New segments of audio tapes purportedly featuring Mel Gibson ranting against Oksana Grigorieva, mother of his eight-year-old daughter’ have been released via an exclusive on Radaronline and there are two things that must be said about them:
1. The tapes indicate that for Gibson the hits just keep on coming. Or, rather, the tapes indicate for Grigorieva that the hits apparently did come from Gibson — because he seemingly admits it, amid with what sounds like a death threat.
2. If this keeps up Gibson’s best hope may be that the Swiss government will take over the movie studios, since then he might not have to worry about dire corporate consequences to his career.
Radar Online’s report has the actual audio tape — and it once again seemingly shows an actor-director who will may have a tough time convincing a big chunk of America to blot out what they’ve read about the “real” Gibson when they see him trying to become immersed in the imagery on the screen — or that they should plunk their money down for movies he produces that’ll further fatten his already tubby bank account.
Mel Gibson, under investigation for domestic violence, admits to hitting Oksana Grigorieva and TWICE threatens to kill her in an explosive new audio tape obtained and released exclusively by RadarOnline.com.
The enraged actor tells the mother of his eight-month old daughter Lucia “you deserved it” after she says that he hit her and broke her teeth.
….The new tape features a ranting, out-of-control, Mel who screams and is so enraged at times that all he can do is pant heavily, seemingly incapable of speaking. It is one of the most powerful, crazed and bizarre episodes ever caught on tape from a major Hollywood star. You can listen to the tape here exclusively on RadarOnline.com.
The tape is not only big trouble for Mel in the domestic violence investigation but he could face additional criminal charges based on two death threats heard clearly on this new audio.
Here are the two key passages that will likely get Gibson in hot water:
Oksana: What kind of a man is that? Hitting a woman when she’s holding a child in her hands? Breaking her teeth twice in the face! What kind of man is that?
Mel: Oh, you’re all angry now! You know what, you —-ing deserved it!
AND:
Later on the tape, Mel alludes to killing and burying her. As the former couple’s argument grows worse and worse Oksana tells Mel: “You’re gonna answer one day, boy, you’re gonna answer.”
Infuriated, Mel asks if she is threatening him, and Oksana says she is not. “I’m not the one to threaten,” the Russian-born beauty says.
And that’s when Mel makes what certainly can be reasonably interpreted as another death threat, telling Oksana: “Threaten ya? I’ll put you in a —-ing rose garden you —! You understand that? Because I’m capable of it. You understand that?”
Go to the link to read the entire post.
Entertainment Weekly’s Lisa Schwarzbaum says she’ll skip linking to the latest tape and raises the question of whether what an artist does or who he or she “really” is matters in the end:
My question: How? Do you really benefit from knowing that, if this leaked evidence is to be believed, the private Mel Gibson is a racist, a bigot, a misogynist, a person unraveling in hate? His sins (to put his actions in terms that he, a religious man, would understand) certainly matter to his unfortunate ex-girlfriend, to anyone he has insulted in person, and to his God.
But to put the matter in terms the godless marketplace understands, will what you know affect whether you buy a ticket to Mel Gibson’s next movie? Will you boycott his work? (I won’t.) Or will you be even more curious to see what he does next? His talent agency just announced that he has been dropped as a client. But he is a very rich man, with money enough to finance his own productions. What should our public response be to Mel Gibson’s private bad behavior?
And, indeed, it is a question that has come up many times over the past century since technology spread movies and music and the artists who created them became celebrities: does an artist owe the public anything more than their very best performance? What does their personal life matter?
In the case of Roman Polanski, it’s clear there is a great divide there as well between those who believe the charges against him, those who say they still don’t believe it and those who seem to believe the charges but feel it was a long time ago and that the man is a great artist whose brilliance is a gift to the world so it’s time to move on. And then there are some celebrities who’ll stick with their own, much as some Republicans and some Democrats will defend their parties no matter what.
The bottom line, though is this: there are some people who don’t have millions or a billion dollars, who don’t have big homes, who struggle with debt or have meager savings, who don’t live in chalets and shell out their limited money to make these artists rich. Do they have to like or respect the artist?
Or is it sort of like sending money to a worthy cause — only to find out that it was unworthy?
The debate will continue and — yes — Gibson is likely to resurface with another project (most likely self-produced, apart from some projects already in the pipeline).
But there will be a chunk of the public that will decide he is not worthy.
And he’ll likely continue to get rich.
Maybe not as rich — but rich.
But in terms of Mel Gibson’s future box office potential, it’s unlikely that the hits — for him — will keep on coming.
To follow comments from weblogs go HERE and HERE.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.