Distributor says film is still a hit in Salt Lake area

PROVO — "Brokeback Mountain" may not be showing at Larry H. Miller's theater, but the international controversy over his decision to yank the film shouldn't reflect badly on Utah, the film's distributor said Wednesday.

"The bad thing about this flap is that people will point a finger at Salt Lake City and a culture that should not be credited that way," said Jack Foley, head of distribution at Focus Features. "People will say it's Salt Lake City, but somebody made a business decision. It has nothing to do with Salt Lake City. It has to do with Jordan Commons management."

One of the movie's stars, Heath Ledger, criticized members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints when he learned Miller pulled the plug on the movie just hours before it was to open at the Megaplex 17 at Jordan Commons.

"Personally, I don't think the movie is (controversial), but I think maybe the Mormons in Utah do," Ledger said. "I think it's hilarious and very immature of a society."

"Brokeback Mountain" is an independent art film about two cowboys in a gay relationship. The movie's theme has been the target of jokes by late-night comedians, but those jokes have been redirected at Utah this week. Still, a national strategy to release the film slowly has been a success. The western is now a hit for an indie film, including in Salt Lake City.

"The irony is what happened in Salt Lake City in the first place," Foley said. "It opened in Salt Lake on Dec. 30, and 'Brokeback Mountain' immediately was a smash hit in the marketplace at the Broadway Centre Cinemas. It made $46,000 in four days."

The movie is also a hit at Salt Lake's Century 16, where it made $13,000 last weekend.

"Those are big numbers," Foley said.

The movie is also playing in Park City and Sandy theaters. It will open at a West Valley City theater on Friday, when it also debuts in Utah County at Provo Towne Centre Cinemark 16 and in Davis County at the Layton Tinseltown 17.

The controversy has led Australian and gay newspapers, magazines and Web sites to publish stories about a ban on the film in the United States, leading to letters to editors about censorship. Legal experts say those words are better used when a government entity restrains free speech.

"It's a little bit misleading to talk about prior restraint, censorship or bans when you have a single, private owner making a business decision," said Ed Carter, a media law professor at Brigham Young University.

"If we value a marketplace of ideas, we have to remember that it includes people being able to not associate themselves with an idea or a message," he added. "We should almost celebrate the ability of somebody to make that decision while another theater owner can make the decision to show the movie."