Let me put it this way. If I only looked at actors/directors I agree with, I would miss out on some good stuff. Gary Sinise, as far as I am concerned, is a political asswipe, but he's a pretty good actor too. Clint Eastwood is an asshat too, but a bloody good director producing films that don't mirror his affiliations.

It's harder with Mel Gibson. He's an ass and an unremarkable actor/director, as far as I am concerned.

(September 5, 2016 at 11:31 am)AFTT47 Wrote: The fact is, he's an immensely talented actor. I never cease to marvel at the fact that he can play a role where there isn't the tiniest hint of the monster that lurks beneath the skin. He's one of the best at his craft even though he's a despicable human being. I guess the talent is hard to ignore in Hollywood.

Let's face it, he's one of a long line of artists who put out great work, but also happen to be execrable human beings. If we put every director, author, musician, or actor who turns out to be a gaping asshole down the memory hole, where would our culture be?

John Lennon apparently beat the shit out of his wives (although it seems he got better by the time Sean was born); Klaus Kinski raped his daughters and, from what I've been able to gleam, seemed to be just open enough about it (just ask William Malone) to not be arrested; William S. Burroughs killed his own wife and served hardly any jail time for it; Walter Brennan was an outspoken opponent of the civil rights movement, up to the point where he celebrated when Martin Luther King Jr. got assassinated; Roman Polanski drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl; Edgar Degas was a virulent antisemite who got even worse after news of the Dreyfus affair came out. The list goes on and on, and even longer if we include the ones whose misdeeds weren't verified. And yet, we didn't let any of them drop out of the cultural consciousness for their misdeeds. Why should Mel Gibson be any different? Maybe Signs and The Patriot haven't held up, but there's still so much in his filmography for me to say he shouldn't be stuck down the memory hole.

(September 5, 2016 at 5:19 pm)Pandæmonium Wrote:

They don't even make a shadow of an attempt to try, do they?

LOL... People saying how Gibson is a great actor make me laugh. He's a "meh" actor, who played the same Mad Max/Lethal Weapon character throughout most of his career. It just so happened, that some of those movies were rather good. He's kind of like Bruce Willis in that respect, who also appears to be a bit of an a**hole, although in a much more "appropriate" and manageable arrogant-movie-star-way, as opposed to Mel's outright psychotic kind of a**holery.

As far as his directing and producing goes - I don't particularly care at this point. I recall Apocalypto being watchable, although I don't remember much about it. The Passion of course is just pure sh*t and torture porn for religiously motivated nut-jobs. Apparently - "The Passion 2" is in the works. And based on that alone I'd be happy to live the rest of my life in a world without Mel Gibson's input, just as I'm happy never to watch "Bill Cosby Show" again. Great entertainment and art are abundant, there are countless artists and entertainers, who at least try not to be complete douche-bags. I don't see why I should give money to utter c*nts, if I can help it.

Since Gibson is a raging anti-Semite and he's given us one of the most questionable and unintentionally funny portrayals of Hamlet in film history, I think he must now play Shylock in a bad off-off-off-off-broadway production until he dies or Jesus returns . . . whichever comes first.

(September 6, 2016 at 10:43 am)Crossless1 Wrote: Since Gibson is a raging anti-Semite and he's given us one of the most questionable and unintentionally funny portrayals of Hamlet in film history, I think he must now play Shylock in a bad off-off-off-off-broadway production until he dies or Jesus returns . . . whichever comes first.

I get the feeling Shylock is far too sympathetic a Jew for Mel Gibson's tastes, though. Maybe Barabbas in Jew of Malta, oh, wait, diabolical mastermind though he may be, even he might be too likable.

I just want Mel Gibson to fuck off to an isolated island somewhere and shut the fuck up.

At least I can disown him from being an Aussie...

(September 5, 2016 at 10:07 pm)Homeless Nutter Wrote: I don't see why I should give money to utter c*nts, if I can help it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lR3IHbwOWjQ

(September 5, 2016 at 6:06 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: John Lennon apparently beat the shit out of his wives (although it seems he got better by the time Sean was born); Klaus Kinski raped his daughters and, from what I've been able to gleam, seemed to be just open enough about it (just ask William Malone) to not be arrested; William S. Burroughs killed his own wife and served hardly any jail time for it; Walter Brennan was an outspoken opponent of the civil rights movement, up to the point where he celebrated when Martin Luther King Jr. got assassinated; Roman Polanski drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl; Edgar Degas was a virulent antisemite who got even worse after news of the Dreyfus affair came out. The list goes on and on, and even longer if we include the ones whose misdeeds weren't verified. And yet, we didn't let any of them drop out of the cultural consciousness for their misdeeds. Why should Mel Gibson be any different?

OK I understand that people can be scum in private and yes it usually doesn't bother me to that point that I won't watch some movie from that person. You mention Roman Polanski who raped 13-year-old girl and some people like to call him a pedophile, especially Catholic Church that likes to use him as "one that people don't care that he rapes kids so why criticize us?". But when it comes to Polanski I don't see him as a pedophile because 1) there weren't other girls accusing him of that like boys do priests 2) he was going trough extremely rough times 3) whole thing does look very murky, I mean if this was your everyday innocent girl why wasn't she at school or at home learning instead of being alone with a strange man? It's not like altar boys that are supposed to be in church doing their work and then get raped by priests.
To be honest it seems to me she was a teenage prostitute, because she wanted money from him and when he didn't want to pay she dragged him to court. Unfortunately there are many of those around Hollywood.

There is Burroughs and he was a junky along with his wife and they were both high, he also had a son that died of overdose. Stuff about Lennon and Kinski I haven't heard before and to be honest I don't know what's the source about Lennon? Maybe he beat his 1st wife, but I doubt about Yoko, in other words he changed unlike Gibson.

But I guess what differs Gibson from these people, at least for me, is that he encourages people to be racist. It's not like Lennon (if he was a wife-beater) made songs that went "Slap that bitch every day she deserves it."
What is also with Gibson that he also has racist father and I remember in the days just before Gibson's fall from fame his father told the press how holocaust is a lie and Gibson, instead of apologizing, actually criticized reporters for bothering his "old father" and actually made himself look like a victim. And what finally got him driven away wasn't his antisemitic bursts but when he used slurs against black people. I mean you can talk a lot against the Jews and people will tolerate it but when it comes to blacks it's much more sensitive.

(September 5, 2016 at 6:06 pm)Homeless Nutter Wrote: I recall Apocalypto being watchable, although I don't remember much about it.

Well I recall "Apocalypto" being ripoff of "The Naked Prey" only, let's face it, kind of racist. Those South American people were portrayed as being higly barbaric, totally unable to live with each-other, and then, at the end, the Catholic Church comes and brings civilization.

From what I've heard, Samantha Geimer (Polanski's victim) was actually a child model who originally met with Polanski in order to do a photoshoot for the French version of Vogue, and didn't intend to go through it all. Maybe her mother set it up and decided, "Whatever happens, happens, as long as she gets the exposure she needs." That said, given the fact that there's scant evidence that he did this to anyone else, that it apparently happened during a rough patch in Polanski's life, and that the victim herself has gone on record repeatedly as saying she wants the case dropped, I'm inclined to give Polanski a pass on that.

Also, my source on John Lennon beating his wives was from Cynthia herself. She has made no secret about what John did to her. To be fair, I'm inclined to think he improved with Yoko.

Also, about him not writing songs about wife-beating, you may want to break out your copy of Rubber Soul:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWi-P5fbDwo

(sorry about using a Rock Band version; The Beatles are notorious for taking down videos of their songs on Youtube)

My point is: artists' work should be judged on their own merits, and not the moral bankruptcy of the artists themselves.