Skip to comments.
Hollywood to crucify Mel
The Australian ^
| February 27, 2004
| Lynden Barber
Posted on 02/26/2004 7:33:43 AM PST by dinok
STUDIO chiefs in Hollywood have pledged to black-ban Mel Gibson for his film The Passion of The Christ, which earned more than $637,000 when it opened in Australia on Wednesday.
The chairmen of two Hollywood studios said they would avoid working with Gibson because of the film, which he directed and financed, and his comments surrounding its release, the New York Times reported yesterday.
One of the studio chairmen, who asked for anonymity, told the newspaper: "It doesn't matter what I say. It'll matter what I do. I will do something. I won't hire him. I won't support anything he's part of. Personally that's all I can do."
The chairman said he was angered not only at what he had read about the film's portrayal of Jews but at Gibson's refusal to dissociate himself from remarks made by his father, Hutton Gibson, last week.
The elder Gibson told an interviewer the Holocaust was "all -- maybe not all fiction -- but most of it is".
The younger Gibson, asked in a television interview about his father's comments, told his interrogator to "leave it alone".
The other studio chairman, whose family escaped the Holocaust, said he thought he could "live without" the actor-director.
Jeffrey Katzenberg and David Geffen, the co-heads of the studio DreamWorks with Steven Spielberg, have also privately expressed anger over the film, according to an inside source quoted by the New York Times.
Mark Gooder, managing director of the film's Gibson-owned Australian distributor, Icon Films, said the film's earnings on Wednesday were greater than the $508,000 earned locally by Master and Commander on its first day, and showed it was "a phenomenon".
TOPICS: Australia/New Zealand; Business/Economy; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: bias; blacklist; censorship; christianity; film; hollywood; hollywoodleft; mccarthyism; media; mediabias; passion
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-163 next last
Isn't it interesting that the people who remind us of McCarthy and blacklisting at the drop of a hat want to blacklist Mel Gibson?
1
posted on
02/26/2004 7:33:43 AM PST
by
dinok
To: dinok
OOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooo! I Bet he's just shaking in his boots!
2
posted on
02/26/2004 7:36:23 AM PST
by
Core_Conservative
(ODC-GIRL - the love of my life! - supporting Homeland Defense!)
To: dinok
...so much for the TOLERANT left....
To: dinok
It doesn't surprise me at all. The knives are out for Mel.
4
posted on
02/26/2004 7:37:20 AM PST
by
TheSpottedOwl
(Until Kofi Annan rides the Jerusalem RTD....nothing will change.)
To: dinok
I think they're all jealous that he made a movie they would never ever have even thought to make (forget about dared to make), and is getting global fame and recognition, and record ticket sales out of the deal.
5
posted on
02/26/2004 7:38:08 AM PST
by
thoughtomator
("What do I know? I'm just the President." - George W. Bush, Superbowl XXXVIII pregame statement)
To: dinok
Correction.
Hollywood will attempt to crucify Mel Gibson.
6
posted on
02/26/2004 7:38:13 AM PST
by
cripplecreek
(you win wars by making the other dumb SOB die for his country)
To: dinok
Good point. Another thing is they will change their tune bigtime if something Mel is involved with is a money maker. Then all these comments are just so much dust in the wind.
To: dinok
Gee, I don't think this is true. It would mean that they first killed Christ and then blacklisted Mel.
8
posted on
02/26/2004 7:39:20 AM PST
by
Tacis
To: dinok
Now, we know TRobbins and SS are going to speak out about this blackballing aren't they...
To: dinok
"One Chairman" ??, "the other Studio Chairman" ??
Talk about cowards!!
To: dinok
What always amazes me is how riled up people, who don't believe Jesus is who He says He is, get over anything having to do with Christianty.
If it is all such nonsense and fairy tale, why invest an ounce of emotion on it? Why does it frighten them so?
I think we know why.
To: Sunshine Sister
I'd agree with you. As soon as he comes up with something that's gonna rake in the dough, they'll be sprinting towards him to help. Hypocricy 101 at its best.
12
posted on
02/26/2004 7:40:38 AM PST
by
writer33
(The U.S. Constitution defines a Conservative)
To: JustPlainJoe
No, so much for the constant handwringing and accusations about the "blacklist", under which most of the Hollywood communists blacklisted were able to work and be paid under assumed names anyway. Interesting that Hollywood will blacklist America's favorite actor for creating a successful work of art, a religious movie and because of the nonsensical rants of his 85-year old father says but they rant about the destructive effects of blacklisting people who provided aid and comfort to enemies dedicated to bringing about their country's downfall. Thank God for people in Hollywood at that time like Ronald Reagan, Robert Taylor, Elia Kazan and Louis Mayer.
13
posted on
02/26/2004 7:41:48 AM PST
by
laconic
To: Sunshine Sister
Or if we follow their advice and avoid their movies that are "too violent".
14
posted on
02/26/2004 7:41:52 AM PST
by
Centaur
(Never practice moderation to excess.)
To: dinok
I can't wait to hear what Babs has to say!! :-)
To: dinok
Hmmmmmm.....Lets see, Mel Owns his own production Company, is going to make billion dollars, when all is said and done,Has outstanding directorial credits to his resume, making him an attractive choice for any would-be or established actor.....
Someone remind me, he needs these schmucks for what????
16
posted on
02/26/2004 7:42:31 AM PST
by
hobbes1
(Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
To: dinok
Isn't it interesting that the people who remind us of McCarthy and blacklisting at the drop of a hat want to blacklist Mel Gibson?Yeah. It's almost as interesting as the fact that these "proud Jews" in Hollywood opposed the war against Saddam Hussein and haven't uttered a peep in support of Israel during the current moslem terrorist campaign. But unfortunately, a lot of people who are upset with "Hollywood Jews" will take their anger out on Israel. That always seems to happen.
17
posted on
02/26/2004 7:42:43 AM PST
by
Zionist Conspirator
(Ki sheishet yamim `asah HaShem 'et HaShamayim ve'et Ha'Aretz . . .)
To: dinok
I see this ultimately as a good thing....let us seperate the wheat from the chaff. It is past time for all people to choose sides in the culture war, and I for one turned my back on Hollywood a long time ago. Mel Gibson probably has no intention of ever again being a "Hollywood movie star". IMHO, Mr. Gibson has chosen sides.
18
posted on
02/26/2004 7:43:46 AM PST
by
MamaLucci
(Clinton met with 20 year old Monica more than with his CIA Director...think about that....)
To: Core_Conservative
Yeah, and why does Mel need Hollywood?
He financed this movie by himself, nobody wanted to distribute it, it was to have a limited showing, then when it started showing signs of being "popular" with audiences, all of a sudden theatres were jumping on board like fleas jumping on a dog.
He has proved he doesn't need Hollywood to do what he wants to do!
19
posted on
02/26/2004 7:44:25 AM PST
by
dawn53
To: dinok
So is Tim Robbins going to fret about a "chill wind"?
20
posted on
02/26/2004 7:45:07 AM PST
by
Sloth
(We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-163 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson