STUPIDITY TO KEEP MEL OUT OF HANGOVER 2 - Page 2

Quoted for truth. It's one thing to read about misconduct or violent behavior, but seeing it unfold before your eyes is an emotionally impacting experience. Compare your reaction to the last stabbing you read about in the newspaper to the Bobby J. Blythe Internet scandal, for instance.

I just read Devin's opinion on the new site.

Again: Mike Tyson was released from jail, 15 years ago. He was convicted, almost 20 years ago. 20 years, people. What the fuck?

He was 25-years-old when that happened, and it's common knowledge that he was in a bad place mentally, attitude-wise and all that stuff that comes with being high on fame (which, combined with being young, doesn't mix well). I'm not EXCUSING him, but I do believe in rehabilitation, and I appreciate when a person seems to be legitimately aware that he did something horrible and is sorry for it. As far as anyone knows, he's been 20 years trying to come to grip with and control his demons and redeem himself. It's not been without its share of bumps, but I do believe Tyson is not the worst example of a rehabilitated human being.

Mel Gibson is an unashamed homophobic anti-Semitic wife-beating racist. And all of that comes from THIS YEAR. What's his excuse?

I don't see any hypocrisy at all whatsoever. The two cases are really different, by A LOT.

Someone (be it cast or crew) finally had the guts to say "You know what? Nah, fuck that, I ain't working with him. That's some low shit he did."

Devin says a lot of people in H'Wood are potential horrible pieces of shit and no one complains. So? These guys did. And hooray for them, I'd have a bad taste in my mouth working with someone like that too.

Like I said, it just seems to me a bunch of the people yelling "hypocrisy" are the real hipocrites, who probably at one time or another espoused the idea that prison should be used for rehabilitation, and now calling bullshit for something a guy did 20 years before. I bet they wanted Tookie Williams to be freed too. Pffft...

Oh well as long as it's been 20 years and hes sorry. I mean im sure that girl has forgotten all about that. Not to mention the wife he beat, no damage to her at all. Ya know between this and Polanski Devin sure picks the most interesting people to bat for.

Devin's on the side of "Mike Tyson is a rapist".

I'm sure the girl has not forgotten about it at all, but that's not what rehabilitation is about either. She can choose to forgive him or not, that doesn't change the fact that he might be (and seems to be) conscious of what he did and fully sorry for it. They worked with him because HE'S sorry for what he did, not because "Oh, hey, it's cool 'cuz she forgave him."

Well Devon seems to be on the side of as long as shit happened a while ago it's no big deal. Who knows if Mike Tyson is sorry if he just wants some fucking work. So if Mel comes out tommorrow and cries and says he is sorry they will work with him? Listen I don't care if Mike Tyson or Mel Gibson ever works again or not but the argument is that the cast apparently doesn't want to work with a person who has done terrible things. Sorry but Tyson wins on the crazy/unhinged/dangerous scale.

No one knows if anyone is ever sorry about anything. They just go by what the person demostrates and says. Tyson has Mel beat in that area. The other choice we have as people is never forgiving anybody, ever again, until we invent mindreading technology.

I came in here basically to say this. Devin is wrong, and so is the Salon article, as both are trying to make compatibility between human beings and what we "like" or "respect" or don't like or respect an exact science.

"Person A did this deplorable thing and Person B did this completely different deplorable thing so obviously Person C has to have the exact same reaction to both."

No, it doesn't work that way, and no one's a hypocrite because of it. You simply can't RANK human lives and experiences that way. The cast not wanting to work with Mel Gibson because he's a racist jack ass has absolutely nothing to do with their willingness to work with Tyson, whose an entirely different human being with an entirely different history and has an entirely different history with the cast and crew. You can't just lump people into two categories of GOOD and JERK, and claim that you have to have an exact reaction to whoever based on whichever category the article writer places them into.

Here's another thing that I thought. Perhaps the cast didn't like what they perceived as Mel using some connections to try and use their movie to win favor back with the public. In the case of Tyson, I don't think his cameo had that kind of strength. His public image wasn't going to be made or broke by it. We can make comparisons for days or judge which is worse but Mike while financially strapped due to years of poor money management and career choices has still remained a somewhat bankable commodity. Tyson's able to get work. "Hangover" was not the hail mary pass his career needed. It's definitely that case for Mel. Once it was proven he could appear in any movie without people avoiding it like the plague, it would only be a matter of time before the idea of putting a comeback film out would have been suggested.

The idea that a person's guilit or innocence is based entirely on the eyes of the law (i.e. Mike Tyson is worse because he was convicted of a crime and Mel hasn't) is a bit naive for my taste. I'll look at Tupac Shakur's having the #1 rap album in the country while doing a bid for sex assault versus O.J. being acquitted of murder and being all but banished from the Hollywood scene as at least one example of the public knowing better than the legal system.

Just a few thoughts from a slightly-drunk guy before he heads off to bed.

Maybe Tyson is the star who doesn't want to work with a racist then.

This reminds me of the passionate arguments concerning which of the Star Wars prequels are worse than the others.

They're both rotten human beings. Who gives a shit which one is worse?

I can understand them not wanting to be part of Gibson's career rehabilitation. Tyson's presence in the first movie wasn't framed that way at all. He was there as Tyson, with all that implies. He created a tension, based on his public persona, that the characters required to get motivated.

Love that Neeson is his replacement on the heels of his turn as Hannibal in the A-Team with Cooper. If you want a good reputation, be THAT guy.

The explicitly violent rapist or the implicitly violent racist? Truly a choice worthy of King Solomon.

From the timing of his Comedy Death Ray interview, Galifianakis was pissed a good while before the rumour broke.

Charles S. Dutton is a convicted murderer?!

My view of Alien 3, is FOREVER altered. Oh god, and Rudy...

Manslaughter and he was 17? Does that make it better?

What's with all these straw men?

Galafianakis doesn't want to work with a dick. Good for him.

Didn't he stab a guy to death. How is that possibly Manslaughter.

Also vis-a-vis Gibson and Tyson they're both kind of despicable human beings and if an actor or director feels uncomfortable working with either of them I'd say more power to them for voicing those concerns.

Maybe it was because he was 17? Or there were other circumstances?

ROC claimed it was self defense

Tyson seems to me like an essentially goodhearted, mentally fragile guy who has reformed since being convicted of a rape he may or may not have commited years ago. If I was an actor, I would have no problem working with him.

Mel Gibson seems to me like a bigoted cunt who may or may not have beaten a woman. I don't think he's Satan incarnate and I don't wish any harm upon him, but if I was an actor, I wouldn't want to star in a movie that gives him a self-effacing cameo so soon after he's spouted some despicable views.

That may or may not be the way Galafianakis felt about the whole thing - the idea that he's somehow a hypocrite for working with Tyson but not Gibson is bizarre to me. It's possible to have different feelings about two 'controversial' characters without drawing up a table comparing the severity of their flaws.

In fairness to Devin, he's not saying that the Hangover crew should work with Gibson, he's just pointing out the strange hypocrisy and asking why. The CHUD article however, is calling them "stupid" for not wanting to work with a giant asshole just because they worked with another giant asshole. That's more what I'm taking issue with.

But I don't see what Devin's or Salon's article has to do with anything. They both just come back to the old "I still appreciate Polanski's work!" argument.

Devin has always hated Gibson.

This was a stupid and foolish move for the cast to pull. I have a question is Tyson in the sequel?

That Salon article nailed my feelings on this subject.

what racist and/or misogynistic rants has Tyson gone on in private? i'd bet money he's said things just as bad if not worse than Gibson...look at the rant he went on in the documentary..."i'll fuck you til you love me faggot!" and other colorful metaphors. The Hangover was filming after the Tyson documentary came out. But it was a love-fest, so they conveniently ignored the faggot stuff.

i call hypocrisy...

because sure, they don't wanna work with a freshly discovered asshole...understandable...

for a twelve year old.

but they're adults...adults have the ability to gather the facts and come to a fair conclusion, not based on their raged up emotions, but their adult discernment and ability to see hypocrisy at work. they're simply not being adults. sure you have a RIGHT to get upset, but why let that color your decision making as a rational, level headed person with integrity? what the fuck am i talking about, it's hollywood.

and this is why i can't side with those clowns.

they'd have a point if Gibson did something to them personally, but it was an isolated incident with a spouse caught on tape. people are so god damn reactionary and obtuse, they can't see more than five inches in front of their face.

this part of the salon article pretty much sums it for me:

It's not an isolated incident. Yes, this is the only time he's been caught on tape making death threats to his wife but he was already on more-than-shaky ground publicly for his drunken anti-semetic rants of yesteryear.

Mel just needs an exorcism.

Straight up.

Maybe they just don't like Mel Gibson.

I find it hard to believe tha people would be digging so deep for hypocrisy if it wasn't Mad Max/Martin Riggs we were talking about here. I can understand raising the point, but caling the HANGOVER guys clowns and saying they're stupid and so on is just weird. They've chosen not to work with a racist antisemite, Tyson or no Tyson. They're also in a much stronger bargaining position for this sequel than they were for the first, when all three guys were below the radar.

Come on, you can't write a 1000 word article about that bro. Clearly something hypocrisy something something Roman Polanski is at work here.