Mel Gibson seems kind of like an asshole to me.

[Os Cangaceiros]

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2010/07/12/2010-07-12_mel_gibson_threatens_to_kill_exgirlfriend_oksan a_grigorieva_twice_in_terrifying_.html

Oh Mel Mel Mel...how the mighty fall.

http://blogged.the-protagonist.net/images/mel_gibson_drunk_01.jpg

[¿Que?]

You're f---ing trying to destroy me," he rants.
Not just trying, Mel. She's accomplishing!

[Weezer]

Mel seems kind of like a complete racist to me.

[Blackscare]

I think he's sweet.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Mel seems kind of like a complete racist to me.

Mel was just having a bad day.

Make that two or three bad days. I'm sure the man doesn't have a racist or anti-semitic bone in his body.

[Hexen]

Mel Gibson is not only racist but also turns out be a misogynist/sexist victim blaming (which is a form of the Tu quoque fallacy (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Tu_quoque) aka "NO U (http://encyclopediadramatica.com/NO_U)" found prevalent in capitalist society which is described as childlike behavior) asshole as revealed by the tapes.

[Wanted Man]

Not just trying, Mel. She's accomplishing!

Is she Jewish too? :eek:

[Dimentio]

Cat cares!

[RedStarOverChina]

Well, what did she expect? She did hook up with a demented racist douchebag.

[Robocommie]

Well on the upside, his movies usually suck anyhow.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Well on the upside, his movies usually suck anyhow.





http://holdonletgo.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/roadwarrior1.jpg

You were saying?

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

I haven't heard all of the recent recording of Mel Gibson that caused controversy, but the victim blaming remarks were enough for me to want to hang him from some barbed wire, by the balls, whilst 1,000 angry radical feminists throw ninja stars at him.

[soyonstout]

I'm sure the man doesn't have a racist or anti-semitic bone in his body.
Really?


...hang him from some barbed wire, by the balls, whilst 1,000 angry radical feminists throw ninja stars at him.
ow.

[Blackscare]

but the victim blaming remarksHey, it was her fault for looking him in the eye. Pfft, uppity new age women and their eye contact.

[Robocommie]

You were saying?

That wasn't THIS Mel Gibson. That was Mel Gibson in a different age, a different time... a different world.

Besides, Road Warrior was kind of a fluke. The one before it and the one after kinda sucked.

[Robocommie]

I have to confess this whole thing is a large batch of schadenfreude for me. I was for a long time considering becoming a medievalist (still do, actually) and the movie Braveheart is so awful it just makes me nerdrage like nothing else.

[Hexen]

That wasn't THIS Mel Gibson. That was Mel Gibson in a different age, a different time... a different world.

I think Mel Gibson always has been the same person even back then due to his background (being passed down from his racist father most likely).


Hey, it was her fault for looking him in the eye. Pfft, uppity new age women and their eye contact.

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/b/bf/NO_U.jpg

This picture sums up victim blaming in a nutshell (The Tu quoque fallacy (http://www.anonym.to/?https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Tu_quoque) that is)..It's very identical what children use to blame on others for something they did themselves in order to avoid getting in trouble by their parents or anyone else as if they never grown up...(or has been updated to adult means...a common trend in capitalist society. Has anyone noticed this?)

[Il Medico]

http://holdonletgo.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/roadwarrior1.jpg

You were saying?
This movie always reminds me of Fallout 3, though I am sure Bethsda made the connections on propose, I didn't hear of this movie until after I played fallout and now associate it with this movie.

[Os Cangaceiros]

That wasn't THIS Mel Gibson. That was Mel Gibson in a different age, a different time... a different world.

Besides, Road Warrior was kind of a fluke. The one before it and the one after kinda sucked.

WHAT?! Mad Max sucked? :blink:

And personally I'm of the opinion that Beyond Thunderdome is underrated. If it wasn't for those annoying kids it would've been great.

Also, I like Braveheart, despite the fact that it's incredibly cheesy, stupid and ahistorical.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Road Warrior was fantastic as were some of his early dramatic roles... if I were a producer, I'd use special effects to past Keith Ledger's face over Mel's in the Road Warrior...




...mostly because ledger was DREAMY. But seriously, I don't know if I could watch a Mel Gibson movie that I have enjoyed in the past and be able to get past what we know of him now.:mad:

[Jimmie Higgins]

He'll "rehabilitate" his career by hosting a show on a christian network late at night. The christian right will defend him and say that the media attacked him and made him look bad because he was christian and "told the truth".

And also they'll excuse him because they all think media is run by jews... err liberals. Jew-run liberal media... er Liberal-run jew media. Whatever the current christian-right view of the media is now.

[bc14theroad]

Have you heard his latest message?
Go to radaronline.com/exclusives/2010/07/exclusive-new-audio-mel-gibson-admits-hitting-oksana-threatens-kill-her-listen-it

Its intense!

[The Red Next Door]

He is beyond Asshole.

[Robocommie]

And also they'll excuse him because they all think media is run by jews... err liberals. Jew-run liberal media... er Liberal-run jew media. Whatever the current christian-right view of the media is now.

Jew-run liberal media. Liberal-run Jew media. Jiberal-run Lew Media. Miberal-jun Rew Ledia.

:lol:

[khad]

Mel Gibson is being crucified for something he threatened but did not do...

While Roman Polanski, the confessed child rapist who ran away from his plea bargained prison sentence, is the international object of pity.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2010/07/14/roman-polanski-joy-at-end-of-a-nightmare-115875-22411658/

[Dimentio]

Yes. I think it is because Polanski is doing more "artsy" movies which the establishment are loving, while Gibson is too politically (and religiously) reactionary for them.

[Os Cangaceiros]

He actually supposedly hit her a couple times and chipped her teeth.

Unless you're talking about him threatening to put her in "a fucking rose garden". As far as I know that statement hasn't come to fruition yet.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Yes. I think it is because Polanski is doing more "artsy" movies which the establishment are loving, while Gibson is too politically (and religiously) reactionary for them.

Eh, Polanski's movies really aren't what I'd consider "artsy". They're just well made, some of them anyway (Repulsion especially).

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

Yes. I think it is because Polanski is doing more "artsy" movies which the establishment are loving, while Gibson is too politically (and religiously) reactionary for them.
Fuck them both. Gibson threatened to beat up a woman which is enough ground for punishment. As for Polanski, well, the revolution will decide what happens to both of them, seeing as our system can't deal with this matter.

[bloodbeard]

eh the tapes could be fake. I don't see the point in getting hyped up about it and reacting to it.

[Raúl Duke]

Mel Gibson is a shit head.

[Glenn Beck]

I liked the movie Apocalypto, I thought it gave a sensitive and realistic portrayal of the indigenous people of Mesoamerica.

The Passion of Christ needed more gore though

[Manifesto]

Mel was just having a bad day.

Make that two or three bad days. I'm sure the man doesn't have a racist or anti-semitic bone in his body.

“You go out in public and it’s a f*cking embarrassment to me. You look like a f*cking ***** in heat. And if you get raped by a pack of ni**ers it will be your fault. Alright? Because you provoked it. You are provocatively dressed all the time with your fake boobs that you feel you have to show off. I don’t like it. I don’t want that woman. I don’t want you. I don’t trust you. I don’t love you.”

[Dr Mindbender]

"You need a f---ing bat in the side of the head. Alright, how about that?" Gibson can be heard yelling after Grigorieva suggests that the actor needs to take medication. "You need a f---ing doctor. You need a f---ing brain transplant. You need a f---ing soul. I need someone who f---ing treats me like a man."

"You f--- my day up. You care about yourself when I have been so f---ing good to you. You're f---ing trying to destroy me," he rants. "Shut the f---k up! You should just f--king smile and b--w me because I deserve it!"

"You have no f--king soul. I left my wife because we had no spiritual common ground. You and I have none, zero. You won't even f---king try. You don't care. You don't care."



Thats lovely language for a nice god fearing christian, innit?

[Os Cangaceiros]

"I will bury you in a rose garden!"

LOL. For some reason that's my favorite quote...I think because it reminds me of that song "I Never Promised You A Rose Garden".

[Os Cangaceiros]

The Passion of Christ needed more gore though

Totally agree.

[R_P_A_S]

I think Mel Gibson always has been the same person even back then due to his background (being passed down from his racist father most likely).



http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/b/bf/NO_U.jpg

This picture sums up victim blaming in a nutshell (The Tu quoque fallacy (http://www.anonym.to/?https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Tu_quoque) that is)..It's very identical what children use to blame on others for something they did themselves in order to avoid getting in trouble by their parents or anyone else as if they never grown up...(or has been updated to adult means...a common trend in capitalist society. Has anyone noticed this?)

Interesting... I lost count of how many of my girl-friends have told me that this is the primary weapon used by their ex's when they argue... I always find it immature, specially if they stick around... Didn't know there was a term for this.

[bcbm]

Keith Ledger

keith?

[Os Cangaceiros]

Heath Ledger's younger brother?

[Jimmie Higgins]

keith?:lol:

Yeah, because what the hell kind of name is "heath" - did he have a sister called Meadow Ledger?

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

It's a very sad commentary on modern film that movies like Mad Max can be viewed as being great by anyone. Nothing this man has ever done in his life can be seen as a positive contribution to human society.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Thats lovely language for a nice god fearing christian, innit?

It doesn't put him at odds with Christianity at all: http://www.revleft.com/vb/does-bible-say-t38788/index.html

[Os Cangaceiros]

It's a very sad commentary on modern film that movies like Mad Max can be viewed as being great by anyone. Nothing this man has ever done in his life can be seen as a positive contribution to human society.

Eye of the beholder.

It's difficult (if not impossible) to establish what is objectively good or bad in relation to cinema. It's not different from any other artform in that respect.

But I remember you bashing Ghostbusters a while back, so everyone knows that you're a cretin with about as much taste as a cardboard popsicle!

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Yes, because Ghostbusters and Mad Max are the pinnacle of artistic expression in film.

Thanks for proving my point. :thumbup1:

[Os Cangaceiros]

Yes, because Ghostbusters and Mad Max are the pinnacle of artistic expression in film.

Thanks for proving my point. :thumbup1:

You're welcome! :thumbup1:

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

It's difficult (if not impossible) to establish what is objectively good or bad in relation to cinema.I don't think that's the case; especially if your objective is human liberation and an end to the misery of present day society.

Good films are rooted in reality. They are honest. They raise essential questions. They generate real emotion. They are interesting because they address our actual lives.

In decadent capitalism such films are unfortunately increasingly rare. The further capitalism declines the more escapist crap is pumped out in an attempt to take our minds off of the problems we face. Films are less interesting because they are disconnected from our existence.

Of course if you've been eating pig shit all your life, even a rotten pork chop looks delicious.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I don't think that's the case; especially if your objective is human liberation and an end to the misery of present day society.

Do you seriously view films in such a manner? So in your opinion the latest lame biopic of Che Guevara is better than The Godfather, Mulholland Drive or the Shining?


Good films are rooted in reality.

Bull. Shit.

Good films can be rooted in reality, but being rooted in reality is not a prerequisite for quality.


They are interesting because they address our actual lives.

I wouldn't pay to see a film that addresses my actual life. I know what my life is like. The beauty of film is that it can expose you to different realities than the one you face everyday.


In decadent capitalism such films are unfortunately increasingly rare. The further capitalism declines the more escapist crap is pumped out in an attempt to take our minds off of the problems we face. Films are less interesting because they are disconnected from our existence.

So if quality of film has declined, what do you feel was the "Golden Age" of cinema? And if capitalism was stronger during that time period, how does that correspond with better films? It took a lot of capital and connections to get a film made and put into wide release in the past; today first-time directors can do it for 15,000 dollars (Paranormal Activity).


Of course if you've been eating pig shit all your life, even a rotten pork chop looks delicious.

I liked your "if you've been eating shit all your life, even the half-digested kernal of corn looks delicious" analogy better.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Do you seriously view films in such a manner?I view all art in such a manner, since all art is in one way or another political.

I don't oppose capitalism out of some moral disagreements but because it has enslaved me and billions of others, alienated us from our labor and fucked up our lives beyond measure. That's the first and last thing I think about.


So in your opinion the latest lame biopic of Che Guevara is better than The Godfather, Mulholland Drive or the Shining?Nice straw man.

I didn't say all films have to be about revolution to be good.

I said quality films exhibit particular qualities, and those qualities should be even more important to people seeking a way out of this hell.

Ebert isn't the best film critic or a revolutionary by any means, but he once lauded the movie "Do The Right Thing" because "It was so honest about the way people really feel. No hypocrisy. It generated grief and left us with a central question of American society."


Good films can be rooted in reality, but being rooted in reality is not a prerequisite for quality.There is a difference between quality film and mindless distraction.


I wouldn't pay to see a film that addresses my actual life. I know what my life is like. The beauty of film is that it can expose you to different realities than the one you face everyday.Another straw man. I didn't mean you should watch home videos of yourself. I meant that films should be based on human existence in general. Things people actually go through. Genuine pleasure, pain, etc.

Not phony super hero crap, faux romantics that never happen in real life, fake and contrived interpersonal relationships, continual happy endings, etc.


So if quality of film has declined, what do you feel was the "Golden Age" of cinema? And if capitalism was stronger during that time period, how does that correspond with better films? It took a lot of capital and connections to get a film made and put into wide release in the past; today first-time directors can do it for 15,000 dollars (Paranormal Activity).The same way that the Roman Empire depended more on "bread and circus" as it began its long decline so too do our imperialist rulers as they travel that same road.

That was my point.

And yes some of the best films that come out today are independents or otherwise free of the constraints of the media machine (for example the recent films of Yoji Yamada, who has reached a level of respectability and longevity that gives him quite a bit of room).


I liked your "if you've been eating shit all your life, even the half-digested kernal of corn looks delicious" analogy better. I'll be sure to remember that.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I view all art in such a manner, since all art is in one way or another political.

I don't oppose capitalism out of some moral disagreements but because it has enslaved me and billions of others, alienated us from our labor and fucked up our lives beyond measure. That's the first and last thing I think about.

So you mull over the revolutionary implications of all art?

You should love Mad Max...it was made by an emergency room doctor with basically whatever he could scrounge up! It's true proletarian cinema!


I said quality films exhibit particular qualities, and those qualities should be even more important to people seeking a way out of this hell.

And what are these qualities, exactly?


Another straw man. I didn't mean you should watch home videos of yourself. I meant that films should be based on human existence in general. Things people actually go through. Genuine pleasure, pain, etc.

I disagree. Two of my favorite Italian directors are Mario Bava and (early) Dario Argento. Their films are usually filled with vivid colors, lurid/bizarre plotlines, and in the case of Argento soundtracks that sound like a bunch of jazz musicians took acid and decided to play synthesizers. None of those are really condusive to realism; I like their films (and other horror films) because they're akin to surreal nightmares captured on film.

Now take a look at a prime example of a shit film that tried desperately to be "real" in the sense that you mean: Crash. That film sucked. It was the worst film about racism that I've ever seen in my life. Am I to believe that Crash is better than some style-over-substance giallo schlockfest simply because of it's pretentious attempts to be "deep"?


Not phony super hero crap, faux romantics that never happen in real life, fake and contrived interpersonal relationships, continual happy endings, etc.

Does that mean that you're opposed to genres like sci-fi, horror, fantasy etc?


The same way that the Roman Empire depended more on "bread and circus" as it began its long decline so too do our imperialist rulers as they travel that same road.

That was my point.

I still don't think that answers the question of how past cinema was better than present cinema. If cinematic standards have declined and are continuing to decline, then certainly they must have been better at some time in the past. In my opinion they haven't really gone downhill; sure, you can look at the seemingly endless flow of remakes and big budget crap and come to that conclusion, but independent/underground filmmakers are consistently coming out with great films. Some of my favorite films have come out in the last couple decades. It's certainly easier to get your artistic statement out to the world today than it was when the major studios completely dominated the film capital of the world and the market.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

So you mull over the revolutionary implications of all art?This is a strange question.

Do you ignore the implications, messages, meaning of art?


You should love Mad Max...it was made by an emergency room doctor with basically whatever he could scrounge up! It's true proletarian cinema!Is this a joke?


And what are these qualities, exactly? "Good films are rooted in reality. They are honest. They raise essential questions. They generate real emotion. They are interesting because they address our actual lives."


I disagree. Two of my favorite Italian directors are Mario Bava and (early) Dario Argento. Their films are usually filled with vivid colors, lurid/bizarre plotlines, and in the case of Argento soundtracks that sound like a bunch of jazz musicians took acid and decided to play synthesizers. None of those are really condusive to realism; I like their films (and other horror films) because they're akin to surreal nightmares captured on film.People don't have nightmares?

Anyway, there is a difference between art and entertainment. Art can be entertainment, but it isn't always.

Many people are entertained by fireworks. There's nothing more than bright lights and loud sounds there. There are many movies that are similar to fireworks in that respect. The issue is that film is a medium that allows for so much more (and that goes all ways, they can be used to promote reaction as much as anything else).


Now take a look at a prime example of a shit film that tried desperately to be "real" in the sense that you mean: Crash. That film sucked. It was the worst film about racism that I've ever seen in my life. Am I to believe that Crash is better than some style-over-substance giallo schlockfest simply because of it's pretentious attempts to be "deep"? Was that movie actually based in reality? I don't think so at all.

Look at the most acclaimed "Mob movies:" The Godfather, Goodfellas, Casino. They all portrayed the actual nature and functioning of the Mafia in the US, as well as human interaction, personal relationships, pleasure, pain, etc. That's why they stand out.

And how many shitty, unrealistic mob movies have come and gone without anyone noticing?


Does that mean that you're opposed to genres like sci-fi, horror, fantasy etc?I'm not a fan of any of those genres, though it's certainly not impossible for good horror, fantasy, sci-fi, etc. films to be made.

Dawn of the Dead (the original, not the shitty remake) was a decent film, full of social commentary. The Korean film 추격자 ("The Chaser") could also be included.

What I'm talking about are films that are totally divorced from the reality of human existence, that have nothing to do with the ways we live, function, interact.


I still don't think that answers the question of how past cinema was better than present cinema. Really? You don't see the difference between films like The Battleship Potemkin and Rambo? Citizen Kane and Extraordinary Measures? Dr. Strangelove and Get Him To The Greek? 2001: A Space Odyssey and Battlefield Earth?

Cinema has been in a general state of decline for years.


If cinematic standards have declined and are continuing to decline, then certainly they must have been better at some time in the past. In my opinion they haven't really gone downhill; sure, you can look at the seemingly endless flow of remakes and big budget crap and come to that conclusion, but independent/underground filmmakers are consistently coming out with great films. That's the point: that mainstream cinema is in decline. And that's what the majority of the population watches.

The best films coming out today are independents and documentaries. And that illustrates this all more than anything I can say. And so that's all I will say.

[Jazzratt]

Byt NHIA's criteria I have never watched a good film. On the other hand I'm fairly sure I've never actually watched a good film (save Withnail & I)

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Yea, that's sort of the point. It's very difficult to find good films today. You basically have to dig in the archives, go to a theater that shows indie films, etc.

[Saorsa]

After the revolution it will be compulsory for every film to include the word 'proletarian' at least 122 times.

[Adi Shankara]

Mel Gibson is being crucified for something he threatened but did not do...

While Roman Polanski, the confessed child rapist who ran away from his plea bargained prison sentence, is the international object of pity.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2010/07/14/roman-polanski-joy-at-end-of-a-nightmare-115875-22411658/

The difference is, we don't even know the full story on what happened between Mel Gibson and his girlfriend (tapes seemed a little odd from her end, though that didn't stop Mel from being a prick) and we'll all bash the hell out of him for being a "misogynist pig", yet we all know that Roman Polanski slept with a little girl (even admitted to it) and most likely raped her, yet Roman Polanski has his own booster club on Revleft that claims in his defense he was the victim of "western chauvinist AoC laws".

leftist forums sometimes...:rolleyes:

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

After the revolution it will be compulsory for every film to include the word 'proletarian' at least 122 times.

Yes, because that's exactly what folks are calling for here.

Meanwhile, in the real world, it was the bureaucrats in the USSR and China that imposed strict requirements on the creation of films, TV shows, books, etc. that were about as "proletarian" as they were. :thumbup1: