It is to be assumed that Mel Gibson’s latest fiascos, and it just keeps getting worse (from “raped by a pack of n****rs” to alleged death threats and battering) all following his “Jews cause all wars” insanity of a few years back and then his homophobic comments before that and his weirdo religious views throughout not to mention the drug use, infidelity, over-the-top tirades against critics and the like all while purporting to be a super faithful Catholic have cost him most of his fan base. I’m not a showbiz analyst, but I can’t imagine a romantic comedy starring him ever opening big again, and at least now LETHAL WEAPON 5 (or whatever) would likely flop like a whale on ashphalt even IF you could get Glover and Pesci to work with him… he might be able to finance some movies that will be watched but his career as a leading man is most likely a bleeding stuck pig in a shark tank.
But I could be wrong. Not exonerating Gibson by any means but nothing he’s done is worse than Roman Polanski’s violent drugging and rape of a 13 year old which certainly should have lost him his career one would think, but it didn’t. He has won an Oscar and many other awards in recent years and worked with some of the biggest names in filmdom since his U.S. disgrace. Woody Allen had some flops but he still comes out with a new film every so often and still gets decent reviews, so I wouldn’t count those two.
Tom Cruise was a bit of a leper for a while but his undeniably hysterical performance as Les Grossman gave him a major booster shot and while his Knight and Day movie isn’t setting box office records it’s not yet an unqualified flop; it could make some some money by the time all the markets chime in, so I think he’s at least partly redeemed.
The closest I can think of is Michael Jackson perhaps, whose record sales and popularity plummeted in later years (before sales went crazy again after his death) as his personal scandals and his insanity eclipsed his talent in the minds of most fans. OTOH he was still huge in Europe and about to embark on a sold out UK engagement when he died.
So do you think Gibson will resurface or that he’s done? And if you think he’s done, are there any other stars- actors, singers, or other- who are in Gibson’s yacht by which I mean they
1- Have plenty of accolades from their career
2- Have undeniable talent for their art (capable actor, great filmmaker)
3- Have earned (and still have) buckets and barrels and freight trains of money
4- Are absolutely unemployable due to scandal that has nothing to do with their talent
IMHO, in front of the camera, he’s toast. He was a star, and stars need to have likeable personas. Furthermore, he’s already blown his second chance, unlike Tom Cruise, who is keeping his insanity well-hidden while he goes through the 12-step celebrity rehab programme.
He may, however, have a career as a critically-acclaimed director if his future films display warmth and humanity. Unlike the tabloids, critics will forgive anything if your films speak to their sensibilities.
But as any kind of box-office draw, he’s effectively killed his career.
You guys, with the exception of John Mace, give the public too much credit. Do you really believe people pay attention or care about this crap one iota? Mel Gibson could make a movie and star in every role, and if it’s entertaining and escapist enough the throngs will gladly pay their 9 bucks (or whatever movie tickets go for these days) to see it.
Yeah, he’s a jerk, and probably a racist and antisemite to boot. Bla-bla-bla. Like he’s the only one. Come back and tell me about the end of his career after his next hit movie.
Charlie Sheen is a scumbag by any measure, and he’s doing okay, right?
Lindsay Lohan hasn’t done anything worse than Mel (maybe, who knows which is worse), but the challenges she faces getting good work seem to come largely from (a) the beating her looks have taken in just a few short years; and (b) fears of unreliability. From a certain director/producer standpoint, having someone late for a shoot, or “sick,” or “hospitalized for exhaustion,” or in rehab, is probably a worse sin than backhanding your girlfriend or being a racist. At least as far as I’ve heard, Mel poses less of a threat to hold production up than some other addict/trainwreck types in the business.
Don’t forget that Icon Productions, the production/distribution company Mel founded when no one else wanted to make PotC, is a going concern. I noticed they produced the pretty-solid PBS reality show Carrier (?) and from their website they seem to have a good number of movies, television shows, and other activities they either make or distribute.
I am by no means a Polanski fan, and think he should be brought back to the U.S. and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, but my understanding of his case is that he didn’t “violent[ly] drug” (what does that even mean?) his victim.
As to Mel, with the passage of time Hollywood will forgive just about any sin if you can still sell tickets. If you can’t, then ciao, baby, even if you’ve totally reformed and become a living saint.
If Mel releases Road Warrior: Whateverthehellthenextnumberis, he’ll be boffo at the box office. If he releases Watching Paint Dry, but it is rumored that he shows bare Mel butt at some point, he’ll still be selling tickets to women.
Did you send this post forward in time from the 90s? Mel Gibson already seems like a complete non-entity, movie star wise (though I agree he could have a 2nd career behind the camera). What woman wants to look at as his ass? This is 2010, not 1984. And who the fuck wants to watch Road Warrior? Again, 2010. I mean, I’m sure that if they remade Road Warrior with an actor people actually wanted to see, it could do some serious business. But another sequel starring Mel Gibson? I don’t know anybody who would pay money for that.
Edge of Darkness made $43 million domestic. It’s budget was $80 million, so I’m pretty sure that it’s considered a flop. Underworld: Rise of the Lycans made more money. If you compare it to 2009 releases, it made comparable money to “small” films like Drag Me to Hell, Crazy Heart and Precious: etc (which was perfectly fine for movies with small budgets. Drag Me to Hell cost $30 million, Crazy Heart 7 million, Precious 10 million).
So yeah, I think Mel Gibson has been done as a box office draw for awhile now. However, I’ve no doubt that as long as he wants to produce/direct, he’ll have a seat at the table.
Mel Gibson is nuts. But Apocalypto was fantastic! If he makes another good movie I’ll go see it, so count me among the sheeple who don’t give a fuck about his beliefs.
Mad Max: Fury Road (AKA Mad Max 4) is in development and the director has no interest in bringing Gibson back. He made that decision before Mel’s “sugartits” outburst, so he’s unlikely to change it now.
Like others have said, I think he’s done as a big name draw. His acting career isn’t over unless he wants it to be (there’s always room in the movies for formerly big stars to appear in bit parts). But his days of being MEL GIBSON! are done.
It means forcing a 13 year old girl to take drugs and then sticking his dick up her ass even though she begged him to stop. Polanski is scum and should rot in a cell for the rest of his life.
Charlie Sheen’s major sin was visiting hookers back in the 90s. Yes, he’s also a bit of a drug addict and the latest thing with his wife looks bad, but both of them admit this wasn’t Charlie beating on his wife, it was two messed up people having a bad argument. These are “private matters” to Hollywood people that eventually go away in the public sphere.
If he makes another movie that has him as the leading man (not sure how old he is, but he’s getting to the point where being a leading man is less and less likely), women will drive the ticket sales.
No one really cares. People have the short term memory of an infant, so he’ll be forgiven before anyone realizes it.
I like Mel. To compare him to MJ is a massive stretch, and in my opinion doesn’t hold. He’s still making good movies, and as long as he does that, people will pay to see his work.
Gibson will always have core fans, who won’t desert him regardless. Gibson used to also have a wide base of fans who liked him for his good looks. Well that is long gone. So now he is reduced to hard core fans only.
This will allow him to make movies if he wants at a lower level. If he produces a hit he’ll come back. Look at John Travolta. He was UP, then way down. Then he had a supporting role to a baby and came back. Then he went down again. Then he had Pulp Fiction and was way up on top again.
Britney Spears had her biggest chain of successes after she became a total mess.
As for MJ he was huge, but so what? His hits extended from the late 70s to early 90s. Where’s Whitney Houston today? Her range was similar to his. Most singers only maintain a few years in hit mode. Then they fade back to selling a solid number of albums to their core audience with the once in awhile hit single. Such as Madonna.
Part of Mel’s problem is this stuff is coming out when he is “of an age” where his ass is no longer a huge draw. Not that it isn’t a draw, but he is 20 years past being able to appeal to a female audience merely on looks (Harrison Ford is 30 years past it - and Tom Cruise is getting squicky on the edges). While male actors have more success aging than female actors - I can’t think of many (Paul Newman) who managed to retain their sex appeal late into their career.
I’m sort of prime “Mel Gibson is SO hot” age. But Ryan Reynolds with his shirt off is a much bigger draw right now.
He made that movie earlier this year. It was called Edge of Darkness. It was a flop.
Untrue. Each album in Brtiney Spears’ discography has sold fewer copies than the album before it. Pretending she’s “just as big as ever” is probably her biggest misstep whenever she puts out new music. The hardcore fans go away, just like they did for Gibson, and you’ve got to do something to bring them back. Spears doesn’t get it, and I doubt Mel does either.
His best days before the camera are probably over. Behind the camera, he can work.
What I would like to see or read is a tell-all book from his exwife or his kids. His Dad is crazy, so the nut doesn’t fall far from the tree. I wonder how many of the rest of his siblings are this much of a anti-everything nutjob like dad.
Not that it makes much of a difference, but Icon Productions, according to Wikipedia, was created when Gibson couldn’t get the money to film Hamlet. Same idea, different movie.
I think he is still going to make money behind the camera. But, as a lead actor I am not sure he has much left; he probably won’t have Eastwood’s longevity as a money making leading man. Looking at this IMDB page it doesn’t seem like he has interest in acting any more anyway. Edge of Darkness was his first movie in 6 years. This might be his growing interest in directing, his personal problems, or a realization that his age and craziness is a drawback to his ability to attract an audience. At least, his insane recorded tirades make for entertaining listening. It’s nice to hear a white guy finally talk about those raving packs. It has become such a cliche coming from the mouths of black folk.
As per this link, the William Morris agency just dropped him.
Even big stars need agents to negotiate deals and put together projects, so this is really the kiss of death for a career. Granted, he could find some lower level agency, or put together projects on his own - but the stigma is going to stick.
If I were Mel, I would put all my money into a PR firm and have them work overtime to try to undo the mess he got himself into. Don’t know if it would work, but that is about his only hope now.
They will send him to some camp for anger management, have him do a few photo-ops with minorities and donate some money. The public has a short memory and Mel can only hope “this too shall pass”.
I won’t forget, and I can remember being in a Gay bar in West Hollywood watching the Oscars when Braveheart won - and there were resounding “boo’s” from a crowd that had not forgotten his comments about Gays.