Saturday, October 23, 2010

The Hangover 2 Boots Mel Gibson

I read this morning that Mel Gibson was supposed to cameo as himself in the sequel to The Hangover, but that the cast was uncomfortable letting this noted bigoted, homophobic, death-threat-making, anti-Semitic drunk into the movie. Zach Galifianakis apparently led the charge to have Mel Gibson booted from the flick, feeling it wasn't right to let Gibson come in and spoof his image.

But here's what I don't get.

I don't get why Zach, Ed Helms, Bradley Cooper McConaughey and whatever that short guy's name is were perfectly okay the first time around letting Mike Tyson do the same thing.

So, it's not cool for Mel Gibson to parody his recent stupidities, but it's perfectly alright for wife-beating convicted rapist Mike Tyson to play a cute version of himself? I mean, Tyson ended up joking around with the Jonas Brothers onstage at the Teen Choice Awards because of that movie. I wonder how Desiree Washington feels about that.

I just have a lot of mixed feelings here. I mean, I certainly don't want to see Crankypants Mel in another movie. I just don't. I'm done with him.

But I also believe that people deserve second chances.

But I also don't see the moral relativism in saying that a rapist who rips another boxer's ear off with his teeth is cute and funny (why, because he converted to Islam in prison?) and a guy who says Jews are responsible for all wars (a punchline go-to on Family Guy) is the scum of the Earth.

I'm not defending Mel Gibson here. I'm just... well, I just don't see why the moral stand is being taken against one and not the other.

7 comments:

Roger Owen Green said...

The difference in these things, I think, is time. Tyson was an asshole, but apparently not recently. One gets the sense that Gibson is STILL an asshole and that he really isn't apologetic and hasn't changed.

Jaquandor said...

I read somewhere an article in which a prominent psychologist speculated that Gibson may well be bipolar and needs to be on meds. That would explain a great deal, because I've seen bipolar people go off their meds, and they're like time-bombs of crazy when they do.

I do think he would help his own cause by getting help and showing more remorse than he's already shown.

koeniou said...

Two theories:
Zac Ridic Long Last name didn't have the clout to say no to wanting to film with Mike Tyson in the first movie, but for the second one he does.

Or the fact that Mike Tyson was convicted and served his time in prison means that they are more willing to give him a second chance. Whereas Mel Gibson is no where near that far aong.

Jason said...

I'm going to second Roger's theory. I think it's a matter of proximity. Mel's assholery is still fresh on everyone's minds, and in fact is still playing out in the tabloids (possibly that was a concern, too -- if something big came up between him and Oksana just as H2 were released, could it damage the movie?), whereas Tyson hadn't done anything too recently.

TheOtherSamuraiFrog said...

I suspect that's the case. But if it is, it's clearly a commercial decision and not the moral stand everyone's pretending it is.

RJ said...

I agree with what is said above. Additionally, who was Zach Galifinackis (sp? whatever) during the making of the first Hangover to demand anything? Now that he is a necessary part of the sequel and I would imagine a valued player for the studio, they're much more willing to do things to make him happy.

Neil Sarver said...

"Or the fact that Mike Tyson was convicted and served his time in prison means that they are more willing to give him a second chance. Whereas Mel Gibson is no where near that far aong."

I like this one the best. I wish I thought it was more that and less just the time thing. But I think it's all about time and not at all about having paid one's debt.