What is with Mel Gibson and his blood lust?

[BushOut06]

First there was Braveheart, an orgy of violence and bloodshed. Then we get his anti-Semitic Passion crapfest, one of the bloodiest, most brutal movies made in a long time. Now we're treated to Apocalypto, the bloodiest, most violent movie ever released by Disney.

WTF, does Mel Gibson jack off to violent porn? What's with all this ultra-violent "entertainment" lately?

[southerncrone]

1. Desensitizes public to real gore & bloodshed in say. . . . . a war!

[NewJeffCT]

20. I'm not a Mel Gibson fany anymore, but...

He has spoken out against the war several times, including during the run-up to his Passion of the Christ movie.

There are plenty of things to bash him about, but that is not one. I mean, the hypocrisy of being a supposedly devout fundie Catholic, while making some extremely violent movies, and also movies where he had sex on screen.

[tuvor]

2. He's competing with Rob Zombie?

[Bluestar]

3. I agree--can't stand his movies

I boycott everything he has done since "Lethal Weapon". I think he is a sick human being, pandering to the lowest common denominator of our society. Unfortunately, many people get turned on by this sicko stuff. He wraps it in a storyline that he can sell as "important" when what he is really selling are snuff movies.

[Canuckistanian]

4. And remember what made him famous? "Mad Max".

He's been in violence flicks since day one, almost.

[liberalsoldier5]

5. I liked the Passion

but yes, the constant gore does make you wonder what's really on Mel's mind- could be a mental condition.

[newyawker99]

11. Hi liberalsoldier5!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Ken Burch]

6. It's never clear which is worse with Our Mel...

...his blood lust, or his booze lust.

[BlooInBloo]

7. I thought the lemmings-being -driven-over-the-cliff movie woulda been the bloodiest...

... after all, everyone - LITERALLY - died.

[Ken Burch]

71. Those weren't REAL lemmings

(lemmings don't actually DO that)

Disney had them set up cameras at the base of the cliffs while ping pong balls were fired over the cliffside by air guns.

Also, the scene where the rams butted heads in tempo to the "Anvil Chorus" was achieved by putting the animals in isolation in the L.A. Zoo and starving them for a month.

(William O. Douglas, the late, great Supreme Court justice, discussed this in one volume of his autobiography. He HATED the Disney "True Life Adventure" films).

[IntravenousDemilo]

8. And don't get me started on "The Patriot".

Suffice it to say that he should be sued by all Englishmen for defamation of character.

[NewJeffCT]

21. It was way too manipulative of a film for me

Both scenes that had a son of his dying seemed manufactured to pull on the heart strings of the audience.

That said, I have not seen too many revolutionary war movies that focused on the South. I did appreciate the different angle.

I would love to see a miniseries someday on the whole revolutionary war. It seems like US history class is the Boston Tea Party, Bunker Hill, Washington crossing the Delaware, and then bang, Cornwallis surrenders and we win, skipping over 6-7 years in between, and on to writing the Constitution. So many pivotal events in between (heck, Cornwallis almost escaped Yorktown...)

[stanwyck]

27. that reminds me

when that movie came out, my son was playing on a soccer team (boys were about 12 yrs. old) and one of his teammates had recently moved here from England. The boys were talking about "The Patriot" (the bloody stuff, of course). And the English kid said, with a perfect dry British delivery: "Oh, yes. Mel Gibson saves us all again."

[hedgehog]

42. Actually, the War in the Low Country was pretty bad.

I don't think there was a case of holding people inside a flaming church, but churches and homes were burned and there were other atrocities. If you want to criticize the movie on historical accuracy, how about the wonderful relationship between white farmers and black slaves?

[IntravenousDemilo]

46. Yeah, it was the "holding people inside a flaming church" thing that really incensed me.

The Nazis actually DID that in France (I think in that case it may have been a synagogue), and by blithely ascribing the same act to the Brits for the sake of a mere plot point, Gibson tends to minimize the enormity, unique singularity, and unprecedented specialness of the Nazi crime and insult the people who were actually murdered in that place of worship. But then, the Gibson family has a bit of a Nazi-apologist history, and perhaps ol' Mel thought that the Nazi atrocity wouldn't seem so bad if there were a precedent.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

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

[WildEyedLiberal]

67. "Holocaust propaganda"???

Did I take a wrong turn onto Stormfront??

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

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

[IntravenousDemilo]

72. Judging by your post, the (deleted) response to my post must've been pretty awful.

Maybe it's just as well I didn't see it, and that we have Terminix on speed-dial.

[BoneDaddy]

9. I love Mel's movies

and for the most part distance myself from his politics. That said, it does seem like he enjoys the blood lust, but that should not surprise us as he identifies with a more obscure form of fundamentalist Catholicism where "being bathed in the blood of Christ" is not an uncommon phrase. I find fundamentalists often refer or are drawn to the more brutal aspects of Christianity and the bible in general, similar in some ways to the sado-masochism of the rigid religious who reveled in hair shirts, self flagellation, etc.

[jobycom]

10. Maybe a little honesty about violence on film is a good thing

I get sick to death of battles and gunfights in Hollywood that result in small amounts, or no amounts, of gore and blood. Americans ignore the horrors of war because they think wars are clean and pretty.

Keep it up, Mel.

Whatever the hell a "crapfest" is...

[Scout]

12. Mel did not MAKE "Mad Max" ... he acted in it...

some non-violent films he's been in:

Tim
Forever Young
Hamlet
The Man Without a Face
Signs

some that may have had violence but weren't "gore fests"
The Year of Living Dangerously
Bird on a Wire


I think "We Were Soldiers" could be considered an anti-war film.

there's probably more....

[FormerDittoHead]

37. What about that bloodfest "What Women Want" with Helen Hunt? n/t

[Scout]

40. how could I have forgotten that bloody mess??! n/t

[IntravenousDemilo]

48. Not so much a bloodfest, but I did feel mentally and aesthetically raped by it.

And then there's Mrs Awful -- I mean, Mrs Soffel. A couple hours of my life rudely stolen...

I have to admit, however, that I did like Gallipoli, which was violent by necessity, and The Year of Living Dangerously, though I preferred the book.

Nothing short of a great deal of money would ever tempt me to watch his Jesus snuff movie.

[Bad Penny]

64. "I think "We Were Soldiers" could be considered an anti-war film."

That's news to Randall Wallace

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

13. It sells.

[Catherine Vincent]

14. "Braveheart" was one of my favorite movies. n/t

[chaska]

16. See 'Rob Roy'. Almost the same movie, but better.

[BushOut06]

22. Rob Roy - same story without all the over-acting

THEY WILL NEVER TAKE OUR FREEEEEEEEEEEEEDOM!

Yeah, Braveheart was a nice little fluff film, but Rob Roy is definitely the better movie.

[IntravenousDemilo]

49. I hope the operative word here is "was". And again, the English should sue him for defamation...

...and so should gay people.

[Radio_Lady]

15. Apocalypt-OW! Mel’s Messy Mayan Movie -- Rex Reed savages the movie: (SPOILERS)

Apocalypt-Ow! Mel’s Messy Mayan Movie

By Rex Reed

In the first scene of Mel Gibson’s boring, affected, expensive, gruesomely violent and historically inaccurate curio Apocalypto, a humongous tapir (like a wild boar) charges from the jungle and attacks a peaceful tribe of hunters, who slaughter the animal and eat its testicles. For the next 130 minutes, they search for a better meal. Wouldn’t you? And while you’re at it, you might search for a better movie.

I went to Apocalypto expecting and hoping for a historic chronicle of the decline of the Mayan civilization. But although the movie does end with terrified Mayan survivors watching the arrival of the Spanish, it’s probably worth mentioning that by the time the real Spanish reached Mexico, the Mayans were already decimated. At the screening I attended, security guards flanked the entrance doors, opening and inspecting the contents of every critic’s briefcase, purse and backpack in a search for recording equipment. What a waste of time. Who would want to tape more than two hours of a movie nobody wants to see, featuring hundreds of people nobody has ever heard of, speaking a language nobody can understand? You would learn more from an illustrated National Geographic essay.

This is an action epic, not a plot-driven film about big issues, but here is the thumbnail C.A.T. scan: A friendly and peaceful tribe with a cosmic sense of family loyalty is alarmed to see another tribe, homeless and scared, fleeing some nameless threat beyond the jungle. Suddenly the good guys are invaded by Holcanes, a vicious mob of slave traders who burn their crops and huts, attack the men, rape their wives, butcher their children and leave all but a handful behind to die. One brave warrior named Jaguar Paw manages to lower his pregnant wife and son into an underground cave for safety before he is captured with his friends, all of them painfully hog-tied to bamboo poles and dragged across the continent to a Mayan city to be painted blue, then sold on the auction block or sacrificed to the gods. Along the way, a diseased child acting as a mystic foretells the doom that awaits the savages for destroying their people and their country. The prophecies come true, but first the audience must endure a long, harrowing Mayan-sacrifice sequence in which human hearts are ripped out of chest cavities while still beating and heads are severed and rolled down the steps of the pagan temple, to tumultuous roars of applause and cheers for more blood. I kept trying to figure out where all of this was supposed to be taking place. I have visited the ruins of Tulum, Cozumel and the Yucatan, and none of the ancient temples had steps that climbed into the sky. All I could think of was that this is where a Club Med now stands.

Full article at: http://www.observer.com/20061211/20061211_Rex_Reed_culture_rexreed.asp


It’s a long way from Malibu: Mayra Serbulo and Ariel Galvan ford a river in Apocalypto.

[mduffy31]

61. Point of order Mr. Reed

it is not a C.A.T. Scan, it is a CT scan.

[Jacobin]

17. He does Chainsaw massacre movies for fundies

[talk hard]

18. I wonder why he calls his movie

Mel Gibon's A....
Not the best name to put on a project because of his recent craziness.

[QuestionAll...]

19. gee, so Mel invented violent movies now?

wow, I didn't know that. Maybe he should be taken out of hollywood and we won't have those nasty things anymore.

[devilgrrl]

23. I don't think that's what the OP is insinuating.

He's confused by Mr. Gibson's affection for blood and violence.

I wonder what his deal is myself.

[QuestionAll...]

24. do you spend as much time wondering about Tarrintino's affection for the same? nt

or the long long list of others?

[devilgrrl]

26. No. Because Tarrantino doesn't parade around rewritting history...

and religion.

[Scout]

28. So there's nothing wrong with QT movies, full of blood and gore,

because they aren't about religion or history? No one wonders about his "blood lust"? No one accuses him of beating off to his own movies?

:eyes:

When I want real history, I watch a documentary.
When I want entertainment, I watch hollywood movies.

[devilgrrl]

29. Oh please! A flamewar over this???????????

:nuke:

Take it to the OP

:nuke:

Mel Gibson is sick fuck! End of story!

[QuestionAll...]

31. wow, you're right! what was said was so inflammatory!

""When I want real history, I watch a documentary.
When I want entertainment, I watch hollywood movies.""

==
I am still in shock at this thoughtless drivel!
:sarcasm:

[Scout]

32. well, devilgrrl has spoken! put us all right in our places, i guess_NOT. n/t

[devilgrrl]

33. You got the last word in though...

You win!!!!!!!

:party::bounce::party::bounce::party:

[WildEyedLiberal]

68. Yep, that's how you "win" arguments on DU

Whoever gets the last word in WINS no matter what!

God sometimes this website is not worth the time it takes to load.

[Scout]

73. FYI, I wasn't the one "worried" about who did/didn't have the last word....

:eyes:

[Nikia]

34. I like historical fiction

Historical documentaries are usually passionless. Even when they are passionate, it will lack the passion of a well done film that concentrates more on the individual characters point of view and relies less on third person narrative.
I know that his (and other historical fiction films) are not completely accurate historically but that is part of the art.
As has been pointed out, Mel Gibson's films are no more bloody than many action and horror films. I don't see any problems with historical fiction films being bloody if the subject matter does have to do with violence, like wars.

[BushOut06]

35. Tarantino doesn't wrap himself in religion

Mel Gibson is supposed to be a devout Catholic, a "good" Christian. Yet here he is spewing out hateful anti-Semitic statements, and producing some of the most violent mainstream movies ever released by major studios.

[Kingshakabobo]

38. Come on. You have to admit there is something creepy.....

....about a fundie religious anti-semitic wacko producing/directing/starring in all these "revenge" based blood lust movies. Most of these movies are about righteous-blood-lust, slaughtering-for-good and revenge.

[QuestionAll...]

44. those Hallowe'en and Friday the 13th series..

were many fold more wacko and violent - and the target was specific to a young audience. I find that much more disturbing that gorey films meant for an older audience.

but I have no idea of who the producers were or what things they may have said or what church they go to. makes no difference to me - those movies were over the top violent and awful and even if some timid peace loving do-gooder made them, - they are still horrible movies which I will not see. But I would not like to prevent you from seeing them if that's your kind of thing.

so I'm not sure what some of you are asking - do you want Mel's work censured, removed... what? Do you want a special board or commission to investigate movie producers and directors before they can ply their trade, ... actors too? to read scripts for approval before?

All I want is to be able to decide for myself whether a movie is worth my time and effort and few dollars. If you don't want to see it...


then don't.
what's so complicated?

[Kingshakabobo]

52. Hmmm. I just scanned through this.....

........thread again and didn't see any calls for censorship or "special boards"???? I'm wondering where you got that idea? Maybe one of your strawmen whispered it to you because it wasn't me. Can you point me in the right direction? I DID see some discussion on *GASP* a DISCUSSION board about movies made by a holier than thou jag-off.

Well, I'm off to burn some books.

[QuestionAll...]

53. well, that may have been too strong of a language, I admit, but

there seems to be considerable effort put into discouraging people from seeing this film. but that's no big deal because it's individual expression. I've done that with many movies and books. Snakes on a Plane was one.. how Anyone could want to see that trash... but anyways...

But what does disturb me a bit is the 'if you're not with us you're against us' nuance. That if someone decides to see Gibsons work, they are somehow insulting a group of people and may be 'suspect' in some way. That I would be funding Gibson and his hatreds. If I see a mel movie, does that make me an anti-semite sympathizer? a rascist lite? a supporter of the Catholic church and all the evils they have done?

That's the feeling I get, but maybe I'm wrong.

[Kingshakabobo]

57. I'll fess up. I liked Braveheart and The Patriot.......

....I'll watch parts of these movies if they are on the tube and I'm looking to kill some time. What do they call them? Guilty pleasures? Now, mind you, that doesn't mean I still don't think he is a creepy mullet-wearing jag-off. :)

[QuestionAll...]

58. I just can't stand him when he does his cutesey roles..

that one where he was dressing up as a woman, that fluff thing - I forget the name.
makes me want to barf.

And Conspiracy Theory, altho I liked the movie better on the 2nd view - but because I'm beginning to have more belief in conpiracy theories irl, not his doofus role in it.

I guess what I'm mostly trying to figure out here is why choose Gibson as an example of violence in movies. I mean, come on, it's been there long before this mullet-wearing jag-off got into the biz. Or is any excuse okay to use?

[baby_mouse]

25. Latent sadomasochism. Why can't he just run a fetish club like normal people? nt.

[MrSlayer]

30. I like bloody movies.

I thought The Patriot was better than Braveheart though it was slightly less bloody. The scene where he tomahawks the Redcoat is excellent. Braveheart is still really good but after seeing it so many times you can pick out all the editing mistakes and it loses a bit of it's luster. Apocalypto looks pretty good, I'll probably see it. I dig these kind of movies.

[Lilith Velkor]

59. If his movies were music, they'd be death metal.

:headbang:


Have you ever heard of Takashi Miike? Mel's films are pretty sick but tame compared to his.

[FormerDittoHead]

36. Ultra-violent movies are a product of this administration's willingness to torture

Putting aside the fact that Passion was a major blockbuster, and as such was the envy of all movie studios (oh, THEY'RE not interested in making MONEY... :sarcasm:) the current trend/fad in torture in movies started with 24's Jack Bauer and was fed by the Republicans who weren't shocked by his behavior as a federal agent but they fly off the handle when The Dixie Chicks criticize Bush.

The icing on the cake, was, of course, when the Bush administration formally endorsed torture by not coming out strongly against it...

Torture HAS become entertainment, thanks to these sick, sick people.

Now show your "bipartisanship" and see Turistas.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0454970/

[QuestionAll...]

47. about torture and bush and the passion.

I did see the passion and I sure can appreciate a lot of people not being able to handle the brutal violence. I had to avert my eyes a few times as I get a bit queasy. I know a few people, who if they saw it, would actually pass out or vomit.

How I interpreted those terrible, long drawn out scenes is this way:
Was it to glorify violence - I don't think so. but as I say, imho.

It was to show us how horrible torture really is. How sickening that people can do this to each other. I don't think you would have the same kind of feeling about it if it were a few snippets here and there - it had to be an assault on the senses. It had to be dragged out and never ending and awful beyond words to have a tiny fraction of feeling what the tortured one is going through.
No remote control, no pause or fast forward, real people being tortured don't have this luxury, obviously.

so I see it quite differently that most here, it seems. I had a glance into that dark ugly world and it has made me even more against torture and unfair treatment that I was before. Because I've never seen it so close before.

[FedUpWithIt All]

66. I agree

It was brutal to watch and THAT is IMHO what made it so powerful for the intent you stated.

I tend to archive real and painful images of Iraq and other things on my computer. One thing i have noticed is that those who call for war, blood, revenge do NOT have the stomach to see the result of their "actions". I know people who suggest that, "We should just turn Iraq into glass and be done with it." If you ask these same people to view images from bushwar they will aggressively refuse. Why? Because it is easy to spew violent opinions when you can shut out the reality of the suffering and pain wrought from that violence.

I saw the Patriot. The main character is ashamed of his own violent past and there is a visible struggle about allowing his children to see a side of him that he tried to long ago "put away". The character is portrayed as a sort of pacifist (haunted by demons of his past activities) forced into the hated violence through a need for defense. Do i agree with this choice by the character? Does it matter? The film made me think about it. To me that is something film should do.

I will be seeing Apocolypto. I like to form my own opinions about these things. I suspect i will come away shocked and disgusted at the harm people do to others. I do not think i will come away hating the Mayan people as i did not come away from Passion thinking "Jews are bad" or the Patriot thinking "the English are all murderers". I realize that there are simply a few people from every group known to man who are "capable" of doing harm to others. This is human nature. My anger is at those few people. It is also the nature of film to portray a struggle against this by the many (again from any group known to man) people who do not have it in their natures to desire harm to others.

There is a lot of violence in film and other forms of entertainment today. Some show the violence in a way that depicts it as entertaining and sometimes even gratifying. Others show it as a destructive thing and make you come away with a sadness about what you have seen perpetrated.

Braveheart, Passion, Patriot all left me with a feeling of sadness and contemplating the far reaching consequences of violence. Nobody is left unscathed by it.

Just my take.

[QuestionAll...]

69. thanks. it feels good to be heard. :) nt

[DerBeppo]

75. I take it you're not a fan of the horror or suspense films

of the 70's.

Fascination with torture didn't begin or even flourish in media with or because of this administration. In fact, I'd say that I've seen far more disdain for torture and those who use it placed in situations of admonishment or ridicule over the past two or three years than I had before.

[Jed Dilligan]

39. Come on, didn't you see Lethal Weapon?

He's a loose cannon, just waiting to go off.

It made him even meaner when the handlers made him cut off his mullet.

[treestar]

41. The Victorians did not mind violence in fiction either - so long as there

is no sex (horror of horrors!!) violence was fine.

Maybe it partakes of that mentality.

[Annces]

43. His first movie was one where he was a young soldier and

did not die, miraculously. It seems he is one of those people who attract large stories and events, a lightening rod.

[QuestionAll...]

45. Gallipoli?

as I recall that was a decent film. Been a looong time tho.

[Annces]

50. Yes Gallipoli

Directed by Peter Weir, a great director. He looks like a kid in that movie, and it seems like he got a lucky break with that role, or maybe fate?

[QuestionAll...]

51. ! bookmarked - those creatures are so grand and beautiful!

Part of My Big Tail,     Light Limbs,   Made of Sinew and Fur
The Desert Wide and Flat,   Sand and Brush,   Is My Original Home
High on the Ridge,   Low in the Canyon,   Traveling Quickly,   Searching for Rabbit and Mouse
I Call out to My Brother Across the Landscape,   I Cry to My Creator Who Knows My Life
I Have the Way to Be Invisible

[Annces]

55. Thanks

I am doing a series on the hunted animals. Coyote was first. I am doing deer next.

[cool user name]

54. Braveheart is one of my favorite movies ...

Of course, I didn't know he was an anti-semitic prick, but that movie was damned good.

[ToeBot]

56. I haven't seen anything he's done since Braveheart, but...

a movie about pre-columbian mesoamerica would have to be bloody. Their religion and culture would make an abattoir look like a semiconductor clean room.

[Marr]

60. I've always enjoyed his work, personally.

He was excellent in The Bounty, and alot of other movies when he was just an actor. He's turned into one of the better directors out there- at least, one of the least risk-averse. Sheesh- who else would even consider doing a movie like Apocalypto? Say what you like, but it's about as original as you can get.

I've always enjoyed Gibson's work, and I'm not about to stop just because I disagree with his political or religious views.

[Radio_Lady]

62. UPDATE: You can now read my review of "Apocalypto" here:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Radio_Lady/87

I'll be interested in your comments!

Thanks!

Radio_Lady Ellen in Oregon

[QuestionAll...]

65. appreciate your view!

I will be seeing this travesty sometime this weekend. ;)

I do note a line from your critique that I have to darkly chuckle to:
""It doesn't even make sense to me why the intruders would want to kill and maim so many of the peaceful people.."""

[DerBeppo]

74. He's attracted to melodrama

Violence is second only to sex as far as basic, primal human activity. Pain has spawned both drama and comedy and is perfect for broad appealing mediums such as film. The ability to choose one act, put it up on a screen and be able to illicit dozens of emotions from invigoration to disgust to fear is alluring to artists. I think the ability to use such broad strokes in an artistic and appealing way shows just as much talent as an artist that uses subtlety and understatement to convey his or her message.

[jeffrey_X]

76. How about the audacity to plaster his name and face all over the marketing...

of this movie after what he did.

Fucking shameless.