Author Topic: Timeline on BBM (Read 66469 times)

jerasjr · « **on:** Feb 25, 2006, 10:42 PM »

When I read postings about the first tent scene happening one night and the second tent scene the next, I don''t agree. They were on BBM tending the sheep during the period that it was possible for the sheep to be there and be able to feed before bad weather made it impossible. Probably at the very least that would have been 3 months or even longer. Ennis got upset when they were going to lose a months pay. Given Ennis' reticence, think that it would have taken him a longer time to make the move back to Jack, even though felt he knew he was going to make that move at some time.

Walford · « **Reply #1 on:** Feb 25, 2006, 10:46 PM »

I got the feeling that Ennis stayed up on the mountain for a few days before returning to the base camp.

ethan · « **Reply #2 on:** Feb 25, 2006, 11:22 PM »

Quote from: jerasjr on Feb 25, 2006, 10:42 PM

Given Ennis' reticence, think that it would have taken him a longer time to make the move back to Jack, even though felt he knew he was going to make that move at some time.

That is what I thought. Thanks, jerasjr. Posts here suggest that 2nd tent night happened next day after the first tent.

jimmypage · « **Reply #3 on:** Feb 26, 2006, 05:50 AM »

Quote from: ethan on Feb 25, 2006, 11:22 PM

Quote from: jerasjr on Feb 25, 2006, 10:42 PM
Given Ennis' reticence, think that it would have taken him a longer time to make the move back to Jack, even though felt he knew he was going to make that move at some time.

That is what I thought. Thanks, jerasjr.

Maybe. I note that the first night is a clear full moon night, while the second tent night is very dark ...
and moreover Ennis wears two different shirts: the Shirt during the second night and the other one in the first night and when he speaks with Jack about the one-shot thing.
Anyway these are not really proofs.

chowhound · « **Reply #4 on:** Jul 09, 2010, 04:01 PM »

Thanks, LC, for your interesting contributions to this topic. Like you, I'm very impressed by Jackster's detailed knowledge. I,too, hadn't realized that there was a date on the flyer that came with the returned postcard until Jackster pointed it out yesterday.

Below is a complete timeline I created for Brokeback Mountain some while ago. I'm afraid it's rather long but it does cover the period you're talking about in your recent post. I thought you and Jackster might like to have a look at it. Any comments or suggested corrections most welcome but maybe for that should we create a new topic?

A Timeline for Brokeback Mountain.

In the following timeline, ss=short story and sp=screen play. All quotations are from “Brokeback Mountain:Story to Screenplay”.

1941 K.E. del Mar born

1943 Jack and Ennis born (Sept.-Dec.)

1952. Ennis and K.E. forced to look at Earl's mutilated body by their father

1957 ? Ennis's parents killed

1963:

May 7 Jack and Ennis meet

May 8 Full moon

May 24 Elk and potato dinner

June 7 TSN1. Full moon

June 8 TSN2

June. Ennis and Jack switch routines

June. Ennis and Jack move the sheep further up the mountains

July. Aguirre spying

July. Hailstorm and sheep tangle

August. Snow. Forced to leave Brokeback. *1.

Nov. Ennis marries Alma Beers

1964:

Jan. Alma pregnant

spring: Ennis employed shovelling asphalt

spring: Ennis and Alma see "Surf Party" (1964)

spring: Jack returns to Brokeback

autumn: Alma jr. born

1965:

winter: Jenny born

1966:

July 4. Alma, Ennis and the two children attend Independence Day celebrations.

August. Jack meets Lureen at rodeo

1967:

Jan. ?Bobby born.

Sept 24 Jack and Ennis re-unite in Riverton

Sept 25-? Wyoming campsite

[1967-83:
"Years on years they worked their way through the high meadows and mountain drainages, horse-packing into the Big Horns, Medicine Bows, south end of the Gallatins, Absarokas, Granites, Owl Creeks, the Bridger-Teton Range, the Freezeouts and the Shirleys, Ferisses and the Rattlesnakes, Salt River Range, into the Wind Rivers over and again, the Sierra Madres, Gros Ventres, the Washakies, Laramies, but never returning to Brokeback." ss. p.17]

1971:

Girls on swing scene

Jack driving tractor scene.

1972:

July Ennis receives postcard from Jack ("See you in a couple of weeks") [postmark: July, 1972.]

July/August Blue parka scene. 14 hour drive for Jack.

July/August Ennis leaves for Big Horn mountains. Almost forgets his tackle box.

July/August Jack and Ennis meet up in the Big Horn Mountains. ["Jack comes out of the tent, the intense pleasure of being with Ennis all over his face." sp. p.58]

August/September Jack with Bobby probably driving one of the "new models" Lureen mentions to Jack before he leaves for the Big Horns.

1973:

Alma: "We could still smarten up, head over to the church social" (sp. p.60).An episode from "Kojack" is playing on the TV.
-

Ennis: "If you don't want no more of my kids, I'll be happy to leave you alone." (sp. p.60)

1975:

Nov. 6 Alma and Ennis divorce. *2.

Nov. Jack drives up to be with Ennis. Rejected.

Nov. Jack goes to Mexico.

Dec. Jack meets up with Ennis? Jack says "see you next month, then..." (sp. p.63) in the "rejection" scene. *2.

1976

April. Jack receives the “divorce” postcard. Drives up to be with Ennis. Rejected.

April. Jack goes to Mexico.

May. Jack meets up with Ennis? Jack says “see you next month, then…”(sp.p.63) in the “rejection” scene.*2.

1977:

Nov. Thanksgiving weekend. The two Thanksgiving dinners.

1978:

Mountain scene. Jack suggests that Ennis might move to Texas.
-
Ennis meets Cassie.
-
Jack and Lureen have dinner with the Malones. [Banner behind bar reads "Welcome to the 1978 Benefit Dinner, The Childress County Children's Home"]

1979:

Bar scene where Cassie asks Alma Jr. "...your daddy ever gonna see fit to settle down again?" (sp. p.77) [sp. notes that Alma is 15]

1983:

May. Hail Strew River Drainage. Final time together:

(a) Jack: "tell you what...truth is, sometimes I miss you so bad I can hardly stand it." (sp. p.80)
(b) Asleep in tent, Ennis curled around Jack.
(c) The quarrel. Jack: "come here...it's alright, it's all right...damn you Ennis". (sp. p.83)
(d) Flashback to Brokeback, 1963. The Dozy Embrace.
(e) Jack watches Ennis's truck as it drives away.

July. ? Final scene with Cassie

August/Sept. ? Jack dies.*3.

October/early Nov. Ennis phone call to Lureen [Ennis's postcard to Jack had proposed they meet at Pine Creek on Nov 7] *4.

Nov. ?Ennis visits the Twists

1984

spring: Alma Jr. visits Ennis. [Alma is 19]

June 5 Alma presumably marries Kurt.

NOTES:

*1 I prefer these dates with the first full moon we see occurring in May and TSN1 taking place at the next full moon in June. I chose the May date in part because, when Jack and Ennis are first going up the mountain, the foliage has the very light green look of spring (May) rather than the somewhat darker green of full summer (June). It also gives Jack and Ennis a longer time together after TSN2 before they are forced to leave Brokeback. But making everything a month - or full moon - later also works.

*2 One possibility is that what the judge says here is an “interlocutory” decree and not a final decree. The final decree would then have been granted some months later – say, in March or April of the following year. If Ennis sent Jack that postcard shortly after receiving the final decree, then Jack would have probably driven up in April and his reference to their meeting next month would point to May.

Another possibility is that the judge’s pronouncement is final but that Ennis spends some time getting things sorted out before sending Jack that postcard. This again could result in Jack’s driving up in April.

In general, a number of Brokies feel that it is much more likely that the meeting referred to would take place in the spring and not in wintery December. There is some textual support for this. In one of the earlier scripts for Brokeback Mountain, Jack’s line reads: “I’ll see you first week in June, then.”

*3 The exact time of Jack's death is unknown. Jack has presumably gone to Lightning Flat for a few days before heading back to Texas after his May meeting with Ennis which is when he must have said to his father that he would be returning with "another fella" (sp. p.90). OMT then goes on to say "...but like most of Jack's ideas it never come to pass". (sp. p.90). Therefore, I think a fair amount of time must have passed between Jack's offer and his death. If Jack had died shortly after his return to Texas, surely OMT would have put it differently.

*4. I'm assuming here that Ennis's postcard - the one stamped "deceased" - is returned to Ennis before Nov. 7.

jackster · « **Reply #5 on:** Jul 09, 2010, 07:06 PM »

Whoee - Yeah!!
This is remarkable CH!
Gonna' take me all weekend to go through this and study your hard work and dedication.

lancecowboy · « **Reply #6 on:** Jul 09, 2010, 08:32 PM »

I join in Jackster's applause.

But would you mind checking the list? I think there is a bit of a mix up.

The divorce scene is 1975. What's the deal with 1976?

The final confrontation is in 1981, according to the screenplay...but I will double check and get back to you.

lancecowboy · « **Reply #7 on:** Jul 10, 2010, 05:04 AM »

Here is an excellent timeline created by enniscake at LJ - I am presenting it in a table instead of a slide show

start

Witnessing Rich and Earl

Meeting in Signal Wyoming

Herding on Brokeback Mountain

Working together

No more beans

Came upon a bear

Hee haw!

Don't mind switching

Spurring 'im on

Watch out ...

Get in here Ennis!

I ain't queer

Nobody's business but ours

Peeping Joe

sleeping on your feet cowboy

Scarring off the sheep

Brrrrrr

Come on down

Time to go cowboy

You coming back next year?

Kiss the bride

Feel the baby

Have you seen Ennis Del Mar?

What you waitin' for cowboy, a mating call?

I would if I have three hands

4th of July

Rodeo will get 'em

Reunion

Motel Siesta

Sweet life, just like this, always

Come back here Alma!

Texans don't drink coffee?

Divorced

See you next month then

Sit down!

Jack Nasty Twist

You ever get the feeling?

drinking beer after beer

do some fishing...

Not the marrying kind

Last Night

I wish I can quit you

Two shirts

Jack I Swear

lancecowboy · « **Reply #8 on:** Jul 10, 2010, 05:06 AM »

I can see how the year could be different at the end. I found this other time line at bettermost, which says the book put Jack's death in 1983, while the movie put it earlier.

Timeline in the lives of Jack and Ennis
by - surf501 (Mon Dec 19 2005 20:39:12 )

Here goes after seeing the movie four times (EDIT: Have now seen movie 9 times), and reading the published version of the screenplay, certain year milestones are noted:

1963 - The year they meet, summer. After Brokeback, Ennis marries Alma the same year.

1964 - Ennis and Alma are married, and expecting their first child. The movie at the Drive-in is "Surf Party", from 1964.

1966 - Fourth of July when Ennis beats up the foul mouthed Biker. The announcer in the background clearly says Fourth of July, 1966. Same summer, Jack attempts to pick up Jimbo the Rodeo Clown, then meets Lureen.

1967 - Four years after the summer on Brokeback, Jack and Ennis reunite.

Flashback: 1952 - Ennis' father takes him and his brother to see the murdered body of Earl, the rancher. Ennis says he is 9 years old, which means he must have turned 20 later in the fall of 1963, after the summer on Brokeback, which makes sense since the book says he was "not yet twenty", which seems to imply "not yet twenty, but almost/soon will be".

1969 - The "Where's my Blue Parka?" scene. The screenplay is messed up here about dates. In the space of two pages the year changes from 1971 to 1969 to a scene with a wall calendar that says 1973! I think that 1969 is supposed to be the correct year, but then why would little Bobby need a tutor at age of only 2 or 3? In the movie though we are free to place it in any year we choose in a given late sixties, early 70's range.

1972 - The montage where Jack is letting bobby drive the tractor and Ennis is baling hay out the back of a truck

1973 - Ennis and Alma sit in their apartment on a Saturday night and watch an episode of "Kojack". Alma wants to go to the Church social, but Ennis dosesn't feel like hanging out with "..that fire and brimstone crowd."

1975 - Ennis and Alma divorce. The date is read by the judge. I believe it's in July. The 5th? (Correction: The date of their divorce is November 6th) Jack drives up to see Ennis, hoping this means they will now be able to live together.

1977 - Thanksgiving with Ennis at Alma and Monroe's, and at the Twist Household. You hear the year read by the announcer at the football game on television. The screenplay describes Bobby as being 10, which means he would have had to be two when he needed the tutor.

1978 - Jack and Ennis go to the Mountains again, "Aww go to hell Ennis Del Mar, you want to live your miserable *beep* life, go ahead..." Jack and Lureen meet Randall and LaShawn Malone, at a benefit dinner dance. Ennis meets Cassie.

1979 - Scene with Ennis, Cassie, and Alma Jr. at the bar. The screenplay describes Alma Jr. as 15 yrs,

1981/1983 - Jack and Ennis meet for the last time in 1981 (screenplay) or 1983 (book). In the book, Proulx says they go everywhere but back to Brokeback. In the movie it seems like they always return to Brokeback or we assume so. Cassie confronts Ennis in the Diner.

1982 - In the screenplay, this is the year Jack is killed, and Ennis has the phone coversation with Lureen. Ennis meets Jack's parents.

1984 - Final scenes in movie with Ennis and Alma Jr., the reversed shirts.

"You know it could be like this, just like this, always"
Black Hat White Hat

WildCatIsle · « **Reply #9 on:** Jul 10, 2010, 06:33 AM »

In 1963 JacK was 19 (SS). He dies 39 (1983)

chowhound · « **Reply #10 on:** Jul 10, 2010, 01:34 PM »

Quote from: lancecowboy on Jul 09, 2010, 08:32 PM

I join in Jackster's applause.

But would you mind checking the list? I think there is a bit of a mix up.

The divorce scene is 1975. What's the deal with 1976?

The final confrontation is in 1981, according to the screenplay...but I will double check and get back to you.

Hi LC:
   The trouble with relying exclusively on the dates in PSP (Published Screen Play) is that not all of them seem reliable. For example, PSP has Ennis's visit to the Twists taking place in 1982 and the very next scene, when Alma comes to call on her father, occurring two years later in 1984. To most, this seems highly unlikely. Likewise, the girls on the swing scene is dated 1971 but the very next scene, the "piss-ant" scene, is dated 1969.
   I'm sorry I caused confusion with my divorce dates. What I was trying to do was to provide alternative timelines for two different versions of the divorce scene. The first would see the divorce we see as "final". Jack, therefore, to see Ennis "next month", would have had to travel in December. I think this scenario is quite possible especially given Jack's later complaint that their meetings are "always in the friggin' cold weather".
   However, another Brokie, an American with a legal background, once suggested that what we are seeing in the divorce scene is not the final divorce but an earlier "interlocutory" stage with the divorce to be finalized some months later. If that's the case, then Ennis would have sent that postcard to Jack once the divorce was final and that, presumably, would be around March or April. I'm neither American nor a lawyer so have no way of assessing the likelihood of this being the case. But, in the interests of inclusivity, I thought I should offer it as an alternative.
   I expect you and others have noted that I neatly sidestepped the "Bobby the bastard" issue by simply stating:

1967:

Jan. ? Bobby born.

Personally, I find the idea that Lureen was pregnant when she first meets Jack and in desperate need of a husband quite attractive as it does explain certain other things, OLd Man Newsome's attitude towards Jack, for instance. However, does a footnote about this issue really belong in a timeline of Brokeback Mountain? What do you think?

If you or Chameau would like to move this and other discussions of the timeline to another topic, by all means do. However, I'm afraid I don't have the expertise to initiate such a move.

chowhound · « **Reply #11 on:** Jul 10, 2010, 02:16 PM »

Quote from: lancecowboy on Jul 10, 2010, 05:04 AM

Here is an excellent timeline created by enniscake at LJ - I am presenting it in a table instead of a slide show

start
Witnessing Rich and Earl
Meeting in Signal Wyoming
Herding on Brokeback Mountain
Working together
No more beans
Came upon a bear
Hee haw!
Don't mind switching
Spurring 'im on
Watch out ...
Get in here Ennis!
I ain't queer
Nobody's business but ours
Peeping Joe
sleeping on your feet cowboy
Scarring off the sheep
Brrrrrr
Come on down
Time to go cowboy
You coming back next year?
Kiss the bride
Feel the baby
Have you seen Ennis Del Mar?
What you waitin' for cowboy, a mating call?
I would if I have three hands
4th of July
Rodeo will get 'em
Reunion
Motel Siesta
Sweet life, just like this, always
Come back here Alma!
Texans don't drink coffee?

Divorced
See you next month then
Sit down!
Jack Nasty Twist
You ever get the feeling?
drinking beer after beer
do some fishing...
Not the marrying kind
Last Night
I wish I can quit you
Two shirts
Jack I Swear

Thanks for posting this illustrated version of the timeline LC. However, let me offer some corrections to make sure people don't get confused:

1. Alma says "Texans don't drink coffee" on Sept 25, 1967, not in the July of 1972. She says it when Ennis returns to their apartment after spending the night with Jack.

2. The scene identified as "Come back here Alma" takes place in 1971 not 1969. It is so dated in PSP (Published Screen Play) and, when there is no contradictory evidence, I see no point in changing PSP"s dating. 1971 also fits in with Alma Jr. being six in this scene. Alma Jr. was born late in 1964.

3. The two Thanksgiving dinners take place in 1977, not 1976. PSP so dates them and again I see no point in altering that date.

4. "You ever get that feeling..." This scene between Ennis and Jack takes place in in 1978, not 1977. Again, that's where PSP puts it and I see no point in moving it back a year.

lancecowboy · « **Reply #12 on:** Jul 10, 2010, 02:31 PM »

Quote from: chowhound on Jul 10, 2010, 01:34 PM

Hi LC:
The trouble with relying exclusively on the dates in PSB is that not all of them seem reliable. For example, PSB has Ennis's visit to the Twists taking place in 1982 and the very next scene, when Alma comes to call on her father, occurring two years later in 1984. To most, this seems highly unlikely.

Hey, CH. I never thought much about the dates and times before. I was more focused on the plot and characters. Thank you for bringing these items to mind. I don't know if Ang Lee and company put much thought into the dates and continuity, and if they did, whether any of the discrepancies between the two canonical sources are accidental or intentional. It would be interesting to hear from someone in the know, perhaps those who worked on the script.

Quote from: chowhound on Jul 10, 2010, 01:34 PM

I'm sorry I caused confusion with my divorce dates. What I was trying to do was to provide alternative timelines for two different versions of the divorce scene. The first would see the divorce we see as "final". Jack, therefore, to see Ennis "next month", would have had to travel in December. I think this scenario is quite likely especially given Jack's later complaint that their meetings are "always in the friggin' cold weather".

No worries and no need to apologize. As I said, I was not aware of the discrepancies so I am thankful for your attention to detail. I don't see much impact on the plot or characters of the story, whatever the dates or alternative in the divorce scene. I doubt he drove there for 14 hours in December however, since Wyoming would be snow covered by that time. See Riverton Climate Report.

Quote from: chowhound on Jul 10, 2010, 01:34 PM

However, another Brokie, an American with a legal background, once suggested that what we are seeing in the divorce scene is not the final divorce but an earlier "interlocutory" stage with the divorce to be finalized some months later. If that's the case, then Ennis would have sent that postcard to Jack once the divorce was final and that, presumably, would be around March or April. I'm neither American nor a lawyer so have no way of assessing the likelihood of this being the case. But, in the interests of inclusivity, I thought I should offer it as an alternative.
I expect you and others have noted that I neatly sidestepped the "Bobby the bastard" issue by simply stating:

1967:

Jan. ? Bobby born.

Personally, I find the idea that Lureen was pregnant when she first meets Jack and in desperate need of a husband quite attractive as it does explain certain other things, OLd Man Newsome's attitude towards Jack, for instance. However, does a footnote about this issue really belong in a timeline of Brokeback Mountain? What do you think?

I've never heard of the Bobby Bastard theory. This is the first. I've always thought Bobby was Jack's son. By all indications, i.e. the way Jack treats Bobby, the concern he shows regarding his education, the way he showed him how to drive the tractor, the way he referred to Bobby as his son, etc, Jack thought Bobby was his. I would think so too. As for the dates, etc. I will need to study the material and timeline in depth to have an opinion on that. I would be surprised if Annie and Ang Lee would introduce such a spurious element into the story, one which really has no relevance to the love between Ennis and Jack.

Quote from: chowhound on Jul 10, 2010, 01:34 PM

If you or Chameau would like to move this and other discussions of the timeline to another topic, by all means do. However, I'm afraid I don't have the expertise to initiate such a move.

No worries. I trust cham to do what is right by us. He will make the necessary changes and whatever is appropriate.

Thank you again for bringing the timeline to the forum. I don't believe I've seen any discussion on it, and it is certainly worthwhile.

lancecowboy · « **Reply #13 on:** Jul 10, 2010, 02:38 PM »

Quote from: chowhound on Jul 10, 2010, 02:16 PM

Thanks for posting this illustrated version of the timeline LC. However, let me offer some corrections to make sure people don't get confused:

1. Alma says "Texans don't drink coffee" on Sept 25, 1967, not in the July of 1972. She says it when Ennis returns to their apartment after spending the night with Jack.

2. The scene identified here as "Come back here Alma" takes place in 1971 not 1969. It is so dated in PSP (Published Screen Play) and, when there is no contradictory evidence, I see no point in changing PSP"s dating. 1971 also fits in with Alma Jr. being six in this scene. Alma Jr. was born late in 1964.

3. The two Thanksgiving dinners take place in 1977, not 1976. PSP so dates them and again I see no point in altering that date.

4. "You ever get that feeling..." This scene between Ennis and Jack takes place in in 1978, not 1977. Again, that's where PSP puts it and I see no point in moving it back a year.

The captions are mine, so I take responsibility if any of them are in the wrong place, illustrating a photo from a different scene. "Texans don't drink coffee?" was from the day after the reunion, so you are correct. I think that photo of Alma is from the scene when Ennis for his tackle box. "You forgot somethin'?" would be correct, yes?

The order of the scenes and the dates are from enniscake, and it depends on which source he used. Do you mean PSP as in the screen play found with the short story in the book which also contains the three essays from Annie, Diana, and Larry? I have that book, and I will verify the timeline(s) with it one day.

Thanks for keeping a close eye on it.

lancecowboy · « **Reply #14 on:** Jul 11, 2010, 07:22 AM »

I think I figured out the problem. The screen play says Ennis visited Lightening Flat in 1982. But the old man Twist said Jack told 'em "this spring" bringing another fella. The scene of Ennis's visit was clearly not in the winter, so it is likely Ennis was visiting either in the fall of 1981 or spring of 1982. However, if 1982, then old man Twist should have said "last spring" so I am inclined to think the screen play made a mistake. It makes more sense for Jack to have died in the early summer of 1981, and by late August, the post office returned the postcard, Jack had been cremated and half the ashes sent to Lightning Flat. A while later, since the Twists didn't have a telephone, and Ennis had to arrange for the visit by mail, a letter to request a visit, and a reply, by the time he went out to the farm, it was in October of 1981.

If Junior visited Ennis in 1984, it would make sense, too, that after Jack died, he was grieving and for two years Junior didn't get to see him much, or talked much about her own life.

I wonder if there are any other mistakes in the published screen play.

trekfan · « **Reply #15 on:** Jul 11, 2010, 12:27 PM »

thanks for the timeline thing. I really appreciate it

chowhound · « **Reply #16 on:** Jul 11, 2010, 02:20 PM »

Quote from: lancecowboy on Jul 10, 2010, 02:38 PM

The captions are mine, so I take responsibility if any of them are in the wrong place, illustrating a photo from a different scene. "Texans don't drink coffee?" was from the day after the reunion, so you are correct. I think that photo of Alma is from the scene when Ennis for his tackle box. "You forgot somethin'?" would be correct, yes?

The order of the scenes and the dates are from enniscake, and it depends on which source he used. Do you mean PSP as in the screen play found with the short story in the book which also contains the three essays from Annie, Diana, and Larry? I have that book, and I will verify the timeline(s) with it one day.

Thanks for keeping a close eye on it.

Hi LC...Now I've taken a another look at it, yes, I'm sure that screencap comes from the scene with the tackle box where Alma says "you forgettin' something?" (Was that the tackle box, I wonder, which concealed the fatal note?). And you're right - the correct date for this scene is 1972.

As far as texts of story and screenplay go, the only authoratative source is Brokeback Mountain: Story to Screenplay. When referring to or quoting from the short story
or screenplay, this is the one I always use. It is also the one I and others refer to as PSP (Published Screenplay). However, authoratative as the printed script might be, there are problems with the dates attached to certain scenes, so some of PSP's dates have to be treated with due caution.

rdx · « **Reply #17 on:** Jul 11, 2010, 03:47 PM »

Thanks guys, this is more than interesting!

I wouldn't be surprised if the writers left some obscurity/ambiguity in the film/screenplay intentionally.

lancecowboy · « **Reply #18 on:** Jul 12, 2010, 06:33 AM »

Quote from: chowhound on Jul 11, 2010, 02:20 PM

Hi LC...Now I've taken a another look at it, yes, I'm sure that screencap comes from the scene with the tackle box where Alma says "you forgettin' something?" (Was that the tackle box, I wonder, which concealed the fatal note?). And you're right - the correct date for this scene is 1972.

As far as texts of story and screenplay go, the only authoratative source is Brokeback Mountain: Story to Screenplay. When referring to or quoting from the short story or screenplay, this is the one I always use. It is also the one I and others refer to as PSP (Published Screenplay). However, authoratative as the printed script might be, there are problems with the dates attached to certain scenes, so some of PSP's dates have to be treated with due caution.

This reminds me of the old days when discussing Star Trek.

The Canonical version of different stories, etc.

I trust some literature class at some university one day will have a course to study Brokeback Mountain, under English or Americana Literature, or LGBT Literature, and our discussion will be very useful study material for future students.

I have to disagree about the authoritative source bit, though. In my humble opinion, Annie is the authoritative source on the short story, Larry MacMurtry and Diana Okassana are the authorities on the screen play, and Ang Lee is the sole authority on the movie.

It makes any definitive pronouncement difficult because, as we all know, there are a number of deliberate differences between the short story and the screen play and the final released movie. Brokeback Mountain was a evolving work of art, not a code of canons passed down from heaven, although I'd like to think the hand from heaven helped Annie write the story also helped Diana and Larry add flesh to the bony short story, and most of all, inspired Heath in his creation of Ennis, and Ang Lee to pull everything together in the final masterpiece.

chowhound · « **Reply #19 on:** Jul 12, 2010, 02:45 PM »

Quote from: lancecowboy on Jul 12, 2010, 06:33 AM

This reminds me of the old days when discussing Star Trek. The Canonical version of different stories, etc.

I trust some literature class at some university one day will have a course to study Brokeback Mountain, under English or Americana Literature, or LGBT Literature, and our discussion will be very useful study material for future students.

I have to disagree about the authoritative source bit, though. In my humble opinion, Annie is the authoritative source on the short story, Larry MacMurtry and Diana Okassana are the authorities on the screen play, and Ang Lee is the sole authority on the movie.

It makes any definitive pronouncement difficult because, as we all know, there are a number of deliberate differences between the short story and the screen play and the final released movie. Brokeback Mountain was a evolving work of art, not a code of canons passed down from heaven, although I'd like to think the hand from heaven helped Annie write the story also helped Diana and Larry add flesh to the bony short story, and most of all, inspired Heath in his creation of Ennis, and Ang Lee to pull everything together in the final masterpiece.

I think you're misunderstanding me, LC. In using the term "authoratative" I was referring to the text or texts, not to authorship. The screenplay text published in Brokeback Mountain:Story to Screenplay is the "authoratative" one, as it is the final one and therefore has greater "authority" than any of the earlier versions. Likewise, the text of the short story in Brokeback Mountain:Story to Screenplay is more "authoratative" than the earlier version published in the New Yorker as it is the final version of the short story and is in the "final" form that Annie Proulx wanted. Fortunately, with Brokeback, there's no confusion over authorship.

chowhound · « **Reply #20 on:** Jul 12, 2010, 03:20 PM »

The fact that there are demonstrable confusions with dates in parts of the published screenplay encouraged me and others, like enniscake, to suggest the change of the 1982 dates in the screenplay to 1983. The reasons for this change are threefold:

1. This is the date given for their final meeting in the short story:

In May of 1983 they spent a few cold days at a series of little icebound, no-name high lakes, then worked across into the Hail Strew River drainage.

2. Lureen says that Jack was 39 when he died. We know that Jack was 19 when he first met Ennis in 1963. Therefore the year must be that part of 1983 before Jack turns 40.

3. The screenplay dates Alma Jr.'s meeting with her father about her upcoming marriage as 1984. This is undoubtedly correct as Ennis mentions that Alma Jr.'s is now 19. To retain the screenplay's dating of Ennis's visit to the Twists as 1982 and to have this, the next scene, taking place in 1984, imposes a somewhat awkward 18 months or so between the two scenes. I find it artistically more appealing to have the winter visit to the Twists followed by the spring visit of Alma Jr.

lancecowboy · « **Reply #21 on:** Jul 12, 2010, 04:12 PM »

Quote from: chowhound on Jul 12, 2010, 03:20 PM

The fact that there are demonstrable confusions with dates in parts of the published screenplay encouraged me and others, like enniscake, to suggest the change of the 1982 dates in the screenplay to 1983.

I don't object to making changes, but then the timeline would no longer be authoritative, no matter how valid the reasons. We need to be rigorous in our terms here. The authoritative time is as agreed, the one(s) derived from the short story, the screen play, the movie, no matter how much they conflict or show inconsistencies.

Any changes would be tentative at best, subject to agreement. I am open to this, as long as the discussion is reasonable.

Quote from: chowhound on Jul 12, 2010, 03:20 PM

The reasons for this change are threefold:

1. This is the date given for their final meeting in the short story:

In May of 1983 they spent a few cold days at a series of little icebound, no-name high lakes, then worked across into the Hail Strew River drainage.

Well this definitely set the short story timeline against the screen play. Since there are more than one place that is significantly different between the two, I think it would be futile to try to force them into a consistent single timeline. IMO, we need to accept each as an independent piece of work, and follow the timeline for the shortstory when reading it, and follow another timeline for the movie when watching it. To mix the two would be to compromise the integrity of both.

Quote from: chowhound on Jul 12, 2010, 03:20 PM

2. Lureen says that Jack was 39 when he died. We know that Jack was 19 when he first met Ennis in 1963. Therefore the year must be that part of 1983 before Jack turns 40.

This depends on Jack's birthdate, which is unknown. Since they are definitely 19, and met in the summer, we can safely assume that BOTH their birthdays are in the latter half of the year 1953. This means that Jack's death can occur between the summer of 1982 and the summer of 1983 to be consistent with Lureen's statement. Since the final confrontation is in the spring of 1981, according to the screen play, there is definitely a problem. I'd prefer to think Lureen made a mistake in the middle of her stressful conversation with a stranger, than to think the screen play was wrong, in more than one place. So Jack died when he was only 38.

Quote from: chowhound on Jul 12, 2010, 03:20 PM

3. The screenplay dates Alma Jr.'s meeting with her father about her upcoming marriage as 1984. This is undoubtedly correct as Ennis mentions that Alma Jr.'s is now 19. To retain the screenplay's dating of Ennis's visit to the Twists as 1982 and to have this, the next scene, taking place in 1984, imposes a somewhat awkward 18 months or so between the two scenes. I find it artistically more appealing to have the winter visit to the Twists followed by the spring visit of Alma Jr.

Yes, I recall Ennis saying Alma being 19 during her visit. This can date her birth year with certainty, since the visit is clearly stated as 1984. So Alma was born in the early part of the year 1965.

lancecowboy · « **Reply #22 on:** Jul 12, 2010, 04:22 PM »

Quote from: chowhound on Jul 12, 2010, 02:45 PM

I think you're misunderstanding me, LC. In using the term "authoratative" I was referring to the text or texts, not to authorship. The screenplay text published in Brokeback Mountain:Story to Screenplay is the "authoratative" one, as it is the final one and therefore has greater "authority" than any of the earlier versions. Likewise, the text of the short story in Brokeback Mountain:Story to Screenplay is more "authoratative" than the earlier version published in the New Yorker as it is the final version of the short story and is in the "final" form that Annie Proulx wanted. Fortunately, with Brokeback, there's no confusion over authorship.

Nope. I understood you perfectly, and wanted to be clear on the meaning of authoritative, and also to stress on the fact that the screen play differs significantly in a number of places with the short story, and there fore we can NOT be expected to match the two perfectly. To do so is in my opinion a futile attempt.

chowhound · « **Reply #23 on:** Jul 13, 2010, 11:03 AM »

You understand, I trust, LC, that when I call a text "authoritative", I'm not thereby claiming it is necessarily without textual problems which would require editorial intervention if a text is being edited for publication. This happens all the time with the preparation of a Shakespeare play for publication. Take Hamlet for example.An editor can't have Hamlet both saying:

   O that this too to sullied flesh would melt
and
   O this too too solid flesh would melt

He has to make a choice between "sullied" and "solid" and, presumably, would also have to provide some rationale for the choice he has made.

However, if an editor had to reissue the screenplay as it appears in Brokeback Mountain: Story to Screenplay, I don't think there's any reason for scriptural invasions by the editor unless he wants to point out, by a footnote, such things as that although it is a deer which Ennis and Jack are supposed to kill in the script, it is not a deer but an elk that actually gets killed in the movie. However, with some of the dates published in the screenplay, it is a different story. Editorial intervention is there demanded. The best example of this occurs on pp. 54-56 of the screenplay. There the swing scene is dated 1971, and the next three scenes - the pissant scene, the Alma discovers postcard scene and the blue parka scene - are all dated 1969, though, in addition, in the blue parka scene there is a direction that there should be seen a wall calendar showing the date as 1973. Clearly an editor has to do something to untangle this confusion. What I have done (silently) in my timeline is to keep the girls on swing scene and the pissant scene in 1971 and move Alma's discovery of the postcard and the blue parka scene to 1972, chiefly because the postcard that Alma discovers in their mail is very prominently datestamped "July, 1972". (I don't have a footnote about all of this in my timeline, so maybe I should. What do you think?). Anyway, this is my editorial solution but if you were the editor, maybe there's a different solution you'd like too offer or discuss. Obviously things can't just be left to stand as they are.

This also applies to the later 1982 dates which I have silently amended to 1983. This is chiefly because in both short story and screenplay, Lureen says that Jack is 39. Both the short story and the screenplay date the Brokeback summer as 1963 and the short story establishes that Jack is nineteen then. Therefore his death must occur before that point in 1983 when he turns 40. Your suggestion that it is 1982 but that Lureen gets confused and says Jack is 39 when Jack is actually 38 I find unlikely and therefore unconvincing.

However, there is a more elegant way of resolving this problem which I've been thinking about over the last couple of days.What if there is a divergence between the short story and the screen play over Jack's age during that summer on Brokeback. What if he's twenty - and there is real textual support in the screen play for this - and not nineteen, then all these problems start to melt away. It still leaves that awkward time gap of about 18 months between the penultimate scene and the final scene but that's something I can live with. I'll think about this a little more before emending the timeline with new dates.

I find discussions of things like the timeline great fun. I hope you do too. Indeed, I was thinking that it might be interesting to look at the various ways that Ang Lee has of establishing time in the movie. It can be through seeing written things like datestamps on postcards or dates on banners or what an announcer says, but it can be also through the dates of a movie shown, like "Surf Party" or even the dates of certain cars or trucks.

lancecowboy · « **Reply #24 on:** Jul 13, 2010, 04:42 PM »

I merely pointed out that, to me, "authoritative" refers to someone who can state with authority, and to me, that has to be the original authors of the respective works...Annie Proulx for the short story, Dianna Okssana and Larry MacMurtry for the screen play, and Ang Lee for the movie. We agree that any deviations from the said authoritative versions (as released in the PSP and final cut of the movie) need to have footnote/explanation, and can no longer be considered the authoritative timeline.

I agree that each work of art has its respective discrepancies which detract from their realism, and it is this reason that I often overlook them, to focus on the story, and not be distracted from the suspense of disbelief so essential to dramatic performances. There is nothing that ruins a good story faster than the jolt of dissonance with the belief that it is real.

So the answer to your question, if I enjoy this, I have to answer with only a qualified yes. I enjoy it to the extent that I am a trivia hound dog, as Tony so fondly called me more than once. I enjoy digging up stuff to understand what lies beneath. To that extent, I enjoy finding out the connections between the events in each respective story, to make the story more interesting. On the other hand, when the discrepancies create the dissonance that detract from the realism of the story, I find it distasteful. It's like finding a blemish in a masterpiece. I wish there aren't any. But life is not perfect, and we just gotta stand it if we can't fix it.

I prefer to keep two separate timelines because the short story and the movie are sufficiently different that in my opinion it would be futile to try to reconcile the two. Cassie does not exist in the short story. And the motel scene is "sequentially" moved in the movie if I recall. I must confess that it has been a LONG time since I last watched the movie, and went over the screen play. I am far from familiar with the short story. So I appreciate learning all the interesting tidbits.

Having said that, it is also a lot of work, and I am not sure I enjoy it THAT much.

Kudos to you and anyone else who dedicated so much time and effort into this.

rdx · « **Reply #25 on:** Sep 25, 2010, 10:34 AM »

Once again, a minor observation of mine...

The calendar in this scene shows "January 1966" (it's visible on Blu-ray, I'll get that picture later on):

Per se, this doesn't 'prove' anything but it contradicts the above mentioned "Jun 1966: I would if I have three hands". Also the sceneries outdoors don't support January..or do they?

After all I'd say this is some intentional ambiguity despite Ang Lee's authenticity.

Further more, the calendar states that the January 1^st is Tuesday. The January 1^st fell on Tuesday only in 1963 in the 1960's. See 1966 here.

There's also this other calendar obscurity though in the screenplay (Story to Screenplay) only: it's supposed to be 1969 when Jack is looking for his blue parka while talking to Lureen but the calendar is supposed to show 1973. This scene is preceded by Alma reading the July 1972 postcard 'fish should be jumping'; the honey-honey continuation.

Or am I missing some point here?

lancecowboy · « **Reply #26 on:** Sep 25, 2010, 12:01 PM »

rdx You the man! That's awesome detective work.

I think the calendar can be easily explained. It is conceivable that after the birth of the children, Ennis and Alma got so busy, they didn't bother ripping the pages from the calendar, for four months. Spring is especially a busy time for a ranch hand.

Then again, if the calendar is indeed 1963, which means it is probably a genuine antique collector's item that was borrowed for the film, the owner would not be happy with the pages being torn or folded in any way. So they had to preserve it the way it was.

thanks for all your technical expertise rdx.

rdx · « **Reply #27 on:** Sep 25, 2010, 01:49 PM »

You're welcome Mr lancecowboy

I agree with you on both points. I'm not completely sure about the last digit of 1966 on the calendar; it's partially out of the picture when the camera is still.

In general I'd say that details like these ones shouldn't matter while timelining, for example. Film, as a form of art, doesn't need to authenticate the reality per se, IMHO. E.g. the phases of the Moon (mentioned above) are (just) matters of visualization.

See here. This link was originally posted by theohsocurlyone in here. The link was updated by Monsieur chameau..somewhere else..

I like 'nuit américaine'..day for night..

The colour correction/grading is everyday stuff, a sort of glamour filter.

lancecowboy · « **Reply #28 on:** Sep 26, 2010, 12:48 AM »

That's amazing. I didn't realize so much of Brokeback Mountain was special effects. I knew about the sheep, but it seems a lot of the sky was also artificially created.

I love the part "Add Moon".

The power of the director is limitless.

The spear of sunlight on the lone tree on a hill...that's superb.

Brokeback Mountain is not just a movie; it's a work of art.

Ang Lee.

rdx

PS. It was probably decided not to FX the calendar because the film had a limited budget, and Ang Lee probably thought nobody would notice something that tiny which only flashes on screen for a few seconds. You the man, rdx.

rdx · « **Reply #29 on:** Sep 26, 2010, 04:58 AM »

Quote from: lancecowboy on Sep 26, 2010, 12:48 AM

PS. It was probably decided not to FX the calendar because the film had a limited budget, and Ang Lee probably thought nobody would notice something that tiny which only flashes on screen for a few seconds.

Exactly LC. The resources (time and money) are always limited, especially money. But usually the result is much more creative and intriguing when you have limited resources: it forces you to think, focus and be more imaginative. Perfection is dull, inhuman and not interesting.

But once again, details like these shouldn't matter: it's the result that matters, not the means. BBM is a work of art, not reality per se, IMHO.

Art imitates life and life imitates art; it's a loop. Art provokes thoughts, raises questions..is of interest. Otherwise we wouldn't be here: some 4,900 members and over one million posts.

Back to the topic.....!