Disney rethinks links with Mel Gibson

[CareBlair]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14139167/

"...Disney is scheduled to release Mr Gibson's latest production, Apocalypto, in December, and to support the film about the decline of the Mayan civilization with an advertising and promotional campaign.

In an ironic twist fit for a screenplay, Disney's ABC network has also been developing a mini-series about the Holocaust with Mr Gibson....

...However, ABC appeared to cut ties with Mr Gibson by saying that it would cancel the Holocaust project...."

 

[Fitswimmer]

OK, that's their choice. I just find the media's response to this hypocritical. If it's ok to stop buying Braveheart DVD's then it's ok to stop buying Dixie Chick CD's too. I notice a vastly different tone about the Gibson thing than what happened after the Dixie Chick thing. They were painted as victims of a vast Right Wing conspiracy-which they weren't. Just like Mel, they said something that offended a group of people and suffered the consequences.
Freedom of speech means the same thing whether we agree with the speech or not. That's the whole point! In this country we're allowed to express whatever bonehead opinion we want, and we're also free to support or withdraw support from any celebrity that says or does something that we consider boneheaded.
If I like an artist's work, I'll pay to see it or listen to it regardless of what they may have said as a private citizen-but that's me. I have no problem with others who choose to "speak with their wallets" in response to such things. Just be consistent-if it's ok to do in one case, it's ok to do in any case.

 

[MJMcBride]

OK, that's their choice. I just find the media's response to this hypocritical. If it's ok to stop buying Braveheart DVD's then it's ok to stop buying Dixie Chick CD's too. I notice a vastly different tone about the Gibson thing than what happened after the Dixie Chick thing. They were painted as victims of a vast Right Wing conspiracy-which they weren't. Just like Mel, they said something that offended a group of people and suffered the consequences.
Freedom of speech means the same thing whether we agree with the speech or not. That's the whole point! In this country we're allowed to express whatever bonehead opinion we want, and we're also free to support or withdraw support from any celebrity that says or does something that we consider boneheaded.
If I like an artist's work, I'll pay to see it or listen to it regardless of what they may have said as a private citizen-but that's me. I have no problem with others who choose to "speak with their wallets" in response to such things. Just be consistent-if it's ok to do in one case, it's ok to do in any case.

OK. I know we're opening up a can or worms here but I take issue with this post for several reasons in that I don't understand your point. To compare a racial slur with a political statement is wrong as those are two vastly different things in my view.

Secondly, it seems they have been treated the same. The Dixie Chicks were slammed and companies did not want to work with them after they made those comments, much like Mel. Its only been more recently as public opinion has shifted away from the President that they have gotten a more favorable public response.

 

[exDS vet]

MJMcBride...
First off, whatever Gibson said in a drunken state, was apparently not a racial slur. Since the Jews are not a race, but a religion.

I have a problem with this whole story because if Mel Gibson was Jack Smith, nobody would be saying anything. But because Gibson is a celebrity, the story gets jucier. It actually becomes a story. And what timing, with a war going on in Israel and Lebanon. The funny thing is since the media is portraying the Israelis as the bad guys in this war, I'm surprised they aren't painting Gibson as a hero.

I have known people who say things they shouldn't when they have been drunk. Unfortunately when some people are in this state, they cannot control the words that come from their mouths. Did he mean to say it? Probably not. Does he deserve a pass from us for the comments? Why not. If I am excusing Mel Gibson's behavior, then sobeit. I just think this is the media's attempt to get all of us wound-up, just like they did with the Dixie Chicks.

And so far, it appears to be working.

 

[MJMcBride]

MJMcBride...
First off, whatever Gibson said in a drunken state, was apparently not a racial slur. Since the Jews are not a race, but a religion.

I have a problem with this whole story because if Mel Gibson was Jack Smith, nobody would be saying anything. But because Gibson is a celebrity, the story gets jucier. It actually becomes a story. And what timing, with a war going on in Israel and Lebanon. The funny thing is since the media is portraying the Israelis as the bad guys in this war, I'm surprised they aren't painting Gibson as a hero.

I have known people who say things they shouldn't when they have been drunk. Unfortunately when some people are in this state, they cannot control the words that come from their mouths. Did he mean to say it? Probably not. Does he deserve a pass from us for the comments? Why not. If I am excusing Mel Gibson's behavior, then sobeit. I just think this is the media's attempt to get all of us wound-up, just like they did with the Dixie Chicks.

And so far, it appears to be working.

First of all, I agree that I should not have said "racial". But you know what I mean. Using a slur based on race, religion or sexual preference is far different in my book from a political protest/statement.

Secondly, just because he's drunk does not give him a pass. I'm sure he really feels that way. Booze doesn't make you lie. In fact, it is often a "truth serum" so to speak. We got to know the real Mel.

And of course, its only a story because Mel Gibson is a celebrity. We all know that. With the war going plus Gibson's father's feeling about the holocaust and Gibson's denial that he feels that way, plus the heat the Jewish community gave Gibson for his potrayal of Jews in the Passion of the Christ. It all makes it juicier.

 

[pouncingpluto]

OK. I know we're opening up a can or worms here but I take issue with this post for several reasons in that I don't understand your point. To compare a racial slur with a political statement is wrong as those are two vastly different things in my view.

Secondly, it seems they have been treated the same. The Dixie Chicks were slammed and companies did not want to work with them after they made those comments, much like Mel. Its only been more recently as public opinion has shifted away from the President that they have gotten a more favorable public response.

Thank you!!!

And as to whether Jews are a race or a religion... I would argue that they're largely considered both. Or, at least, Jews have traditionally been a more racially homogenous group than many religious groups and have tended to be distinct from the "host" population. The modern situation of Jews in the U.S. is unique in their history.

But then we get into the whole argument over whether race exists anyway or if it's a social construct. (I think it clearly does exist to some degree, but it's a lot less clear than the convenient categories we place people in.)

While drunken Gibson undoubtedly said something he otherwise wouldn't have let himself had his guard not been down, I doubt he just made it up without having real feelings or opinion behind it.

 

[cxcelica]

I disagree with the post that alcohol is a "truth serum". Alcohol releases inhibitions, that does not necessarily mean it reflects who you are. When people get drunk and engage in adult relationships with people they never would thats hardly a truth serum. It allows you to do things you would not normally do. Alot of time people would not do something normally because they know it is wrong.

Anyway this Mel Gibson thing is a non-story really. He got pulled over for drunk driving. If anything the outrage should be that he was driving drunk. You dont hear anyone talking about the fact that he could have killed someone, all you hear is the outrage about the statements.

He said he was sorry and he did not mean them, for me thats enough to just move on.

 

[MJMcBride]

It allows you to do things you would not normally do.

But that you really want to. Thats what I meant by "truth serum". It removes the inhibitions you would have if sober to do things you want to. Or say things that you really want to.

 

[cxcelica]

But that you really want to. Thats what I meant by "truth serum". It removes the inhibitions you would have if sober to do things you want to. Or say things that you really want to.

I don't think it allows you to say what you really want to, I think it allows you to do things you normally would not do. That does not mean that these are necassarily things you want to do all the time and the alcohol brought out the real you.

It means the little guards in your head that say don't steal that because it is wrong do to it, or don't sleep with that person because it is not the right thing, are down. Thats not the real you

 

[Fitswimmer]

I know we're opening up a can or worms here but I take issue with this post for several reasons in that I don't understand your point. To compare a racial slur with a political statement is wrong as those are two vastly different things in my view.

I'll try and be clearer then. What my point is that anyone who defended the Dixie Chicks for their freedom of speech needs to do the same for Mel Gibson-whether they like what he says or not. It doesn't matter what the comment was-political, racial, religious, or even how stupid it was. The issue is whether a person has the right to make the comment.
The Dixie Chicks made the cover of every magazine, all the talk shows and now even have a CD and concert tour that trades on the controversy over their comments overseas. The general impression is that anyone who disagreed with what they did, or stopped buying their stuff were attacking their freedom of speech. They were portrayed as victims, and are still playing up that identity. (they played MSG in NY last night and had lots of fun with it and Mel according to the NY Daily News)
We all have the right to have opinions that others may consider incorrect, offensive or downright stupid. We also have the responsibility to choose when to express those opinions. If you make your living in the public eye, you'd better expect that there will be consequences if you express a controversial opinion in public. I only get interested when the reaction is inconsistent, as it seems to be here.

 

[exDS vet]

I don't think it allows you to say what you really want to, I think it allows you to do things you normally would not do. That does not mean that these are necassarily things you want to do all the time and the alcohol brought out the real you.

It means the little guards in your head that say don't steal that because it is wrong do to it, or don't sleep with that person because it is not the right thing, are down. Thats not the real you

I agree. Alcohol makes many people say and do very stupid things. I had to end a friendship with a very close friend because the bottle was more important than his family, friends, life. When certain people are drunk, they take on an entirely different persona. Especially the high strung individuals. More mellow people just get quieter, and in some cases people do the opposite.

And people regularly do things they normally wouldn't do when intoxicated. Hence the song lyric "the girls all look prettier at closing time."

I also agree that the real story should be about Gibson driving drunk. And it will be so when this story dies later today or tomorrow. When he is convicted, he will do some community service, a P.S.A. and go on a goodwill tour to speak against drinking and driving. All will be good in the world.

I don't see this incident hurting Gibson's career at all.

 

[Fitswimmer]

I think a movie done entirely in Mayan is going to give him more career problems than this. The Passion made money because there was a target audience ready to lay down the money to see it. I don't really know how large the Mayan community is, but I'm thinking it may not be quite that big.

 

[MJMcBride]

I don't see this incident hurting Gibson's career at all.

I couldn't disagree more. I think his career is in definite jeopardy.

As for saying something while drunk, do you honestly believe he's not an anti-semite after what he said even though he was intoxicated?

 

[MJMcBride]

I'll try and be clearer then. What my point is that anyone who defended the Dixie Chicks for their freedom of speech needs to do the same for Mel Gibson-whether they like what he says or not. It doesn't matter what the comment was-political, racial, religious, or even how stupid it was. The issue is whether a person has the right to make the comment.
The Dixie Chicks made the cover of every magazine, all the talk shows and now even have a CD and concert tour that trades on the controversy over their comments overseas. The general impression is that anyone who disagreed with what they did, or stopped buying their stuff were attacking their freedom of speech. They were portrayed as victims, and are still playing up that identity. (they played MSG in NY last night and had lots of fun with it and Mel according to the NY Daily News)
We all have the right to have opinions that others may consider incorrect, offensive or downright stupid. We also have the responsibility to choose when to express those opinions. If you make your living in the public eye, you'd better expect that there will be consequences if you express a controversial opinion in public. I only get interested when the reaction is inconsistent, as it seems to be here.

But then don't pretend you're not anti-semitic. He spent so much time and energy claiming Passion of the Christ was not ant-semitic and separating himself from his father's views. He was caught lying. Thats what most people are latching onto. The Dixie Chicks did not turn around and say.."no we were drunk, we love George Bush and think the war is necessary, etc."

Besides, my memory is that the Dixie Chicks took a major PR beating after that. Its only now when most of the country is against the War and Dubya that they have been accepted again.

So I guess I disagree with you that the reaction is all that different. Plus, like I said before I think these are two very different.

 

[Fitswimmer]

There's also a persistent rumor going around that Mel was set up by someone from the website that broke the story. The club he was drinking in is a hang out for celebs, so the cops sit on the road out to stop them from driving drunk. (good thing they do) Anyway, the rumor is that someone from the website got him going on his way out of the club, so when he got stopped it just added to the fun.
It's not hard to get a drunk person to act crazy, especially if it is someone who has been sober a long time and then falls off the wagon-which is another part of his story.
Everytime I read one of these stories, I'm so thankful that I'm not famous. What a lousy way to have to live, watching every move you make and every word that comes out of your mouth because there's always someone ready to publicize your failings.

 

[cxcelica]

I couldn't disagree more. I think his career is in definite jeopardy.

As for saying something while drunk, do you honestly believe he's not an anti-semite after what he said even though he was intoxicated?

Mel Gibson's career is not in jeopardy. The last major film he starred in was Signs. He made so much money producing the Passion of the Christ (which studio execs ended up kicking themselves over, since no one wanted to touch it and Gibson laid out alot of his own money) that he has the freedom and control to make his own movies, and that is what he has been doing.

His career is not in jeopardy, he is at point in his career where he can do what he wants and that is what he is doing. Its not like he needed to do Lethal Weapon 5 and now he cannot!!

I don't care either way about Mel Gibson, but I do feel that there is a large group of people who are really happy over this, since they have been looking to stick it to Mel Gibson ever since the Passion of the Christ(which I should say I have not seen)

 

[MJMcBride]

Mel Gibson's career is not in jeopardy. The last major film he starred in was Signs. He made so much money producing the Passion of the Christ (which studio execs ended up kicking themselves over, since no one wanted to touch it and Gibson laid out alot of his own money) that he has the freedom and control to make his own movies, and that is what he has been doing.

His career is not in jeopardy, he is at point in his career where he can do what he wants and that is what he is doing. Its not like he needed to do Lethal Weapon 5 and now he cannot!!

I don't care either way about Mel Gibson, but I do feel that there is a large group of people who are really happy over this, since they have been looking to stick it to Mel Gibson ever since the Passion of the Christ(which I should say I have not seen)

I did not mean to imply that he is going to go broke by any means. However, I think many people will not see a movie of his now that might have before. Plus, he was always viewed as a "nice guy" and that image is shot.

 

[carrie s]

First I dont see how anyone can call Passion of the Christ anti-semitic.Jesus was jewish and was killed by romans.I honestly dont see how Jewish people can have a problem with it.I think jewish people just dont like that Christains believe Jesus is God.

The news has been making Isreal out to be the bad guys.the news is mostly showing all the people in Lebonon suffering, there showing very little of how this is effecting Isreal.Many people believe all this started over the 2 soldiers being kidnapped, when the kidnapping was just the last straw after years of being terrorized. Anyway, Mel was probably watching all this on the news and was upset by it so while he was drunk these feelings came out.What he said was wrong ,I dont want it to sound like I think its not,but it may not of been how it sounded.Alot of people are worried about this war, he may just be one of them.

 

[exDS vet]

Besides, my memory is that the Dixie Chicks took a major PR beating after that. Its only now when most of the country is against the War and Dubya that they have been accepted again.

I agree and disagree with this point. The Dixie Chicks did not just take a PR beating over Natalie's comments. They lost their country audience. Today, they have not been accepted again. They have found a new audience. The music on their new album is completely different from anything on their prior 3 releases.

The anti-war/liberal crowd jumped on the Dixie Chick bandwagon and the chicks responded by recording a left-leaning album. Country music has not welcomed the Dixie Chicks back and my guess is that they never will. As a fan of country music, and a supporter of the war, I guess I am in the middle because I also support the Dixie Chicks and enjoy their music. I guess I am better than others at being open-minded and accepting.

I'd imagine that this thread will be moved to another board pretty soon.

 

[MJMcBride]

First I dont see how anyone can call Passion of the Christ anti-semitic.Jesus was jewish and was killed by romans.I honestly dont see how Jewish people can have a problem with it.I think jewish people just dont like that Christains believe Jesus is God.

Do you see Passion of the Christ? I only saw parts of it so I can't make a complete determination. But I will say this. Jesus, his followers, and even the Romans were well groomed nice looking people. All of the Jews (that I saw) were potrayed as ugly, with bad hygiene and teeth. Visual symbolism? Maybe.

I'm not jewish but count many jews as friends and none of them don't like me because I'm Catholic or have any problem with my beliefs so I'm not sure how you can say that last bit.