nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Mel Gibson

Sir Osis of Liver.

Loves Ireland.

Just saw a load of fcukin celebrity arseholes slag him off on E or mtv or some other sh1te.

Mel"s alright.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

Bambi wrote: »

when did eastwood ever sound like mickey mouse?

It's not supposed to be anywhere close to a perfect impression but is actually pretty close to how a laid back Eastwood sounds at times.

dark crystal

Mel Gibson - Hollywood outcast.

Roman Polanski - Oscar winner.

I guess some Hollywood misdemeanours are more easily forgivable than others....

Agricola

Mel would make a great drinking companion but you'd never let him have your phone number or address.

Femme_Fatale

SweepTheLeg wrote: »

Why not? He could be a child killer for all I care. Doesn't stop him being an Oscar winning Director, and Braveheart being an amazing film.

I think they're referring to "it's his own business" thing you said about the unpleasant stuff he's gotten up to. When other people are being affected badly by his behaviour, no it isn't.

Deleted User wrote: »

The problem with all the tapes released is that it's one sided. We have no idea just what the other person said or did. Was Gibson responding in kind to abuse being hurled at him. I'm not defending Gibson but at the same time would like to hear all of the conversations and not just the bits that make him out to be as big a monster as possible.

Saying he hoped she got raped by a bunch of n***ers is enough for me. I mean, really - nothing could justify that. And "The f*cking Jews" stuff... How is it even up for debate?

The whole, The Beaver is autobiographical is nonsense.

Well hopefully it's biographical in that Mel has a mental illness, because I wouldn't like to think of a sane person behaving as he did.

Some fair points but you're playing down some of the stuff he did just because you admire him as an actor/director, which should be treated separately. I'm indifferent to him as an actor/director, but if people think he's brilliant, fair enough - it shouldn't be used to minimise his behaviour though.

Femme_Fatale

My name is URL wrote: »

It's a pity what happened to Mel

What happened to Mel? You mean his own behaviour for which he is responsible?

My name is URL

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

What happened to Mel? You mean his own behaviour for which he is responsible?

I mean his very obvious mental breakdown, bouts of severe depression, experience with bipolar disorder and battle with alcoholism.

You seem to have a wide-on for questioning or attacking those who say they feel some pity for him. Y'know having an ounce of empathy or pity for a person isn't tacit approval or support for their behaviours.

Gran Hermano

RIP

Femme_Fatale

My name is URL wrote: »

I mean his very obvious mental breakdown, bouts of severe depression, experience with bipolar disorder and battle with alcoholism.

Fair enough. He's still responsible for his nasty behaviour though.

You seem to have a wide-on for questioning or attacking those who say they feel some pity for him.

No, people who are glossing over/minimising his behaviour, just because they love his work. That's different to pitying him.
I have acknowledged he's unwell.

Sir Osis of Liver.

0ph0rce0 wrote: »

He has a nice gaff up in Killiney.

He also has a house in Mianus.

[Deleted User]

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I think they're referring to "it's his own business" thing you said about the unpleasant stuff he's gotten up to. When other people are being affected badly by his behaviour, no it isn't.

Saying he hoped she got raped by a bunch of n***ers is enough for me. I mean, really - nothing could justify that. And "The f*cking Jews" stuff... How is. t even up for debate?

Well hopefully it's biographical in that Mel has a mental illness, because I wouldn't like to think of a sane person behaving as he did.

Some fair points but you're playing down some of the stuff he did just because you admire him as an actor/director, which should be treated separately. I'm indifferent to him as an actor/director, but if people think he's brilliant, fair enough - it shouldn't be used to minimise his behaviour though.

No one is down playing any of what he said or did. We are merely pointing out that there are two sides to every story and so far we have only heard one.

The media loves taking sides and with Gibson they were presented with a ready made villain and they went to town with it. Yes, he brought much of it upon himself but at the sometime you have to question the motives behind releasing the tapes, especially the later tapes which were put out there in a vindictive and nasty manner. Had Gibson went ahead with the script then we would have never heard those tapes or anything else about it.

I like Gibson, as both an actor and filmmaker and I'm not going to ever deny that fact. Do I find his behavior and out bursts disgusting? Yes I do but at the same time I'm not going to sit back and judge him ,especially when I've only heard one side. Everyone has said and done stupid things but to have your past repeatedly brought up and used to knock you down isn't fair.

Femme_Fatale

Deleted User wrote: »

No one is down playing any of what he said or did.

Some folks here are actually.

We are merely pointing out that there are two sides to every story and so far we have only heard one.

But even so, nothing could justify some of the stuff he said.

Do I find his behavior and out bursts disgusting? Yes I do but at the same time I'm not going to sit back and judge him

Why not? Shur you could say that about anyone ever. He has to take responsibility for this stuff - he did it himself; being judged is down to his own words/actions.

Everyone has said and done stupid things but to have your past repeatedly brought up and used to knock you down isn't fair.

If he changed his ways I'd agree. We haven't all done stupid things to the extent of what he has done. There's no get-out clause for being a c*nt.

greedygoblin

Sir Osis of Liver. wrote: »

He also has a house in Mianus.

Whoopi Goldberg has a house in Mianus too.

old hippy

He was good in Galipoli and The Year of Living Dangerously. Even The Bounty and Braveheart were entertaining. He's acknowledged his problems which is a step in the right direction. Far more so than some of the usual suspects online

Compu Global Hyper Meganet

rock_dinasaur wrote: »

he may be mental but he,s an incredibly underated film maker

appocolypto is an astonishing movie , didn't get the recognition it deserved due to mel,s well publicised troubles with the law at the time

Great call. I've watched a lot of the so called "greatest films of all time", and Apocalypto is right up there as far as I'm concerned. The way that he controls the tempo and suspense is fantastic. Having said that, Braveheart was horrifically overrated so it balances out.

My name is URL

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Fair enough. He's still responsible for his nasty behaviour though.

No, people who are glossing over/minimising his behaviour, just because they love his work. That's different to pitying him.
I have acknowledged he's unwell.

Not sure why you decided to single out that one part of my post then tbh. I thought what I saying was quite clear in the context in which I said it.

I certainly wasn't minimising or defending his behaviour. You say you've acknowledged that he's unwell, but do you not acknowledge that a very frequently mentally unwell person isn't always in control of their own emotions, and often lash out for seemingly no reason?

Hell even the most rationally minded people lash out and come across as loons sometimes. Look at what Patrick Moore's views were on the Germans.. he basically wanted them all dead, not to mention his views on women

Galwayguy35

Compu Global Hyper Meganet wrote: »

Great call. I've watched a lot of the so called "greatest films of all time", and Apocalypto is right up there as far as I'm concerned. The way that he controls the tempo and suspense is fantastic. Having said that, Braveheart was horrifically overrated so it balances out.

:eek:

old hippy

Compu Global Hyper Meganet wrote: »

Great call. I've watched a lot of the so called "greatest films of all time", and Apocalypto is right up there as far as I'm concerned. The way that he controls the tempo and suspense is fantastic. Having said that, Braveheart was horrifically overrated so it balances out.

You can't say that! That film is a sacred cow

tigger123

Never really a fan of his, even less so after his anti semitic rants and wife beating behavior, the guys a scumbag. Think I read somewhere that his dad is a holocaust denier, so I'm sure he didn't pick it up off the ground.

tigger123

Also, Apocalypto sounds like an ice cream.

philstar

tigger123 wrote: »

Think I read somewhere that his dad is a holocaust denier, so I'm sure he didn't pick it up off the ground.

yep, his old man was a right wing conservative and devout catholic..think his political views rubbed off on Mel

i do believe Mel Gibson had a chapel built within his hollywood home in which a latin mass would take place daily..bit extreme

Tribb

Does anyone know for sure what Mel Gibson's ooinions towards jews and various races actually are.

Are people just basing their beliefs about him off a few soundbites, possibly out of context?

Femme_Fatale

Tribb wrote: »

Does anyone know for sure what Mel Gibson's ooinions towards jews and various races actually are.

Are people just basing their beliefs about him off a few soundbites, possibly out of context?

Because of his own anti semitic outburst.

Tribb

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Because of his own anti semitic outburst.

Has it been confirmed these are his opinions and wasn't taking the p1ss.

cloudatlas

Apocalypto was awesome. Love his work, hate his beliefs have the same attitude towards Orson Scott Card.

[Deleted User]

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Some folks here are actually.

But even so, nothing could justify some of the stuff he said.

Why not? Shur you could say that about anyone ever. He has to take responsibility for this stuff - he did it himself; being judged is down to his own words/actions.

If he changed his ways I'd agree. We haven't all done stupid things to the extent of what he has done. There's no get-out clause for being a c*nt.

As I've said a number of times, I'm not defending Gibson or what he said, I would just like to hear both sides of the argument. What has been released has been carefully selected to portray Gibson in the worst possible light and for all we know he was merely responding in kind.

Gibson has admitted that he has issues and maybe it's just me but I like to give a person a chance, especially one who may have serious mental health issues. By all means rush to judgement but I wonder would you be so quick to judge if the various tapes released were of someone not so famous?

And no one said there was any excuse for the way he acted but at that it's unfair to judge him without having all the facts at hand. Maybe Gibson deserves everything that has came his way but even then I'll still enjoy his work and look forward to everything he has a hand in. I'm a fan of the man and will happily admit that. Does it mean that I judge him less harshly than someone who hates his work, yes it does but then again I enjoy the work of Roman Polanski yet would never defend him or his actions. The reason being is that we've heard both sides of that story and as such can make an informed judgement. With Gibson, we've heard one side that has been careful constructed and manipulated to make him look as bad as possible

Femme_Fatale

Deleted User wrote: »

I wonder would you be so quick to judge if the various tapes released were of someone not so famous?

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

And no one said there was any excuse for the way he acted but at that it's unfair to judge him without having all the facts at hand.

No it isn't, because he said he hoped a bunch of n***ers raped her and went on about the ****ing Jews. Why is another "side" required?! It's baffling. Nobody portrayed him as bad as possible - he did it himself.

Maybe Gibson deserves everything that has came his way but even then I'll still enjoy his work and look forward to everything he has a hand in.

Nothing wrong with that.

I'm a fan of the man and will happily admit that. Does it mean that I judge him less harshly than someone who hates his work, yes it does

Thanks for confirming! You implied (for no reason) that my judgement is clouded by him being famous, when your bias is actually clouded by liking him as an artist.

but then again I enjoy the work of Roman Polanski yet would never defend him or his actions.

Same here.

SparkySpitfire

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

No it isn't, because he said he hoped a bunch of n***ers raped her and went on about the ****ing Jews. Why is another "side" required?! It's baffling. Nobody portrayed him as bad as possible - he did it himself.
.

I agree with like 90% of the things you say, but everyone knows there's always two sides to every story. You need to hear both when passing judgement.* Things said in the heat of the moment, while you have a mental illness to boot, aren't always meant. That being said, it's a disgusting thing for anyone to say, and while those things don't necessarily excuse someone's actions, they give them a context. If anything he should have been seeking professional help for the things he came out with there.

*Not that we should pass judgement, but we're human beings and we live to judge.

[Deleted User]

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Yes. Why wouldn't I?

I doubt that to be honest. In fact were it not for Gibson's profile then these tapes would have got not attention whatsoever. Is it right that someone who has attained success in life should have their life so publicly dragged through the coals?

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

No it isn't, because he said he hoped a bunch of n***ers raped her and went on about the ****ing Jews. Why is another "side" required?! It's baffling. Nobody portrayed him as bad as possible - he did it himself.

There are two sides to every story. If you are not in possession of all the facts then any judgement you make is flawed. For all you know, Gibson may have been on the receiving end of equally disgusting abuse and simply responded in kind. It wouldn't make what he said any less acceptable but when taken out of context it's hard to judge anyone. Especially not someone who has obvious mental issues. It's clear that you find it acceptable to pass judgement upon someone when only privy to one side of a story but most people, myself included would like to hear both sides and some context before rushing to judge another

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Thanks for confirming! You implied (for no reason) that my judgement is clouded by him being famous, when your bias is actually clouded by liking him as an artist.

Same here.[/QUOTE]

You are missing the point completely. Of course someone will judge a person they like less harshly that another who hates the person or their work. I'm sure if a musician or filmmaker you liked was in a similar scandal you would be less quick to judge them, whereas someone who disliked their work would be the first to point the finger.

As I said, I judge Polanski far more harshly than Gibson as I'm aware of both sides of the argument and can make an informed judgement.

Femme_Fatale

Deleted User wrote: »

I doubt that to be honest.

Why? I definitely would similarly judge someone who did the same stuff but isn't famous.

It's clear that you find it acceptable to pass judgement upon someone when only privy to one side of a story but most people, myself included would like to hear both sides and some context before rushing to judge another

I judge someone who said/did the examples I mentioned numerous times, and you're kidding yourself by saying most people wouldn't.

You are missing the point completely. Of course someone will judge a person they like less harshly that another who hates the person or their work.

I'm not missing any point, and no, "of course" a person wouldn't. Why is it that you accuse me of being unreasonably judgemental when you admit you're completely biased?

I'm sure if a musician or filmmaker you liked was in a similar scandal you would be less quick to judge them

Well you're wrong. I'm a big fan of the band Joy Division but happily admit the lead singer seemed a bigoted prick. I adore The Smiths/Morrissey but have no problem admitting Morrissey can be quite the unpleasant character.
And I don't dislike Gibson's work.

You can't read my mind in fairness...

Karl Stein

Can people stop persecuting him? Look at all the things he's had to suffer. His Wife/GF was killed multiple times. He had his guts ripped out. He was demoted as a detective... FFS just leave him alone.