Heaven and Mel: Our One and Only Mel Gibson Discussion Thread

A subforum to discuss film culture and criticism.
Message
Author
User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 4K)

#26 Post by therewillbeblus » Thu Nov 19, 2020 12:43 pm

This reminded me to dig up an old post of mine from before I became active on the forum, in response to people wondering on why Gibson is getting roles now, or a "free pass" as someone put it
therewillbeblus wrote:
Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:12 pm
I can't help but think that the determination for this "free pass" boils down to what is considered an acceptable measure of redemption by the majority of Hollywood. Gibson came out a few years back in an interview talking about maintaining sobriety for over ten years at that point, and while this information certainly doesn't absolve him of responsibility for his actions, it seems to be one of the more measurable forms of rehabilitation through behavior (particularly compared to those recently cast out in the #MeToo movement, for which I can't really think of a starting point for a path to rehabilitation in this climate). Of course none of us know what he's been doing (if anything) to "redeem" himself in the eyes of the industry all these years, and can only speculate and concoct our own narratives shaped by subjective beliefs and personal stakes in the case. I'm certainly not in opposition to opinions expressed in light of this news in this thread and everyone's perspective has been, and is, valid. But, from an objective standpoint, if one believes in rehabilitation I can't think of a more measurable form of evidence that one's attempting to change than being publicly active in the recovery community in Hollywood.
My theory has long been that Gibson is an active member of 12-step fellowships in Hollywood, which has a pretty vast network, and explains why his fellow friends in recovery have gone to bat for him in recent years. Personally, I'm all for it. Good for filmmakers casting him and being powers of example in publicly reinforcing the perspective that people are not defined by something they said or did and are capable of change. I honestly don't know how people who don't believe in rehabilitation live with themselves, since nobody has a skeleton-free closet, and that takes a certain amount of self-ignorance to point the figure without looking in the mirror (or holding up a celebrity as a person less complex, which is dehumanizing in the same way people treat a faceless cashier as lesser, and opens up a whole other set of problems in differentiating us v them along an anti-humanist platitude).

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 4K)

#27 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Thu Nov 19, 2020 2:01 pm

jazzo wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:56 am
But addiction/mental health issues are difficult to recognize and manage for anyone, but combine those with whatever deep-rooted racial hatred and cultural insensitivity he already had or developed over the years, and you've got a pretty shitty cocktail.
therewillbeblus wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2020 12:43 pm
I honestly don't know how people who don't believe in rehabilitation live with themselves, since nobody has a skeleton-free closet, and that takes a certain amount of self-ignorance to point the figure without looking in the mirror (or holding up a celebrity as a person less complex, which is dehumanizing in the same way people treat a faceless cashier as lesser, and opens up a whole other set of problems in differentiating us v them along an anti-humanist platitude).
On Twitter last night someone brought up Eric Clapton's outburst in the mid-70's, advocating for Enoch Powell, and the reactions to it were mostly anti-Clapton and still holding those comments over his head to this day. To many there is a line to be crossed from "woke" to ridiculous and I felt that crossed it. Mainly because they ignore or forget that he was in a state of deep inebriation, and also likely narcotically induced as well. In a documentary made about him a few years ago, he characterized the moment not just in terms of addiction but depression as well. When he was hooked on heroin, he was suicidal, and when he kicked it and traded it for alcohol which he defined as worse, that turned outward and he became incredibly spiteful, even to those closest to him.

In Gibson's case, from what I've read, it was something he grew up around. It wasn't born of independent thought, and I've never seen him express such views so directly and soberly as people, say, in the Trump administration (or those in support) have. That's a major difference in how seriously I take hateful points of view, if they are of sound body and mind when they say it. If it's something simply exacerbated by drugs or alcohol, it makes me question the validity it has to the person saying it. I've seen people who I knew to be rational and tolerant sober, say hateful things when they were drunk, so this isn't coming from a place of naivety when I say it.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 4K)

#28 Post by therewillbeblus » Thu Nov 19, 2020 2:12 pm

Right, I think often of the phrase "hurt people hurt people" which I don't think anyone is truly "above." Even if you're not inebriated by alcohol or other substances, our executive functioning goes first when we become emotionally flooded (i.e. 'seeing red' in the case of anger). I have a client who is a wonderful, calm, empathetic person yet becomes dysregulated and loses control by yelling and occasionally hitting things in her house when she goes too long without supports to strengthen her will power- and if that's driven by the same mechanism as someone losing all ego functions and spitting racial epithets, I don't see how one should be treated with care and understanding the other as a definitive branding on that person's worth for life, as if their entire personality was uttered in that line.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't take responsibility though- if I showed up in court with violations from being intoxicated I can't just say, oh I was drunk so it's not my fault. Obviously Gibson had to pay for this, but while there's no measuring stick that will satisfy everybody for when someone 'earns' their place back, that doesn't mean that opportunities should be eliminated permanently. Everyone has the right to size people up as they wish, but the minute we take our personalized value-assignment and project it as the objective universal truth that all behavior should be assessed by, we're entering into a dangerous place and should probably look at our own issues of grandiosity.

User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 4K)

#29 Post by cdnchris » Thu Nov 19, 2020 2:56 pm

jazzo wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:56 am
Of course, he was just as magnetic in those action/comedy pictures, and his career not only survived a massive personal/publicity disaster, but continues on five decades later, so what the fuck do I know? Casting him in anything these days may be problematic (and honestly, I'm not entirely sure why a filmmaker would unless it was to be provocative), but even his late-career performance in Dragged Across the Concrete was not only very, very good, but a sad reminder of lost potential.
I don't think I realized just how much presence Gibson could have until I watched all three Expendable movies at my father-in-laws one time. I remember thinking they had potential but what I remember of them isn't good. Gibson (as the villain in the third one) was by far the best thing in all of the movies by a long shot. At the time I was dismissive of him because of his outbursts and shook my head when I saw he was in that film, but I had to admit he stole every scene he was in and he was working with a nothing character, a very generic villain, that he somehow made it better just by being there. He's actually the only thing I remember about those movies.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Heaven and Mel

#30 Post by therewillbeblus » Thu Nov 19, 2020 4:20 pm

Aside from the Mad Max franchise, I actually prefer his mid90s period to his 80s-early 90s streak, not so much for the films themselves but for what he was able to do within them. Gibson made films like Maverick, Ransom, and Conspiracy Theory far more tolerable due to his screen presence. For modern films, Get the Gringo and less-so Blood Father are also great reminders that his spirit can carry a programmer and turn it into something memorable. I think he's a lot like Tom Cruise and Harrison Ford, who have both been mentioned, as a guy who has charisma and star power that attracts me to even B or C material.

beamish14
Joined: Fri May 18, 2018 3:07 pm

Re: Heaven and Mel

#31 Post by beamish14 » Thu Nov 19, 2020 4:45 pm

Conspiracy Theory is hilarious. I'm very fond of how his character is established in that film.

Has anyone listened to Joe Eszterhas' short tome Heaven and Mel (beyond, presumably, mfunk)? It details their collaboration on a proposed film about
the Maccabees, and Eszterhas' fight or flight response upon learning he's signed on to fulfill the wishes of a raging lunatic. If you have Audible, it's a free title.

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 4K)

#32 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Thu Nov 19, 2020 6:15 pm

I liked Edge of Darkness a whole lot.
jazzo wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:56 am
When I look back on his stellar performances in Gallipoli, The Year of Living Dangerously, Mrs. Soffel and The Bounty, it really is a shame he pivoted towards the action genre, and away from drama. He was absolutely magnetic in those pictures, and I can't help but wonder if continuing to work with directors like Peter Weir or Gillian Armstrong would have had a more grounding effect on his career, and on Mel Gibson, the person.
One of the bigger what-ifs of his career is if he accepted Kevin Costner's part in The Untouchables instead of Lethal Weapon. He'd been sort of on the edge of all-out stardom with the Mad Max movies, and with critical plaudits in those period pieces he'd done. With regards to the first LW, It's understandable he probably wanted to pivot towards something more contemporary.

He still did drama afterwards, doing stuff like Hamlet and Man Without a Face. As far as other action films, he probably should have stuck closer with Donner and Joel Silver instead of appearing in turkeys like Bird on a Wire and Air America.

Jack Kubrick
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:13 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 4K)

#33 Post by Jack Kubrick » Thu Nov 19, 2020 6:36 pm

knives wrote:
Wed Nov 18, 2020 9:17 pm
To be fair his status seems more the norm for actors of his generation. Tom Cruise seems to be the only one who hasn’t flirted with direct to video crap as far as I can think of.
Tom Hanks is the same age as Gibson and has not filtered with straight-to-VOD material, though his latest movie did go straight to Apple nonexistent TV platform. Clooney and Pitt are Cruise's age, they are still commanding strong pull in the Hollywood community.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Heaven and Mel

#34 Post by knives » Thu Nov 19, 2020 6:42 pm

I wouldn’t mentally put that group with the Gibson group though I guess Hanks’ career overlaps a great deal.

Jack Kubrick
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:13 pm

Re: Heaven and Mel

#35 Post by Jack Kubrick » Thu Nov 19, 2020 7:06 pm

Thought we're talking stars in the broadest sense and not just 'action heroes.' On that note even Arnie and Sly appear in VOD dreck. With the changing industry not offering mid-budget genre pictures to open in theaters all of these once theatrical headliners have slipped away onto a 50 inch screen near you.

User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Heaven and Mel

#36 Post by Brian C » Thu Nov 19, 2020 8:01 pm

Hanks is an interesting contrast to Gibson, actually. I was still a kid in, say, 1989, but I’d have guessed back then that, of the two, Gibson would be the one that was still a hugely respected star in 2020 and Hanks had long faded into mostly unnoticed dreck.

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Heaven and Mel

#37 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:57 pm

Hanks was still probably suffering from the stigma of being a TV actor before going into movies. If not for the decision he made "to quit playing pussies" as he put it, one flop too many in the 90's and that's probably what would have happened.

User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: Heaven and Mel

#38 Post by cdnchris » Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:05 am


Brian C wrote: ... and Hanks had long faded into mostly unnoticed dreck.
Based on Turner & Hooch and Dragnet? That seems pretty fair.


User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Heaven and Mel

#39 Post by mfunk9786 » Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:26 am

I was informed that we already had an identically titled thread about whether or not Mel Gibson is an asshole or a really big asshole. They are now combined. Carry on.

User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Heaven and Mel: Our One and Only Mel Gibson Discussion Thread

#40 Post by Brian C » Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:09 am

Hey, say what you want to about Turner & Hooch but Dragnet was awesome. And somehow a PG-13 rated Hollywood movie in the heart of the Reagan years that takes a clear-eyed look at the codependence between the religious right and the porn industry!

Also, to stay on topic, Mel Gibson something something.

User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: Heaven and Mel: Our One and Only Mel Gibson Discussion Thread

#41 Post by cdnchris » Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:32 am

(I'm actually a fan of Dragnet, too)

People
Against
Goodness
And
Normalcy

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: Heaven and Mel: Our One and Only Mel Gibson Discussion Thread

#42 Post by colinr0380 » Fri Nov 20, 2020 4:24 am

The difference between many of the star actors mentioned above (apart from the well publicised troubles, though the following factor may be the 'real world' expression of them) is the strong sense of masochism in many of Mel Gibson's roles. I think it is part of what makes him such an interesting actor with a tonally coherent body of work.

Mad Max goes through all of his losses in the first film and becomes a hardened figure towards the world in which he exists in, eventually becoming detached from the post-apocalyptic society around him to such an extent that even when Max has a community that might want him to stay with them (as protector/father figure) at the end of The Road Warrior he still leaves them behind to continue his wanderings alone, all the better to solidify the mythical hero worship of the young mute boy through whose elderly reminiscences that film is filtered through. I remember taking Vince Vaughan to task a few years back for doing 'stoicism' to such an extreme that it was just blankness in Brawl In Cell Block 99 (which reminds me that I need to catch up with that director's Dragged Across Concrete at some point, which stars Vaughan and Gibson together for that same director), which is not the same thing at all, though it may look superficially similar, but Gibson's playing of Max in those films is perhaps the perfect example of that kind of figure done well. Where the stoicism is both coming from the character but also just as much from the way the other characters and the film itself is looking back at, and projecting onto, his blankness. Which can be going in two different directions at the same time, with the other characters or the film feeling things about the character that might not be bourne out by the character himself; or alternatively the character showing flashes of emotion or being momentarily touched in a way that breaks through that hardened exterior for a moment. I also suppose a lot of this all goes back to Clint Eastwood's "Man With No Name" and Toshiro Mifune's Yojimbo/Sanjuro figure too.

The Lethal Weapon series is not apart from the masochism either, although it kind of takes the exact opposite trajectory to the Mad Max films in the way that it starts with the Mel Gibson character being crazily suicidally inclined and slowly builds up relationships with his partner, partner's family and eventually a whole 'extended universe' of characters around him that kind of pull him back from his 'craziness' and turn it from an expression of suicidal urges in the face of an callously cruel wider world in the first two films more into a kind of endearing character quirk no more or less important than being a family man and being "too old for this shit" by the third and fourth ones! The masochism still remains but its transformed from waving a gun around wildly and dangerously more into comparing scars with Rene Russo as a form of romantic foreplay!

Then there's the Gibson playing of Hamlet as very Oedipally fixated and thrown into turmoil perhaps less by his father's death than by his mother marrying someone else rather than him! And its never been emphasised more than in that version that Hamlet is pretty much entirely the cause of his own downfall without needing much help from any machinations of others (which I am not sure I agree with coming at it from the perspective of whether it is a good adaptation of the play, but which I think is fascinating when seen in the context of Mel Gibson's career).

But of course the real expression of (romanticised to the extreme) masochism comes from the films he has directed. The Man Without A Face is a wonderful film about a man who tries to hide away from the world yet ironically even the small contacts he still has with people only serve to turn him into even more of a wronged pariah. Braveheart, for all of its buttock brandishing battle scenes, ironically only really comes emotionally alive in its final sequence of Gibson being hung, drawn and quartered in excruciatingly drawn out detail. William Wallace himself transcends his broken and destroyed bodily existence to become a symbol of defiance and a struggle for independence that will live on through the ages.

Then there's the Passion of the Christ, which is pretty much about the same thing and narrows the focus down by making that final transcendent torture scene of Braveheart into the entire film. And then Apocalypto which is about the insignificant perspective of a single man stuck in a witnessing role inside an entire society that has a death wish, a society that ends up achieving that goal of annihilation, albeit not in the ways that they expect.

So whilst of course not condoning his real life actions (and having not as yet seen any of his recent films to see what has been occurring since this time, even The Beaver!), I still find him a fascinating figure on screen. That full, loving embrace of a kind of masochism in his characters (even What Women Want is kind of all about his character paying for his crimes of ignorance in detailed, drawn out fashion!), where they are badly wronged but still redeemable in some fashion (if only in the eyes of the film audience, often not by the crowds baying for blood, particularly those as portrayed in the films he has directed) is something very different to anything Tom Hanks, George Clooney or Tom Cruise have ever approached, or presumably have wanted to!
Last edited by colinr0380 on Mon Jan 18, 2021 6:18 am, edited 2 times in total.

beamish14
Joined: Fri May 18, 2018 3:07 pm

Re: Heaven and Mel: Our One and Only Mel Gibson Discussion Thread

#43 Post by beamish14 » Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:11 pm

Did anyone else here recall seeing the trailer for The Beaver in a theatre? It hit screens shortly after the bottom fell out for Gibson, and
the audience I saw it with went hysterical over it.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Heaven and Mel: Our One and Only Mel Gibson Discussion Thread

#44 Post by therewillbeblus » Fri Nov 20, 2020 4:23 pm

Yeah it looked ridiculous. Still, it was nice to see Jodie Foster come right out of the gate trying to give her friend a chance, who she obviously saw as a three-dimensional person before he had to 'earn' it from others. I seem to remember her listing his compassionate qualities in an interview to deaf ears, not that I blame anyone for being skeptical!

flyonthewall2983
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: Heaven and Mel: Our One and Only Mel Gibson Discussion Thread

#45 Post by flyonthewall2983 » Wed Nov 25, 2020 10:00 am

Brian C wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:09 am
Hey, say what you want to about Turner & Hooch but Dragnet was awesome. And somehow a PG-13 rated Hollywood movie in the heart of the Reagan years that takes a clear-eyed look at the codependence between the religious right and the porn industry!
It's one of those movies I saw a lot as a kid, and having some exposure to the show itself via Nick-At-Nite (and a little later, seeing the famous Carson skit with Harry Webb) gave the comedic aspect to that reboot some context even I could understand at such a tender time in life.

Harry Morgan reprising his character in such a way that both honors his role in the original show, and also banks on the presence he had on M*A*S*H* was kind of genius, and a total one-off.

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: Heaven and Mel: Our One and Only Mel Gibson Discussion Thread

#46 Post by hearthesilence » Wed Nov 25, 2020 3:41 pm

beamish14 wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:11 pm
Did anyone else here recall seeing the trailer for The Beaver in a theatre? It hit screens shortly after the bottom fell out for Gibson, and
the audience I saw it with went hysterical over it.
Yes I did, and yes that was the reaction I saw too.

I actually saw a special preview that Jodie Foster attended too, which was pretty fun even if the movie itself wasn't good. I was invited along because a friend of mine was covering it for a publication. I even helped with some questions, and based on some comments Foster had already made, I suggested incorporating a Rossellini quote mentioned in Tag Gallagher's bio on Rossellini ("One makes films in order to become a better human being"), and she enthusiastically agreed with that point.

Jonathan Demme even dropped by while she was interviewed by reporters, and it was nice to see them warmly greet each other. At the screening, she did a full discussion and audience Q&A by herself. I'm not sure if she does this often, but I figured this might have been a rare exception because of the PR nightmare Gibson had created. Since she directed it and it was an independently financed production, a lot more was riding on it. Anyway, nothing new or controversial was said about Gibson, they acknowledged he was going through a bad time and avoided analyzing or critiquing his troubles.

To be fair, the acting isn't bad, especially Jennifer Lawrence, but it was a pretty bizarre experience watching Gibson under that controversy. I'm not really a fan and I never liked him as a director, but years later when I was revisiting his Australian films (particularly Mad Max), it was easy to see why people were excited about him and wanted to bring him to Hollywood. As a very promising discovery with a lot of potential, I find those early performances far more enjoyable than what he's done since.


User avatar
thirtyframesasecond
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:48 pm

Re: Heaven and Mel: Our One and Only Mel Gibson Discussion Thread

#48 Post by thirtyframesasecond » Fri Jul 16, 2021 5:02 pm

Gibson and Lithgow are good fun in the Daddy's Home sequel. Gibson's actions are his own and nobody should try to justify his behaviour. Severe waste of a latter-day career though, both behind and in front of the camera. I have no interest in ever watching Passion of the Christ again (though the Ray Parker Jr. song is awesome), but it's an undeniably powerful film.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Heaven and Mel: Our One and Only Mel Gibson Discussion Thread

#49 Post by therewillbeblus » Fri Jul 16, 2021 5:14 pm

Apocalypto is awesome, but I never cared for his other directorial efforts. I finally got around to Passion of the Christ a few years ago and hated it, but not because it was offensive or anything (having grown up in a Jewish culture, and obsessively searching for the antisemitic issues while watching, I was surprised to come up completely empty, though that's not to say they aren't there somewhere). I just found the film completely boring and not affecting in the least. I feel like it's hard to make a film like this anything but "powerful" on some level, but whatever it was doing just whooshed right by me.

User avatar
soundchaser
Leave Her to Beaver
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:32 am

Re: Heaven and Mel: Our One and Only Mel Gibson Discussion Thread

#50 Post by soundchaser » Fri Jul 16, 2021 5:28 pm

I remember enjoying this Slant piece discussing The Passion in conversation with The Last Temptation of Christ. I know you're no fan of the latter, but I still think this article might articulate some of the issues that make the Gibson less powerful. It did for me, at least!

Post Reply