I Come to Praise Jake Gyllenhaal, and to Bury Him

Brokeback Mountain (2005; d. Ang Lee, s. Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal, Michelle Williams, Anne Hathaway) Since I'm all about the parallel processing, can we talk about how the Brokeback Mountain perfectly captures the arc of the Jake Gyllenhaal career? First, there's the splashy debut of a slightly flamboyant stranger with the air of someone with secrets...

...who reveals himself as someone with dreams of being a star...

...but who has other complex desires that may or may not be congruent with those star dreams...

...and who ultimately finds himself negotiating an unfortunate position somewhere between the two poles, really pleasing nobody...

Are we ready to say it isn't going to happen? Gyllenhaal's had major star turns this year in Proof, Jarhead, and Brokeback Mountain. Only Brokeback Mountain has gotten the love, and the lion's share of that love has gone to Heath Ledger, followed by the quality turns by Michelle Williams, Anne Hathaway, and my new favorite, Anna Faris--can we talk about the fact that the chick from Scary Movie is your go-to if you need a star turn for the Ditzy Blonde Role?

Lesson Learned: the Wayans Brothers spot Talented White People.

If only their quality control applied across the board.


What matters is Gyllenhaal meant to be a Star, a new-look combination of leading man looks with puppy dog eyes and a smart, sensitive indie soul, and instead he keeps getting steadily moved off the board, whether it's being outshined by the Peter Sarsgaard's of the world in the parts he was built to shine in, or whether it's being outshined by the Heath Ledgers and, well, the Peter Sarsgaards of the world in the movies that Gyllenhaal is supposed to be carrying. Hell, even Randy Quaid outshines Jake in this movie.

In fairness, there are things working against Gyllenhaal in Brokeback Mountain. Part of the reason Heath Ledger's turn is getting so much attention is that the acting, which is stupendous, is kind of the last thing we expected out of him. I liked A Knight's Tale more than the next guy, but let's face it, nothing the guy has done so far prepared us for such a fully emotionally realized depiction of such an emotionally stunted man. Add in the unexpected pleasures of the aforementioned actresses and their stunning performances, and, well, we just expect it out of Jake, so forgive us if we don't notice while we're trying to take in the sweet surprises of the movie.

If one stereotypes broadly (here we go...), Jake's turn is the traditionally feminine role in BBM. I mean traditional in the sense of the observations about Hollywood and film that I have already made several times in this blog about the job of the actress in movies in general it seems (cf., any reference to Catherine Keener in this blog), and well, actually not even the stereotype--Jake has a lot more in common with Michelle Williams and Linda Cardellini in this movie. After initiating the opening of the relationship through one assertive act, Jack takes the reactive role, waiting for Ennis and the endless dictatorship of his absolute passivity to collapse in some emotional coup. Ultimately, like Michelle Williams and Linda Cardellini, Jack is driven to contemplate a life without Ennis, not out of absence of love, just out of sheer desperation (although he doesn't quite make good on his escape).

As a result, Gyllenhaal's very good performance still directs our eyes primarily to the work that Ledger is doing, since he's dictating all of Gyllenhaal's action, and any of Ledger's responses to Gyllenhaal are merely to negate any postive action he takes. Thus, Gyllenhaal winds up shunted to the reactive role, which is also a good way to get your work underestimated. Kind of like an offensive line--if the line isn't there, the flashy plays aren't happening, but it sure is hard to take your eye off the ball in the air for the beauty of a great block.

That said...when does Gyllenhaal not take a back seat? Jarhead was a war diary--it became an ensemble piece. While sure it makes sense thematically for the movie to focus on multiple characters, Gyllenhaal is still the man with the central arc--we have a relationship with his girlfriend, we see him prior to and after the war. Why are Peter Saarsgaard, Jamie Foxx, and even Lucas Black more indelible memories after this movie? It doesn't seem the masterplan was for Gyllenhaal to take the supporting roles (otherwise, he has a lot more explaining to do about The Day After Tomorrow). He was supposed to be a star. But add in Moonlight Mile to this list, and maybe we should stop waiting for the superstar turn. He's had plenty of chances, and it ain't coming.

All this is not necessarily a bad thing, just a curious one. It's like an indie level equivalent of the old Tina Brown Vanity Fair covers pimping every blonde starlet as the Next Big Thing (where have you gone Gretchen Mol?). Donnie Darko gave us a star, but not the Star he promised to be. And maybe Donnie Darko and Jake Gyllenhaal were perfectly matched, as two slightly passive victims of the whims of others, be it the Ennis or be it the Future. Still, while we may not have our holy cross of Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford, we do have our next dreamy-eyed, sensitive version of This Guy:

Which is good, cause the old version was showing some tread.

Next Time: Jennifer 8