Gary Oldman in hot water!

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
But it's not even about PC. It's about one particular group so hell bent on interpreting every act and utterance through the lens of eternal victimhood that they completely miss the point of what is being said. I can think of a few groups like that...

I don't know about this. Mel Gibson said some pretty hateful stuff, and Oldman is attributing the reaction to his comments as political correctness gone too far. What if the same thing was said about Donald Sterlings comments, which were equally ignorant? I understand Oldman's point, which is that PC has gone too far, but he used a stupid and completely irrelevant example. I don't think that is interpretation through the "lens of
eternal victimhood." I understand the point of what was being said...PC has indeed gone too far. I just think there are RELEVANT examples that he could have used that wouldn't involve him defending comments that as hateful as Gibson's were.
 
Gibson was pretty bad (and didn't he say them right around the time The Passion came out?) Jesse Jackson and Al Sharptonhave said some terrible things as well, but didn't seem to take the same kind of heat.
 
Sharon Osbourne has said some pretty bad things too, John Mayer has said some racist things too. Quentin Tarantino has made a living of making movies with a lot of stuff that can be considered bad or racist....etc etc.

you could argue that comedians get a pass because they are just being funny, But even some comedians get a pass while others don't.

Lisa Lampanelli has some pretty hardcore racist jokes on her sets, stuff so bad that I can't believe she would say out loud. so does kathy Griffin, But for some reason Kramer from Seinfeld is the devil when it comes to making bad jokes. what Kramer said doesn't come close to the jokes that Lisa uses.

People like to go after some celebrities but defend others. they will boycott some movies but accept others. It doesn't really make an sense at all.

Im not even defending or attacking the celebrities I mentioned, it is just an example of some celebrities that get a pass somehow.
 
People have been programmed to react. If you don't follow the accepted line of thinking you are labeled and the idiotic masses come at you with pitchforks, and metaphorically burn your house or business with boycotts and bad press. We all have our prejudices. We all say things in moments when the impulse is not filtered through the brain. The difference is in action. A person may have certain views about some group, but do they actually do a negative action against them? I guarantee you can take the most PC poster boy out there, get him liquored up and you're gonna hear all kinds of crap come out of his mouth. Sooner or later they come for everyone, the question is if you believe in freedom or not.
 
This is sounding more like guerilla marketing for Planet of the Apes. :rotfl

Gorillas don't like or understand your comment. They now want an apology.

netflix-unveils-its-monkey-army.jpg
 
Old article by Joel Stein in LA Times. Guess he's anti-semite too.:lol


Who runs Hollywood? C'mon


December 19, 2008|JOEL STEIN


I have never been so upset by a poll in my life. Only 22% of Americans now believe "the movie and television industries are pretty much run by Jews," down from nearly 50% in 1964. The Anti-Defamation League, which released the poll results last month, sees in these numbers a victory against stereotyping. Actually, it just shows how dumb America has gotten. Jews totally run Hollywood.

How deeply Jewish is Hollywood? When the studio chiefs took out a full-page ad in the Los Angeles Times a few weeks ago to demand that the Screen Actors Guild settle its contract, the open letter was signed by: News Corp. President Peter Chernin (Jewish), Paramount Pictures Chairman Brad Grey (Jewish), Walt Disney Co. Chief Executive Robert Iger (Jewish), Sony Pictures Chairman Michael Lynton (surprise, Dutch Jew), Warner Bros. Chairman Barry Meyer (Jewish), CBS Corp. Chief Executive Leslie Moonves (so Jewish his great uncle was the first prime minister of Israel), MGM Chairman Harry Sloan (Jewish) and NBC Universal Chief Executive Jeff Zucker (mega-Jewish). If either of the Weinstein brothers had signed, this group would have not only the power to shut down all film production but to form a minyan with enough Fiji water on hand to fill a mikvah.


The person they were yelling at in that ad was SAG President Alan Rosenberg (take a guess). The scathing rebuttal to the ad was written by entertainment super-agent Ari Emanuel (Jew with Israeli parents) on the Huffington Post, which is owned by Arianna Huffington (not Jewish and has never worked in Hollywood.)

The Jews are so dominant, I had to scour the trades to come up with six Gentiles in high positions at entertainment companies. When I called them to talk about their incredible advancement, five of them refused to talk to me, apparently out of fear of insulting Jews. The sixth, AMC President Charlie Collier, turned out to be Jewish.

As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood. Without us, you'd be flipping between "The 700 Club" and "Davey and Goliath" on TV all day.

So I've taken it upon myself to re-convince America that Jews run Hollywood by launching a public relations campaign, because that's what we do best. I'm weighing several slogans, including: "Hollywood: More Jewish than ever!"; "Hollywood: From the people who brought you the Bible"; and "Hollywood: If you enjoy TV and movies, then you probably like Jews after all."

I called ADL Chairman Abe Foxman, who was in Santiago, Chile, where, he told me to my dismay, he was not hunting Nazis. He dismissed my whole proposition, saying that the number of people who think Jews run Hollywood is still too high. The ADL poll, he pointed out, showed that 59% of Americans think Hollywood execs "do not share the religious and moral values of most Americans," and 43% think the entertainment industry is waging an organized campaign to "weaken the influence of religious values in this country."

That's a sinister canard, Foxman said. "It means they think Jews meet at Canter's Deli on Friday mornings to decide what's best for the Jews." Foxman's argument made me rethink: I have to eat at Canter's more often.

"That's a very dangerous phrase, 'Jews control Hollywood.' What is true is that there are a lot of Jews in Hollywood," he said. Instead of "control," Foxman would prefer people say that many executives in the industry "happen to be Jewish," as in "all eight major film studios are run by men who happen to be Jewish."

But Foxman said he is proud of the accomplishments of American Jews. "I think Jews are disproportionately represented in the creative industry. They're disproportionate as lawyers and probably medicine here as well," he said. He argues that this does not mean that Jews make pro-Jewish movies any more than they do pro-Jewish surgery. Though other countries, I've noticed, aren't so big on circumcision.


I appreciate Foxman's concerns. And maybe my life spent in a New Jersey-New York/Bay Area-L.A. pro-Semitic cocoon has left me naive. But I don't care if Americans think we're running the news media, Hollywood, Wall Street or the government. I just care that we get to keep running them.
 
Yes he should apologize for making stupid remarks some people find offensive. He is an actor on a public stage and needs to STFU wading into making broad stereotypical remarks or defending Gibson's drunken tirade, or be prepared to live with the consequences when he's called on it. I'm sick of people acting like being non-PC is somehow macho. Everyone has prejudices, you can't get around that. There are things I roll my eyes over, or say in private about groups or sub-groups that I would never say in public. Sure it's easy to not see "what the big deal is" when you don't belong to the group on the other end of the insult. "Why should the Redskins change their name?" "What's wrong with calling someone a "queer"? "Why shouldn't the rebel flag be on display at the state capitol?" "Why do Jews care if folks they're running Hollywood?" Because those things have histories, and most of society is trying to move past that but it's going to take a few more generations. Especially when the odd meathead tries to turn back the clock to the "good old days".

I really like Oldman as an actor and will absolutely continue to do so (Gibson too), but he has tainted himself in one stupid interview and it will probably taint him for the rest of his career. That's why his agent is panicking like a MF. It's also too bad that he treats his roles like throwaway garbage. Zorg? Dracula? Geez, two of my favorites. Perfectionist bull*****. Just be friggin' happy to be a working actor, and stop whining, because there are a million people standing behind you who would gladly take those roles. I recently read an interview with Quentin Tarantino where he was talking about how idiotic actors and directors sound when they say they don't watch their own movies. He said he watches his old movies a few times a year and enjoys the hell out of them.
Anyway while he's on his mea culpa tour maybe Oldman learn to be happy for what he has.
 
The ADL is just a symptom. It's about the larger issue that Oldman tackled: when do the lines blur between "political correctness" and totalitarian ideologies? There's a very clear message underneath all of the "love your fellow man, and 'we love equality'" stuff: conform. I'm not saying it's okay to be a racist bag of dicks, but I think there's a right way and a wrong way to combat intolerance, and I fail to see how more intolerance makes one side better than the other.

Without getting into the whole PC thing, in the context of that interview, I didn't come away from it with the feeling that he meant to say what was broadly received. He was hoist with his own petard a bit though :lol

Oops. You fell victim to my chronic post editing/deleting condition.

thanks for the courtesy requote :lol

I don't know about this. Mel Gibson said some pretty hateful stuff, and Oldman is attributing the reaction to his comments as political correctness gone too far. What if the same thing was said about Donald Sterlings comments, which were equally ignorant? I understand Oldman's point, which is that PC has gone too far, but he used a stupid and completely irrelevant example. I don't think that is interpretation through the "lens of
eternal victimhood." I understand the point of what was being said...PC has indeed gone too far. I just think there are RELEVANT examples that he could have used that wouldn't involve him defending comments that as hateful as Gibson's were.

Mel Gibson's comments were hateful and Gary Oldman did choose a poor example to frame a poorly articulated point. But he's clumsy throughout the whole interview, as though he's having a big whine with a mate over a few ales. He realised at the time that he was digging a hole for himself by "defending all the wrong people" - but I'm surprised that a guy who's been around as long as he has wasn't better prepared and more considered. To me, simple clarification of the comments ought to have been enough to placate concerned others. An apology seems OTP. But having given that apology, apparently it's deemed "insufficient".

One outcome of all the brouhaha is that men will actually be buying Playboy for the article.
 
But it's not even about PC. It's about one particular group so hell bent on interpreting every act and utterance through the lens of eternal victimhood that they completely miss the point of what is being said. I can think of a few groups like that...
This is my perspective on it, as well. I don't think the average person on the street cares, but powerful people do, who are represented by the Defamation League, have powerful influences in the media, etc. And stripping away some of the coarseness of language, I don't think Oldman was really wrong objectively, but that's neither here nor there in some circumstances.
 
I really can't see what exactly Oldman said that was wrong.
He just said a lot of people are hypocritical and that that pisses him off. He didn't say Gibson was right in his comments or anything.
I really don't see the need for an apology, a clarification would suffice.
 
This is my perspective on it, as well. I don't think the average person on the street cares, but powerful people do, who are represented by the Defamation League, have powerful influences in the media, etc. And stripping away some of the coarseness of language, I don't think Oldman was really wrong objectively, but that's neither here nor there in some circumstances.

Besides the people complaining go directly to the advertisers or the channel or the magazine that they were offended by. They will go after the companies that hire these actors.

So yeah it is a pretty big deal with these groups protest because it is not just lame protesting in the streets or anything like that but they would send letters or call the people in charge to complain and to rally people against them.
 
Daniel Tosh is another guy that has some pretty hard racist jokes. His show is nothing but that kind of humor. His stand up is even worse, he only got in trouble for a rape joke but even then it wasn't as bad
 
tumblr_m5tz5cmL3r1rp4j48.gif


I personally do not care about the hateful things people say. I don't care that people are offended by them. It has nothing to do with machismo (nice...misandry...hypocrite) and everything to do with recognizing that other people's thoughts and opinions are none of my business.
 
Back
Top