Mel Gibson "article" in the indo

Ash.J.Williams

She's obviously never seen lethal weapon or braveheart


https://m.independent.ie/style/voices/are-we-all-going-to-forget-mel-gibsons-vile-behaviour-on-his-road-to-redemption-36323625.html

Atrocious stuff

The Backwards Man

She just doesn't know the difference between a fcuking asshole and a complete fcuking asshole. Easy mistake to make.

super_furry

He's a racist woman beater who assaulted his partner while she was holding her baby in her arms. That's what's really atrocious.

Pac1Man

I can't help but root for the guy!

Cina

What's atrocious about it? Seems pretty spot on to me.

Or maybe it's another case of a boardsie getting upset cause a woman is writing an article about an abusive man. Heaven forbid.

The Backwards Man

super_furry wrote: »

He's an Australian

Fixed your post

Jayop

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

She's obviously never seen lethal weapon or braveheart


https://m.independent.ie/style/voices/are-we-all-going-to-forget-mel-gibsons-vile-behaviour-on-his-road-to-redemption-36323625.html

Atrocious stuff

Lol what's the problem with the article? It's an opinion piece and it's a fairly common opinion that someone with the back catalog of shameful incidents he has shouldn't be forgiven just because of a back catalog of good movies he has.

AH really hates people's opinion these days.

weareallmarks

Atrocious stuff? The fella abused his wife and also went on a racist tirade. You can say he was pissed, but i have been black out drunk and never went racist or abusive! The fella is a great actor, great business man and amazingly charasmatic! 

But the only difference between him and Weinstein etc is that he kept his victim numbers down, it wasnt sex it was violence and the pay off kept everyone quiet until the tapes came out. Awful human....................but he made lethal weapon so its graaaaaaaaaaaaand

super_furry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50_qMJSPtqY

Jayop

Cina wrote: »

What's atrocious about it? Seems pretty spot on to me.

Or maybe it's another case of a boardsie getting upset cause a woman is writing an article about an abusive man. Heaven forbid.

That's exactly what it is.

hawkelady

weareallmarks wrote: »

Atrocious stuff? The fella abused his wife and also went on a racist tirade. You can say he was pissed, but i have been black out drunk and never went racist or abusive! The fella is a great actor, great business man and amazingly charasmatic! 

But the only difference between him and Weinstein etc is that he kept his victim numbers down, it wasnt sex it was violence and the pay off kept everyone quiet until the tapes came out. Awful human....................but he made lethal weapon so its graaaaaaaaaaaaand

Having a bad day , sugartits???

Specialun

super_furry wrote: »

He's a racist woman beater who assaulted his partner while she was holding her baby in my arms. That's what's really atrocious.

Why did you have the baby

Hande hoche!

I still enjoy his films. What women want has got to be among the most misogynistic rom coms ever produced.

sbsquarepants

Great actor though - just saying!

The year of living dangerously + tequila sunrise are 2 of my favourite films.

AllGunsBlazing

Definitely has a weird vibe about him.

Always came across well during his absolute heyday in the 80's and 90's, but the mask has long since slipped and he's slowly developed into a bit of a creepy auld fella. Even if he had managed to keep all his dirty laundry out of the public domain you'd still get that weird vibe.....

weareallmarks

Cina wrote: »

What's atrocious about it? Seems pretty spot on to me.

Or maybe it's another case of a boardsie getting upset cause a woman is writing an article about an abusive man. Heaven forbid.

the above post is the most worrying thing i have read today. So you are saying that if it was a fella that wrote the article we wouldnt be so annoyed! jesus pal! look in the mirror!

wes

The article raises a valid point. Gibson got up to some seriously dodgy crap.

blue note

I think that article touches on a very important point. While we're outraged by all of the recent claims, but we're happy to ignore the older ones such as Mel Gibson's. Roman Polanski's case is the worst of all as far as I can see. He was convicted of more serious crimes than any of the guys in the current spat of allegations have been accused of (and in some cases admitted to), yet most of Hollywood seemed honoured to be chosen to work with him. And they gave him a standing ovation at the Oscars. Including men and women who have spoken out about what's come to light to the general public now.

I have my doubts about the sincerity of a lot of the outrage about all these cases now. And the fact that people were happy to ignore cases like these up to when the Weinstein story broke would suggest to me that a lot of it is sadly going along with what's expected of them instead of actually having morals and sticking by them. And it's that very attitude that allowed all of this to happen in the first place.

Agricola

Have to laugh at him in group interviews these days. He doesn't say an awful lot, is very stilted and usually just about comes across as abit odd. I'd say he's mad as arseholes though and has completely disappeared up his own hoop. A bit like a violent, alcoholic Micheal Flatley.

Before I click, it's not a Louise O'Whatever article, is it? Or Amanda Brunker? Bunker?

Prune Tracy

weareallmarks wrote: »

the above post is the most worrying thing i have read today. So you are saying that if it was a fella that wrote the article we wouldnt be so annoyed! jesus pal! look in the mirror!

They're agreeing with you. They're questioning people having an issue with the article, and wondering if the problem is that a woman wrote it.

That's the most worrying thing you've read today?!

But anyway, yeah he has done some hideous things - I heard the recording, Jesus Christ. I have read he turned over a new leaf though.

valoren

Hollywood is a cesspit as we find out more and more about the toxic machinations in that industry.
Is it any surprise that Gibson, a wife beating, alcoholic arsehole was never deemed persona non grata there?

brainfreeze

I always wonder with these type of articles, how to the writers pick their targets? There is nothing wrong with a moral outrage hit piece every now again, however the article starts with:

Will Ferrell, Mark Wahlberg, John Lithgow and er…Mel Gibson

Mark Wahlberg has done far worse things than Mel Gibson. What makes Mel Gibson special and Mark Wahlberg normal? Why did she choose one over the other?

Mel Gibson has said racist things, Mark Wahlberg has committed racial violence, even blinding a man for simply being Vietnamese.

Why is Mark, the far more violent man, more forgivable than Mel?

Answer: The Journalist doesn't know enough about either subject. Her gaps on Gibson are even acknowledged in the article - she probably has no idea about Wahlberg. This is not journalism, this is a badly researched rant created to capitalize on your emotions. This is the standard of a blog post.

valoren

brainfreeze wrote: »

I always wonder with these type of articles, how to the writers pick their targets? There is nothing wrong with a moral outrage hit piece every now again, however the article starts with:



Mark Wahlberg has done far worse things than Mel Gibson. What makes Mel Gibson special and Mark Wahlberg normal? Why did she choose one over the other?

Mel Gibson has said racist things, Mark Wahlberg has committed racial violence, even blinding a man for simply being Vietnamese.

Why is Mark, the far more violent man, more forgivable than Mel?

Answer: The Journalist doesn't know enough about either subject. Her gaps on Gibson are even acknowledged in the article - she probably has no idea about Wahlberg. This is not journalism, this is a badly researched rant created to capitalize on your emotions. This is the standard of a blog post.

Fortunately for Marky Mark none of his behavior was recorded for posterity. As such it can be buried away in court documents, he could just make up his own version of events today if confronted, as in, it didn't happen like that/it was an accident etc etc unlike Gibson who was an A-list actor who got recorded acting disgracefully in the internet age where his actions were divulged instantaneously and to which he could have zero comeback against.

cantdecide

Cina wrote: »

What's atrocious about it? Seems pretty spot on to me.

Or maybe it's another case of a boardsie getting upset cause a woman is writing an article about an abusive man. Heaven forbid.

It depends on whether she's trying to use Mel Gibson's bad behaviour to tar all men, which she hasn't (there appears to be a market for that kind of thing- it's quite popular) and managed to stay on point and I agree with her - he's a vile man and is probably way past any kind of redemption. It's just proof of what Hollywood will give a pass to. I doubt if this all would have happened if the project was for launch in 2018.

Dravokivich

So wait... how come we weren't outraged the last time Redemption Mel was over?

Tayschren

I like like a lot of his movies,

The rest I will leave to the sanctimonious wasters with nothing better to do than read the indo,

MysticMonk

Fcuck the Indo..a load of marxist claptrap.

jmayo

The Backwards Man wrote: »

She just doesn't know the difference between a fcuking asshole and a complete fcuking asshole. Easy mistake to make.

She does seem to be really peed off that "Hacksaw Ridge, his first directorial turn in 10 years was nominated for five Oscars this year"

He might be a complete asshole, but he makes some good movies and movies people actually like.
There are lots of cases in the arts and in sport where people are very good at their craft, create or perform brilliantly, but they are some of the most obnoxious people on earth.

Hollywood is quick to forgive those if they are successful and bring in the money.
And it is very much the same in sport where complete ar**holes are forgiven their sins just because they are winners.
Losers are never given the same leeway.

valoren

I guess they see Gibson as a first rate director at a cut rate price.
It's not like he will turn down material as he would be keen to work.
Also there would be no need to take out enormous insurance clauses when hiring him either, he knows himself how it works.
And seeing as he is seemingly chastened then he can be controlled by the production staff.
So, welcome back Mel!

Prune Tracy

Tayschren wrote: »

I like like a lot of his movies,

The rest I will leave to the sanctimonious wasters with nothing better to do than read the indo,

I like a lot of his movies too but I really don't understand what's sanctimonious about criticising domestic abuse?

MysticMonk wrote: »

Fcuck the Indo..a load of marxist claptrap.

:pac:
Seeing as you couldn't get a more anti public sector and pro commercial enterprise publication than the Indo, I take it you don't know what marxist means.