacted it Ennis and Jack were played by, say, Brad Pitt and Orlando Bloom?  Forgetting the fact that they might be considered too old for the roles, I would wager that when BBM came out, they were infinitely more well known and perhaps more widely considered much more handsome than Heath and Jake. 

So I think we have hindsight in all this.  We call heath and Jake handsome relative to the description in the short story.  But I think we fell in love with much much more than their good looks.

We fell in love with their characters, I guess.  As I said in another post, I think, for example, that there is much more to Jake in Jack than there is in the Jack of the short story.  Well, Jack was a bit shadowy in much of the short story anyway. 

What we see and what we fell in love with had a lot to do with the art and artistry of our two actors.  Proulx certainly loved them, even though things were not exactly what she envisioned them to be.

 

[lamusica]

You bring up another interesting point, Thomas -- that the story really is Ennis's story.  He is the one Annie chose as the main character.  We see both men pretty equally in the film, but the ss surely is Ennis all the way.  Therefore, Jack's character is seen through his eyes more than through the eyes of the omniscient story-teller.  Sometimes it is good to keep that in mind when we discuss motivation and outcomes in BBM.  Thanks for bringing that up again.

[tpe]

You bring up another interesting point, Thomas -- that the story really is Ennis's story.  He is the one Annie chose as the main character.  We see both men pretty equally in the film, but the ss surely is Ennis all the way.  Therefore, Jack's character is seen through his eyes more than through the eyes of the omniscient story-teller.  Sometimes it is good to keep that in mind when we discuss motivation and outcomes in BBM.  Thanks for bringing that up again.

Yes, the SS was taken from Ennis's point of view, no?  In a rela sense (in both ss and film), he was the storyteller.

[welshwitch]

In the ss we hear about Ennis's thoughts and dreams - we see Jack from Ennis's POV.Given the nature of the character, it's essential that AP gets behind Ennis's eyes or into his head or whatever you want to call it - he is so monosyllabic it would be hard to know him in any other way, whereas Jack says more and acts more openly - just the fact that he moves about the country where Ennis doesn't tells you a lot about him.

[tpe]

In the ss we hear about Ennis's thoughts and dreams - we see Jack from Ennis's POV.Given the nature of the character, it's essential that AP gets behind Ennis's eyes or into his head or whatever you want to call it - he is so monosyllabic it would be hard to know him in any other way, whereas Jack says more and acts more openly - just the fact that he moves about the country where Ennis doesn't tells you a lot about him.

The only real exception to this rule is the beautiful passage of the Dozy Embrace, no?

Otherwise, the ss by and large takes Ennis's point of view.

[Tony]

     Hi, BabyTammy!!!  Have to agree with Jackster that it was important to make the guys appealing both to go along with modern culture and
also to undermine homophobia.  But they didn't want them TOO appealing, as that could provoke fear.  Ever notice how the nude scenes
(bathing and skinny-dipping) are not particularly erotic?  Who would get turned on by Jake squatting by the river-hardly his best pose.
This may have been intentional, so as to convey romance much more than threateningly erotic body angles.
   Also, they weren't always good-looking.  Heath could be a little goony at times, and even ugly (check out the scene in the store where
he's arguing with Alma to take the kids-him are uggly).  And look at the pudge on Jake & the sideburns, in later years.  They managed to
pull it off, I think,---scenes of memorable good looks and more realistic scenes where they were plainer-looking.  As Brokies, we blank
those out.
    But beauty is found in any loved one, so the other post, along those lines, covers the larger territory, that you had wanted to bring up.
Besides, need trumps beauty in most of the cards we are dealt.

[Tony]

      BabyTammy---you haven't been on this thread and you started it!!!!  Maybe the last post (mine) didn't really answer your question,
which was would we love them as much if they were less good-looking.   And your friends (us) have been wandering all over the map.
     I know I would have loved them as much, but in a more realistic way, less romanticized.  There was a movie, "Midnight Cowboy"
where I think it was Al Pacino who played a scroungy, unattractive sidekick to the hero.  His name was Ratso, and he died on a bus to
Florida, incontinent, in his friend's arms.  Even his personality was warped.  And yet the hero loved him and so did the audience.
     So, maybe it's the type of love that would change-more realistic, more accepting, but still very, very strong.  Hope that makes up
for not paying attention to your original question.  You are so very kind and sweet of a person, that I hope no offense was given, if there
was a little wandering.  Tony.

[babytammy7]

      BabyTammy---you haven't been on this thread and you started it!!!!  Maybe the last post (mine) didn't really answer your question,
which was would we love them as much if they were less good-looking.   And your friends (us) have been wandering all over the map.
     I know I would have loved them as much, but in a more realistic way, less romanticized.  There was a movie, "Midnight Cowboy"
where I think it was Al Pacino who played a scroungy, unattractive sidekick to the hero.  His name was Ratso, and he died on a bus to
Florida, incontinent, in his friend's arms.  Even his personality was warped.  And yet the hero loved him and so did the audience.
     So, maybe it's the type of love that would change-more realistic, more accepting, but still very, very strong.  Hope that makes up
for not paying attention to your original question.  You are so very kind and sweet of a person, that I hope no offense was given, if there
was a little wandering.  Tony.

Hi there Tony!!!

Sorry so much for my absence!!!! I have had some difficult days, you know, crying for somebody and that. But, really, all of you have answered my question, and that answer is the same as mine, so we will love them whatever their physical appearance were, and that is wonderful for me 'cause it's means that you all are very sensitive and tolerant people, instead of superficial and materialistic like so many other people are. So I'm so happy for your answers!!!  And yeah, I know Midnight Cowboy; a great film too.

  Tony, thank you so much for you so beautiful words: you make smile  I've read every posts you have wrote in this forum, all of them written with depth and beauty, and every time I wanted to write a reply to you 'cause I had so many things in my mind and I needed to say them to you, but my horrible english didn't let me do it. Sorry so much for that. But please, believe me, I'm always around here, reading all brokies' posts, all of yours.
A big kiss sweetie