criterionforum.org

He's actually reached out to Mel Gibson about how to handle this, as this highly critical MTV article details.

It's an obvious move on the surface — after all, Gibson did star in and direct Braveheart, which garnered him the Academy Award for Best Director and Best Picture in 1996. But look a little closer, and it highlights the toxic culture that men are allowed to profit from in Hollywood. Parker might be black, but he's still a man. And as a man, he had no qualms seeking advice from Gibson and then broadcasting the fact that he did in Variety. Among a myriad of offenses, Gibson was arrested for drunk driving, admitted to hitting his ex Oksana Grigorieva, and has hurled anti-black, anti-Semitic, and misogynistic slurs that were caught on tape. Of course, Gibson's anti-Semitism still earned him accolades from other male directors like Spike Lee and Quentin Tarantino for his film Apocalypto. It earned him the role of mentor to Nate Parker, who not only has been accused of violating a woman's body, but also once told BET.com that he would never play a gay character to "preserve the Black man."

Ouch.

Any celebrity publicly reaching out to Mel Gibson on how to handle increased media and popular scrutiny in the wake of personal controversies is probably a bad idea, but that thinkpiece (like nearly all internet thinkpieces) is godawful.

Parker might be black, but he's still a man. And as a man, he had no qualms seeking advice from Gibson and then broadcasting the fact that he did in Variety.

How dare Parker be a man.

That's really what you read into that? Seriously?

I think it just means it's probably a bad look for a man, a minority though he may be, to try to prop up his image as an abuser of women by consulting with another alleged abuser of women. But I have been wrong before, and will surely be wrong again.

It would be a bad idea for anyone to do that, as I agreed. There's no need to frame it via "as a man"

Gender studies, and so on and so forth

It is 2016, and we are old. I don't think it's implying any sort of original sin, just establishing his starting line and how his actions should be framed. And so on, and so forth.

The article that mfunk linked to is muddled because Ira Madison III is one of the worst entertainment journalists I've ever read (used to read him at Vulture and he is abysmal at drawing conclusions and conveying ideas). If you read the Variety article linked to the first mention of Gibson, Parker explains that he sought Gibson's advice about directing battle scenes like those found in Braveheart.

Hahahaha, well it serves me right for not reading the actual Variety piece. Ridiculous.

Wow, that's really sleazy to misrepresent Parker's actions like that in order to score cheap points. Surely there are more than enough visible facets of this scandal to discuss and examine without resorting to attacks that are skewed to fit an existent argument like a bad freshman research paper

Of course, Gibson's anti-Semitism still earned him accolades from other male directors like Spike Lee and Quentin Tarantino for his film Apocalypto.

This is the line that baffled me: so his anti-Semitism is the reason Lee and Tarantino liked that movie? And that anti-Semitism-fueled film criticism is only applicable to men? I get that this writer has apparently demonstrated sub-par talent, but who edited this?

mfunk9786 wrote: Tue Nov 17, 2020 5:07 pm

this rules honestly

Would need some additional information on why you believe that is so

I agree with him/ her. It shows the film’s goals in a pretty succinct and fun looking way.

The image on the spine taken by itself is freaking me out, like one of those paintings whose eyes follow you as you move across the room. I do love the tagline and appreciate its inclusion on the cover.

If any movie was begging for the Blu-ray cover designer to borrow the template from Nebraska, surely it was this one

knives wrote: Wed Nov 18, 2020 12:25 am I agree with him/ her. It shows the film’s goals in a pretty succinct and fun looking way.

him, and even without having seen the film, it just seems to capture the tone - it's going to be a goofy(?) action movie and that's represented well.

I suppose I should run down why I don't like it:

- Doesn't evoke the idea that Gibson's character is 'Santa' on any level, title aside
- Bizarre image of Goggins(?) seemingly playing paintball on the ground level there
- Same image of Gibson on the spine
- Bad white border and typefaces, bad tagline

All of this said: I am going to watch this movie inevitably.

I appreciate the tagline because it made me realize that revenge, in fact, never does take a holiday

mfunk9786 wrote: Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:45 pmDoesn't evoke the idea that Gibson's character is 'Santa' on any level, title aside

He's wearing the hat at least

flyonthewall2983 wrote: Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:57 pm

mfunk9786 wrote: Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:45 pmDoesn't evoke the idea that Gibson's character is 'Santa' on any level, title aside

He's wearing the hat at least

I thought he was sporting a Bruce Vilanch 'do

Remember when Mel Gibson was one of the biggest movie stars in the whole world? If you’re younger than 25 or so, you probably don’t remember this and might have a tough time believing this could have ever possibly been the case. But it really was.

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.

Harrison Ford too - he’s older than Gibson but their respective eras of biggest fame basically overlapped.

But definitely true that time has been unkind to the ‘80s action-hero generation. Gibson just seems different somehow though, maybe because Travolta and Willis always did so much schlock even in their primes and Gibson tanked so suddenly after his crazy was exposed.

Though Ford is semi-retired.

Brian C wrote: Thu Nov 19, 2020 2:47 am Harrison Ford too - he’s older than Gibson but their respective eras of biggest fame basically overlapped.

But definitely true that time has been unkind to the ‘80s action-hero generation. Gibson just seems different somehow though, maybe because Travolta and Willis always did so much schlock even in their primes and Gibson tanked so suddenly after his crazy was exposed.

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.

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.

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.