Despite initially saying that they were going to drop the whole thing after getting petitioned by people personally involved in making the Star Trek movies. And then going ahead and suing the fans anyway. I understand defending one’s IP, but throwing fans under the bus like that is something else.
4 Likes
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I don’t want to see that movie because it looks terrible. But if Gibson made another Mad Max with George Miller, I’d watch the hell out of that.
Garbage people make great and enjoyable art all the time. Tom Cruise is a post-human nutball, but I loved Edge of Tomorrow; Miles Davis was a genuinely terrible person, but I still listen to Kind of Blue; Woody Allen is Woody Allen, but Annie Hall is still an incredibly enjoyable movie; etc, etc.
4 Likes
Likewise! Re-reading my comment I think it was far too general. The last movie with Gibson in it that I saw was Signs, at the behest of a friend. I thought it was quite silly, indeed. I don’t know if it was any better or worse for having Gibson in it.
Many people I know discuss their interest in movies based primarily around the actors, but I don’t generally concentrate upon them. I wonder if they would re-consider their patronage if the offending personality was somebody less visible, like an editor or foley.
The most recent controversy I had about actors was when I was recommending Edge of Tomorrow to people, many of whom had the response that “Ew, isn’t that a Tom Cruise movie?” I was kind of taken aback, because I thought of it more as a gestalt than a vehicle featuring a star. I know that some actors are better at their craft than others, but they’re just not much of a focus for me. Hollywood would advance the craft of acting considerably if the eschewed the whole “movie star” schtick. IMO it’s like reading/avoiding a book for the typeface the printer chose.
1 Like
Just to be clear–are you disputing the existence of those opportunistic parents?
People do insane things to be close to famous people, up to and including putting their children in harm’s way.
2 Likes
Not at all.
When I say “what kind of parent?” the implied answer is:
Not a good one, who only has their kids’ best interests at heart.
3 Likes
No she isn’t disputing that, the opposite actually.
3 Likes
They weren’t profiting as far as i know. And also:
You don’t get to play with someone else’s toys even if you really like them a lot
Yes, yes you totally can and still reach an amicable and mutually beneficial agreement without strong-arming anyone.
10 Likes
Glad I asked. I disagree with your take that the post-1994 accusations didn’t ring true for that reason.
For example, there are currently numerous families living in Europe on R. Kelly’s dime because they put their minor daughters with him to be close to fame and fortune (ETA: after his affinity for minor girls was well known), and are now reaping the rewards of him raping them.
ETA: to avoid misunderstanding due to my too general pronoun choice, I am NOT saying that the girls are reaping the reward or are to blame in any way for Kelly raping them
1 Like
I react unfavorably to people yelling at me, and all caps is yelling on the internet. If writing AND in all caps was not meant as as a snide remark on your perception that I don’t know the details of the suit and controversy, then I apologize for being snide in return, and I respectfully advise using bold or italics to emphasize without what’s generally regarded as yelling.
I treat people with the dignity they treat me. If I misinterpreted your tone I’m sorry.
I maintain that discussion of Axanar should be continued in it’s own thread. I’m the one responsible for this tangent, so mea culpa, but it’s off-topic and should be split off if we’re to continue with it.
5 Likes
I don’t care, frankly.
It just dawned on me; haven’t I asked you before not to attempt to engage me at all? If not, I’m asking politely now.
Thanks.
3 Likes
I’m not at all sure what I did to offend, but offer an apology in any event. Take care, and good luck in all your future endeavors.
1 Like
This comes across as victim-blaming.
3 Likes
They were selling Axanar branded merchandise and bought and equipped a studio with money they raised using Star Trek IP.
The time to reach an amicable and mutually beneficial agreement is before you start raising money, not after.
This is how I feel about Woody Allen.
Ezra Pound was an avowed Fascist and an anti-Semite who broadcast for Mussolini, yet his writing and influence are important to this day (and I am in no way comparing Pound’s work with Gibson’s.) I’m sure if we look back through history there are a lot of famous artists who were assholes of epic proportions, but even a piece of shit can create something of great beauty (there’s that Vonnegut quote about the most beautiful roses he ever saw were growing in 100% horse manure.)
But I think this is a different thing than supporting Gibson’s career by seeing one of his current films. Boycotting his work as a form of protest is a valid argument, particularly if he gives money to causes I find abhorrent. I doubt I will suffer for missing “Daddy’s Home 2”, but even if I did miss out on some great piece of cinema it’s worth it to try and advance a larger benevolent cause.
1 Like
Let me clarify, because that’s not what I intended at all. R. Kelly’s victims are absolutely NOT to blame for what he did to them in any way.
R. Kelly is to blame for his crimes. The adults who chose to put their children close to R. Kelly knowing what he routinely did with minor girls, sometimes because they were so starstruck and desperate to be close to fame and fortune, should be pitied for the terrible thing that was done to their child and criticized for doing what they did to enable it.
Why? That was a truly awful movie whose only redeeming feature was doing the Starship Troopers canvass better than the Starship Troopers film. Great production values, could have been a great movie with a completely different script. There’s certain actors that will draw me to a movie and certain actors that will repel me. Cruise is among the latter, along with Adam Sandler.
I would note that at least part of the reason Mel Gibson was such a big asshole is that he was a raging alcoholic for years and years. Since he is now supposedly clean and sober I can see people deciding to give him a second chance.
7 Likes
I actually avoided Edge of Tomorrow for years because of Cruise. But when I finally saw it because my wife wanted to watch it, I really liked it. One movie however hasn’t changed my general aversion to movies starring Cruise.
2 Likes
Perhaps, but in my experience, alcohol only loosens inhibitions, it doesn’t change who the person is.
8 Likes
I have not seen it myself, i do confess that it starring Tom Cruise is a big factor though i have heard positive things about the movie. I might get around to watching it some day but i do find it hard wanting to watch movies with him involved.
1 Like
