Mar 03, 2006  |  By: TOM JUDSON  | COMMENTS     

THE VERDICT IS still out on whether "Brokeback Mountain" is the best film of the year. That will be decided on March 5. But its impact is undeniable. "Groundbreaking" and "revolutionary" are just some of the adjectives that have been used to describe the movie and how it has entered the national dialogue and popular culture.

It has certainly been a financial breakout; no movie can enter into the mythic $100,000,000 pantheon depending solely on a niche audience. Not even when that niche is "the gays," with all their legendary disposable income.

No, "Brokeback Mountain" has appeal across a wide spectrum, and considering the graphic depiction of the affair between Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger, it’s worth considering just what it is about the movie that has proved satisfying to almost every demographic.-

Novelty certainly plays a part; the idea of two high-profile young actors as cowboy lovers is intriguing in itself.

BUT THE ASPECT OF "Brokeback" that is responsible for its universal appeal is its comfortable familiarity.

What’s that? A couple of Marlboro Men kissing, familiar?

Working on the premise that there have been no new stories since "Oedipus," there are examples throughout film history of two people in love that simply cannot be together, from "Casablanca" to "Brief Encounter" to "The Way We Were."

But it was a more recent film I had in mind as I left the theater after seeing "Brokeback" last December.

"The Remains of the Day," a production by Merchant/Ivory-—-the legendary gay partners (in professional and personal lives)-—-was released in 1993 and starred Emma Thompson and Anthony Hopkins. Their characters’ relationship and story arc is remarkably similar to that of Gyllenhaal and Ledger’s, even though the milieu and construction of the two films could not be more dissimilar.

Unexpectedly finding themselves as co-workers, a pathologically reserved man (Hopkins/Ledger) at first resents his ebullient and spirited coworker (Thompson/Gyllenhaal) who, in turn, is at a loss to understand her/his very private colleague.

Necessity and the demands of their jobs bring them closer together, and they become more intimate with one another, all the while maintaining a wall between them that neither is willing to breech.

As the decades pass, they slip into the comfortable rhythm with the tacit agreement that things can only progress so far. Finally admitting to her/himself that she/he wants more from the relationship, Thompson/Gyllenhaal forces the issue with Hopkins/Ledger when she is proposed to by another man and he is presented with the opportunity to make a life with the manager of his father-in-law’s ranch.

Crippled by his own insecurities and unable to express his own true wishes, Hopkins/Ledger allows her/him to leave. Years later, when he finally realizes the happiness he has denied himself, Hopkins/Ledger reaches out to Thompson/Gyllenhaal only to find it is too late for them both; Thompson feels obliged to stay with her pregnant daughter while the death of Gyllenhaal’s character proves even more final.

Hopkins/Ledger returns home fully aware of how he has wasted his life by denying his love.

While "Remains of the Day" does not feature squirm-inducing anal sex in a pup tent, I remember wanting to cover my eyes at the awkward intimacy of Emma Thompson’s housekeeper coquettishly trying to discover the title of the book being read by Anthony Hopkins in his room.

WHAT DOES ALL this prove? That nobody can write an original story? That Hollywood keeps turning out the same thing again and again? Well, partly, yes.

But that’s because these two examples, and hundreds more besides, show that while outward trappings can vary wildly, human relationships are universal.

At this point, the sexual orientation of the lead characters in "Brokeback Mountain" is still an issue. Most people who saw "Brokeback Mountain" went into the multiplex with the intention of seeing "The Gay Cowboy Movie" but came out thinking they had seen a beautiful love story. That’s progress.