NYT - "New Film May Harm Gibson's Career"

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/26/movies/26GIBS.html

Mel Gibson's provocative new film, "The Passion of the Christ," is making some of Hollywood's most prominent executives uncomfortable in ways that may damage Mr. Gibson's career.

Hollywood is a close-knit world, and friendships and social contact are critical in the making of deals and the casting of movies. Many of Hollywood's most prominent figures are also Jewish. ... Jeffrey Katzenberg and David Geffen, the principals of DreamWorks, have privately expressed anger over the film, said an executive close to the two men. ...The chairmen of two other major studios said they would avoid working with Mr. Gibson ...

...

"You'll never work in this town again!" Interesting side note - didn't Michael Jackson say that Geffen was an anti-black racist, shortly before his latest scandals broke?

[lefty_mcduff]

1. Great.

Turning Gibson into a martyr for the Fundie cause.

[Jim Sagle]

19. He did it to himself. Fuck'm.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

33. you think the CEOs should punish him for anti-semetism?

Do you think Geffen et al should punish him for making this movie?

[Jim Sagle]

39. With all the money this money will make, plus all the money he already

has, how the hell can anyone punish him?

I wouldn't work with him either. He's a Nazi vacuum bag.

[belle]

49. Anyway, the fundies are officially supposed to be Our Pals right now...

Y'know, Moslems bad, so Jews good--anyway, officially. Like most of us want a bunch of weird fanatics "on our side" anyway, Lieberman notwithstanding.

[Silverhair]

2. Money talks louder than politics.

If Mel's "star power" can boost ticket sales of a movie, then he won't miss any signifigant roles. For that matter, he has enough money to produce his own movies.

[BigDaddyLove]

5. He did just that with this one.............

$25-$30 million of his own money.

Estimates are that 'Passion' will make that much this weekend alone.

Money talks louder than most anything else.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

6. sometimes your money is no good

Hollywood and the major entertainment conglomerates have segregated Chrisian entertainment into its own market niche, just like porn. If it was all about money - there would be evangelicals movies and TV shows ALL the time, because it's a HUGE market. Instead, the market is mostly ignored by the major corporations and instead distributed through "Christian bookstores" and the like. There are various reasons, one of the biggest ones because of the controversies that arise over Christian entertainment all the time.

Some of this is systemic though.

[BigDaddyLove]

7. While I have no numbers to strengthen my view, I don't think........

it's a matter of Hollywood segregating Christian entertainment as it's a matter of those Christian film/entertainment makers doing what they do independently of Hollywood.

Just because there is a huge audience for Christian material doesn't mean that Hollywood sees it as viable for the American mainstream, which is what Hollywood aims for.

Also, if you look closely at the receipts, I would think that at least a portion of the capital for such broadcasting does indeed come from more traditional sources.

[slappypan]

8. Overtly religious movies

are for the most part a huge turn-off to most of the movie-going public. That's why they are marketed to a niche audience. One can also argue that movies are an an inherently sensual, "pagan" spectacle and that Christian movies are an inherent contradiction much like Christian rock, but I don't want to go all Camille Paglia or anything.

[girl gone mad]

13. Simply not true.

There are plenty of Christian themed films released by Hollywood. "Luther" is a recent eample, and that was a flop.

People go to church on Sunday, they don't necessarily want to spend their Friday nights thinking about god and religion. Film is escapism from most, and escape from religious indoctrination is part of it.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

17. really? never heard of it

I never saw any advertizments or anything. So which one before that one?

"People go to church on Sunday, they don't necessarily want to spend their Friday nights thinking about god and religion. Film is escapism from most, and escape from religious indoctrination is part of it."

Yet it's a billion dollar business, just segregated from the rest of the entertainment industry, why?

[Jim Sagle]

20. HIs money ain't nuthin' but shit.

:puke:

[BigDaddyLove]

50. Whatever Cuz.

.

[Emboldened Chimp]

22. You kidding? Passion made $25-30 million its first day...

Gibson will profit handsomely from this when all is said and done. I see this movie going over $200 million easy. It'll have, as they say, legs.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

4. thanks

!

[K-W]

9. Also the issue of image

Like an actor who gets slotted into only one kind of role. Gibson made his money as a charming quirky action star. If that image is fundementally changed by this whole thing, hollywood will not know how to deal with him,

[BigDaddyLove]

10. True, but in this case he was behind the scenes..........

and as such most people (the public) won't even remember this 'controversy' when they go to see him in the next Lethal Weapon film.

His 'image' as a quirky action star will remain intact after everyone forgets about 'The Passion' in two weeks.

[DennisReveni]

35. He did make

Don't forget man without a Face, and star in such films as,
Tim, Gallipoli, Year of Living Dangerously, River, The, Mrs. Soffel, Bird on a Wire, Hamlet, Pocahontas (voice), Chicken Run (voice), What Women Want, Singing Detective, The (2003), and Mad Max: Fury Road (2004) (in production).

I think Mel has a long and healthy career ahead of him. Especially after next years Oscar nominations.

[hippiegranny]

11. the P.R. for this film did it's job

it created a huge furor that may cause many who normally would have ignored this film to go "just to see what all the fuss is about."

personally, i will not be paying money to see crucifixion porn.

[devinsgram]

15. Me neither,

I will be sending the money that a ticket would cost to whomever our nominee will be. I wouldn't give a nickel to see this fictional movie.

[Carolina]

21. me three

Mel and all repukes (Arnold, Bruce Willis, Tom Selleck ...) are on my boycott list anyway, so there is no way will I pay to see a movie by him that is essentially, as you so aptly put it, "crucifixion porn."

That movie money is better put to other uses.

[Loonman]

12. Jayson Blair reporting, again?

D'oh!

[Lorien]

14. Jeffery Katzenberg is also very

liberal. I know him personally; he's a big contributer to Dems and Dem issues, and has many close ties with other liberals in the Hollywood community (Whoopi Goldberg and he are very close friends). He also has one hell of a temper, but usually it doesn't surface unless it's fairly justified. I've seen him tear fellow co-workers to shreds over a less than PC statement, and I would never want to be on the receiving end of that!
He and Geffen a pretty powerful in the community. Though it usu sally is all about the money, I think at least those two would never compromise when it came to promoting that sort of destructive fanaticism (I'm also fairly certain that Sherrie Lansing would feel the same way).

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

18. do you think Katzenberg will blackball Gibson from the industry?

Are he and Geffen powerful enough in the industry to blackball people who makes films they oppose? If there was no religious angle to this, but a political one, could they make sure the movie didn't get made (or distributed)?

[Lorien]

36. They aren't that powerful

Jeffery is in the top ten (most powerful in Hollywood), and I think David is in the top 30, but I don't know what today's exact ranking is. Spielberg is their partner, and he's up in the top twenty as well. Pretty much ANY film can be made, but distribution is another matter. It's a small community where alliances are important (though there are different camps). I do think that Gibson could become "toxic"(especially since his bloodthirstiness was revealed*; beyond the film, Director Franco Zeffirelli (sp)? and actor Ian Holm were told by Gibson that he kills calves on his farm "to relax", and that the expressions they make while they are terrified, in pain, and dying, are "almost funny"-such comments won't sit well with much of Hollywood).

* story was in yesterdays LBN-I don't have the link.

[x-g.o.p.er]

16. I don't think $30 million on the first day alone

will harm his career. He will be lauded as a poster boy for many on the far right (although I do not suspect he necessarily wants to do that), and the money he makes from this movie will allow him to independently make another overtly religious movie of his choice.

This film harms Hollywood, not Mel.

[rooboy]

28. $30 million at the box office is not the same as $30m in Gibson's account

don't forget he spent a bomb making this pic.

[Hammie]

23. I think not

The guy has an amazing capacity for making the kinds of movies that people don't make, and making money at them. Braveheart and Patriot were both movies that I thought would suck, but when I saw them (on video) they were actually quite good and they were sucessful.

This movie will put a lot of money in Mel's pocket. I predict that he will turn around and put out another movie that is somehow shocking and successful.

[Dr Fate]

24. Thanks to "Liberals" who act just like Jerry Fawell...

...this movie will make more money and be seen by more people than "The Last Temptation of Christ", and the "Piss Christ" and "Elephant Crap on Mary" combined!!! Thanks to Liberals who act just like Jerry Fawell and Mayor Guliani...

All you people who complained about this over-dramatic movie gave Mel all the publicity in the world...He's laughing all the way to the bank-

In his mind god is now reaping rewards on him, despite the "persecution" he "suffered" over this movie...

I support FREE SPEECH. PERIOD.

I also support the right to NOT go see a movie. PERIOD.

[eissa]

26. That's what I said earlier

before I stopped posting about the movie. Many of us had used the argument of "if you don't like it, don't see it" in the past when conservatives got their panties in a bunch over "objectionable" films, yet when the table gets turned, many on the left did the same. Didn't O'Reily/Faux teach anyone anything?

[shoopnyc123]

25. He said that about Tommy Mottola (eom)

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

29. oops, you're right

Mottola, sorry about that!

[rooboy]

27. I don't think Mel Gibson gives a rats about his career...

I won't be going to see this movie and its timing is really unfortunate. But as far as his career is concerned, a remake of Xanadu would be far more damaging than a 'Jesus flick'...

[Muddleoftheroad]

32. Other studios

You know the smaller studios are frothing at the mouth, praying that the big studios won't use him. Mel sells. And business is all about cash.

[Minstrel Boy]

30. "Lethal Weapon IV" should have harmed his career.

Or "Signs", or "What Women Want."

Everything, rather, suggests Gibson has launched a new career, as a lay minister of the state religion.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

34. he should have been blackballed for "What Women Want"

that's for sure

[DennisReveni]

38. Except

He only acted in those. I'm sure he was paid well for his time and effort.
Other than Johnny Depp, can someone point to any other actor who makes wise choices in roles?

[Bridget Burke]

31. His acting career is not doing so well....

The IMDB showed his latest acting project as "Mad Max: Fury Road". It's "under production" but the comment reads: "Production offices have been closed, sets warehoused; project seems dead".

www.imdb.com/title/tt0345292/combined

Poor Mel.

[DennisReveni]

37. So

So Mad Max takes a hit, But Jesus is a blockbuster and you insult Mel.
Dudette, may you are due a reality check.

[Bridget Burke]

40. So, what's his next directorial project?

The IMDB lists all entertainment-related activities--even those still in the planning stage. There's nothing there for Mel. What's his next project?

Besides, you insult him by calling the Jesus pic a "blockbuster". He did it to fill a deep, spiritual need!

[slinkerwink]

45. I couldn't care less about Mel----he fucked himself on this one

[Sterling]

46. He has lost "it"

Maybe it was the booze but he seems frantic and twitchy these days. A shell of his former self. I see a man slowly losing his mind.

[PATRICK]

41. Costner looking better in comparison

Also a popular second stringer who soared into a lauded epic in which they did everything themselves. Costner's career plunged naturally. Gibson has chosen supernatural extinction. That's entertainment. Eventually the ego forgets why people make movies and why people go to them.

[GuyFawkes]

42. What right do execs. of Public comp. have to discriminate against Gibson

What vindictiveness.

The NYT article says explicitly that Geffen, Katzenberg and Spielberg are angy. OK, there company is a private enterprise, they can do what they want with it (but they cannot discriminate against someone for their religious beliefs. It is against the law). But should they. Presumabley anyone who is even friendly with Gibson will be scrutinized by these three. Maybe work on any projects produced by SKG.

And what about the public companies? Universal, Warner, etc. These companies are not the property of their CEO's. How dare they imply that Gibson will never work in the industry again? Their clumsy threats won't deter anbody of true character (alas, there is not much of that in Hollywood), but they should be called out for these actions.

Greate way to stoke the fires of anti-semitism: Hollywoood Jews blackball Christian auteur. Great. As if Hollywood gives a damm about taste and morality anyway.

Furthermore, whether you like the move or not, Gibson did make it in good conscience as an act of faith. Gibson did not go courting publicity, this was thrust upon him months ago. I remember when stories first appeared, saying that he was going to film it entirely in Latin and Aramaic; the few people who were paying attention said "Is he nuts, nobody will go see it." His adversaries created this publicity blitz.

Gibson doesn't have to worry. He can laugh all the way to the bank. But what about others who look to him as a friend or influence, should they be justifiably blackballed in Hollywood?

[Bridget Burke]

43. People whose relatives were murdered for being Jewish

Do tend to be a bit standoffish around anti-semitic Holocaust deniers. What might happen to him is not as simple as being "blackballed". Movie making is a business involving large amounts of money invested in complex projects. All participants need to be able to trust each other. If you suspect somebody doesn't care at all about your grandfather's murder, you might not wish to give him a lot of your company's money. You might not wish to sit in meetings with him for months at a time. I didn't see a thing in the article about people friendly with Gibson being affected; but, then, who are his friends in the business?

Mel's "strange" behavior on TV was also mentioned. The phrase "crazy as a rat on acid" would occur to me, but I'm an uncouth Texan. Again, could he be trusted?

If Gibson did make the movie as an "act of faith", why would he do something as crass as "laugh all the way to the bank"? He can continue to play the martyred "Christian auteur" and make films for a specialized market, since that's apparently his wish. He's rich & will continue to get richer.

[GuyFawkes]

44. Gibson is not responsible for his father's beliefs.

And furthermore, you do correctly point out that film production is a business like any other, executives committ large amounts of capital because they want to see a profit (that is why nobody would have bankrolled a movie like "The Passion.."), but Gibson never asked for anybody to bankroll his vanity/faith production he did it himself. Why should he be penalized for doing this. In fact, regarding profitabiliyt (the ulitimate arbiter in Hollywood) Gibson has a midas touch. For over 20 years he has done nothing but make tons of money for Hollywood. Blowhards like Sean Penn should do so well.

[Codeblue]

47. Gibson has ruined his image

in my eyes with his recent statements regarding all sorts of things, but I "The Passion" is just a friggin movie. A movie, that he produced with his "take" on things. Why is everyone so upset about a movie? Most movies are not to be taken seriously..I mean what happened to movies being about entertainment. As several people have mentioned before "If you don't like it, don't go see it!" And as an add on to that "Don't complain about it either!" Just forget it and move on.

[mlawson]

48. But did he condemn the remarks??

Seems that he only said, 'No comment'. That would not be nearly enough for me, were I Jewish. But I have close friends who are, so Gibson and his nazi father can go ____ themselves, for all I care.

And this has nothing to do with the movie.

[regnaD kciN]

51. His career was on the skids already...

Still, I hope there isn't any sort of blacklisting, since that would only give ammunition to those who claim that "the Jews control Hollywood" and futher increase anti-Semitism, as those fundamentalists who loved the film would see him as a martyr to "Jewish Liberals" determined to censor anything that doesn't fit their "agenda."

BTW, I would think that Geffen, who is not only Jewish but also gay, would have already been p*ss*d-off at Gibson for his portrayal of Edward II in Braveheart...