jonstad- I agreed with your whole post except for the last part- The part where you said that Hollyweird has only one agenda- to make money. They didn't get the nickname 'Hollyweird" for wanting to make money on every film. You do need to listen to the other parts of these social deviant movies where the directors and writers offer their comments. The facts are that these movies often are pushed through because of a social agenda first and when they happen to make a little money, knockoffs often follow. Named actors will often do the scripts based on the well recognized understanding that these types of scripts that mostly do not get funding will be a pathway to the Oscars. These actors are not stupid. Other actors who have reached this path (Oscars) already will take on the role because they also identify with the social movement. All this happens before the knockoffs start. I watch alot of movies of all types. Being in the production business, I find it a really good technical education on how these movies are made. I try to do the movie a couple of times so I can get the real motivations, trials and tribulations, of the producers writers and directors. Not always interested in the actors say since mostly it's the directors who really control what we see on the screen. Anyway, While I respect your opinion that Brokeback Mountain is not a subject of interest to you, I hope you appreciate where I'm coming from in trying to point out that money is only a fraction of the real motivation to make any movie. If you had said it was the only motivation of the passive investors, then I think I would have to agree. BTW- I watched Rosie Odonnell's latest documentary that is on HBO now. It is her seven day vacation party for Gays on a cruise ship. Again, how did a person's vacation video get on HBO? Answer- Her celebrity status but mostly, I'd bet, was the theme of the documentary. It's quality is as good as Michael Moore's stuff and it is the right theme so will it win an Oscar for best documentary of the year?