Wednesday, 20 January 2010

Hollywood Babble On & On #436: Musings That Do Not Involve NBC In Anyway... Maybe...If We're Lucky...

Welcome to the show folks...


Even though they're laying off people harder than an American automaker, The Weinstein Co. is also hiring. Looks like they're picking up a couple of soon-to-ex Miramaxers to handle acquisitions.

Which makes me ask a question:
Who the hell would sell their film to the Weinstein Company?

I mean, sure, they managed to talk someone into giving them some money for acquisitions, but let's remember what they do with the films that they acquire.


The bulk of their acquisitions end up either gathering dust on a shelf, used to prop up the wobbly leg on Harvey's desk, or dumped in the DVD discount bin. The days when they would hustle these sorts of films to make money are long over. They acquire films solely to keep those who might actually do things with them from getting them.

Then you add their rep for grinding young filmmakers into a fine paste, and you just have to wonder, why anyone would want to get into business with them.

They're the NBC of independent cinema.

Damn it! I promised not to mention NBC this post!

Well, I promise not to do it again.


Summit Entertainment has given the green-light to a television series based on their movie Push.


Let's look at the facts.

Push, a flick rehashing the plot from Firestarter about telepaths fleeing and fighting a sneaky government agency, made about $50 mil in combined global box office on a $38 mil budget. However, that's not enough to cover production and the Prints & Advertising costs, and when you take into account some of the complications of international distribution it probably lost a lot more than that.

Neither was the film critically acclaimed, rating 23% at Rotten Tomatoes.

So why try to make it into a TV series?

Well there are two possibilities.

1. Someone made a series pitch that took the fundamental concept into wild new dramatic directions, like how much the
Buffy the Vampire Slayer series differed from the more farcical original movie.


2. Jeff Zucker thought it would be a great replacement for the
Jay Leno Show.

Damn it! I did it again! What the hell is wrong with me today?

Anyway, let's move on...


Mel Gibson's making a bit of a comeback as an actor, with a new movie coming out and all, but some folks don't care for it. Look at the comments at this Nikki Finke post, and you can see that there's still some folks giving Mel the old stink-eye.

For those who think the Jersey Shore is relevant, I'll bring you up to speed on the issue. First Mel directed a film called
The Passion of the Christ. Some criticized the film as Anti-Semitic, because despite having a Jewish lead character, an angry mob of Jews calls for that lead character's execution by the Romans.

Mel tossed gas into that fire by getting pulled over while driving drunk and engaging in a liquor fueled rant about how "The Jews" start all the wars in the world.

He also called the arresting officer "sugar-tits."

Now Mel's spent some time in the Hollywood wilderness, in which his marriage fell apart, and he started a new relationship with a much younger woman, and you know that is not going to end well, they never do.

Now that Mel's on the cusp of a comeback, some folks are saying that Hollywood should deny Mel forgiveness for his drunken rantings.

Personally, I think Mel was acting like a total asshole, and should be mocked royally for being an asshole, but I have to put his sin in perspective with past sins that Hollywood has forgiven.

Let's look at this extremely incomplete list:
  • Roman Polanski had non-consensual sex with a 13 year old girl.
  • Rob Lowe had 3-way with another guy and a 16 year old girl, and videotaped it, making him officially a child pornographer.
  • Charlie Chaplin couldn't say no to any underage girls.
  • Pee Wee Herman got caught spanking the monkey in a porno theater.
  • Countless actors have been busted for drugs, drunk driving, and other acts of reckless endangerment at themselves and others.
  • Woody Allen married his step-daughter. Not necessarily illegal, but definitely creepy.
  • Countless other actors engaged in spousal abuse.
  • And let's not forget producer Walter Wanger. He actually SHOT A MAN and resumed his career as a movie producer little more than a year later.
Compared to that list Mel's sin seems more venal than mortal.

His attitude was piggish, obnoxious, and apparently only acceptable in certain circles of academia, but he hasn't actually done anything physical against Jewish people. He hasn't assaulted or shot anyone over their religion, so I say that his punishment should fit his crime.

So I say let Mel make movies.

Then let's make fun of him.

Verbal crime, gets a verbal punishment.

Humiliation can be very educational in the area of piggish attitudes.

Hey, I made it though this piece without referring to NBC!

Wait, I just referred to NBC!

Damn it!


  1. Kit here.

    Good post on Mel,but one thing:
    Roman Polanski Raped a 13-year old girl.

    It was not consensual.

    Makes Mel look even Better in comparison.

  2. Blast Hardcheese21/1/10 7:30 am

    "...apparently only acceptable in certain circles of academia..."

    Ouch, that'll leave a mark.

    Anyway, I think Mel did get the 'time in the wilderness' he deserved for his behavior. It still ticks me off that I can't watch Braveheart, one of my old faves, without thinking of his stupid, stupid comments.

    What really frosts my shorts, though, is the utter and complete pass that Polanski gets for STICKING HIMSELF IN A 13 YEAR OLD, while she's telling him NOT TO. That is 'rape rape', contrary to what some Hollywood dimbulbs say. He should have done time. Hard time (har), in Federal PYITA Prison.

    Do you think the reason all of the Hollywood twits come to Polanski's defense is that he's considered an 'artiste', whereas Mel G. is considered more of a 'commercial' filmmaker?

  3. Do you think the reason all of the Hollywood twits come to Polanski's defense is that he's considered an 'artiste', whereas Mel G. is considered more of a 'commercial' filmmaker?

    There's no telling how much of it is religious bigotry.

    There might be some warped priorities there too. I believe it was Jonah Goldberg who talked about "the utopia where the only crime is not being nice to someone". In other words, sure Polanski raped a girl, and sure Wanger shot someone, but at least they didn't hate anybody.

    If one's studied a lot about Christian morality and historical views of it, you can start tracing the inheritance lines through to a lot of these views of hollywood.