MEL GIBSON ARRESTED FOR DUI

[almaty 19]

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Actor and director Mel Gibson was arrested Friday in Malibu, California, and charged with driving under the influence, according to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Office.

Gibson, 50, was pulled over early Friday while driving on the Pacific Coast Highway, said sheriff's spokesman Steve Whitmore. Officers on patrol reported Gibson was driving at an "

He was charged with a misdemeanor and posted $5,000 bond, Whitmore said.

Gibson was not immediately available for comment.

Gibson, who acted in the "Lethal Weapon" movie series, won an Oscar for directing 1995's Oscar-winning best picture "Braveheart."

He reportedly financed the controversial movie "The Passion of the Christ" (2004), which he also directed, with $25 million of his own money. The film made $370 million at the domestic box office and currently ranks No. 10 on the all-time box office list. "Passion of the Christ" was nominated for three Oscars, but won none.

Gibson's latest movie, "Apocalypto," set in the Mayan civilization of several centuries ago, is due in December.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

He reportedly financed the controversial movie "The Passion of the Christ" (2004)...

Anyone have any idea why CNN felt the need to use the word 'reportedly'?

[Alex+R 0]

Now HERE'S the kind of thread I was longing for.

[Ban Hammer 13,676]

lol he was getting ready for mad max IV

[jordanianprincess 0]

guess he lost the passion...

[Jenn! 918]

Funny how more than half of the article was not devoted to this breaking news, but rather to plugging Mel's films.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Funny how more than half of the article was not devoted to this breaking news, but rather to plugging Mel's films.

Almost makes you think he called the cops to tell them he was driving drunk....! Come and get me!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Here's a great read on Mel Gibson and his film, Passion of Christ:

http://www.primal-page.com/gibson.htm

This is not a film about the Prince of Peace. This is not a film about forgiveness, tolerance, mercy; about God so loving the world that God does not leave us to suffer in it alone. The film's . . . apologists have insisted that this is the film's message. But the children know better." (p.144. Emphasis mine) She is correct of course, but most of those who were subjected to violence themselves, might continue to rationalize along the lines of - "Well yes, but it was not so bad, look how well I turned out." I think Mel Gibson may identify with Jesus as an abused child.

This also suggests an Old Testament vision of God - an angry, all-powerful, absolutist father who demands absolute obedience from his children. But in the New Testament doesn't Christ offer a picture of a more loving father waiting to receive those who repent and believe? Is the sacrifice God demands from his son a regression to the sacrifice of Abraham? But when God saw that Abraham was fully ready to sacrifice Isaac he let it go. But here God demands not only his son's death (suicide), but in the most sadistic way imaginable. He does not let it go. Even if we could make a case for it being necessary, why does the sacrifice have to be so brutal and extreme? Is man really so horrifically sinful? Even if he were, why would human sacrifice be the only possible atonement? The film offers us only silence on such questions.

[Lewis 0]

That CNN article is a very good promotion vehicle. Did I say vehicle? Watch out!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Here's a great read on Mel Gibson and his film, Passion of Christ:

http://www.primal-page.com/gibson.htm

This is not a film about the Prince of Peace. This is not a film about forgiveness, tolerance, mercy; about God so loving the world that God does not leave us to suffer in it alone. The film's . . . apologists have insisted that this is the film's message. But the children know better." (p.144. Emphasis mine) She is correct of course, but most of those who were subjected to violence themselves, might continue to rationalize along the lines of - "Well yes, but it was not so bad, look how well I turned out." I think Mel Gibson may identify with Jesus as an abused child.

This also suggests an Old Testament vision of God - an angry, all-powerful, absolutist father who demands absolute obedience from his children. But in the New Testament doesn't Christ offer a picture of a more loving father waiting to receive those who repent and believe? Is the sacrifice God demands from his son a regression to the sacrifice of Abraham? But when God saw that Abraham was fully ready to sacrifice Isaac he let it go. But here God demands not only his son's death (suicide), but in the most sadistic way imaginable. He does not let it go. Even if we could make a case for it being necessary, why does the sacrifice have to be so brutal and extreme? Is man really so horrifically sinful? Even if he were, why would human sacrifice be the only possible atonement? The film offers us only silence on such questions.

The movie is not only gratuitous but it is sadistic. Brutalising the audience by throwing blood at the screen. The message appears to be "look at what these people have done to my God"...

[Marilyn. 340]

Funny how more than half of the article was not devoted to this breaking news, but rather to plugging Mel's films.

I noticed that too... I was wondering what all that had to do with driving drunk

[Alex+R 0]

Thanks to this thread, tonight when I had dinner with my parents and brother and we were sharing bits of current events we'd read, I was able to proudly pipe up and say "Mel Gibson got a DUI!"

Well, SOMEONE in the family has to man the celebrity gossip front.

[Itsmeitsmeitsree! 0]

Funny how more than half of the article was not devoted to this breaking news, but rather to plugging Mel's films.

It happens all the time. George Michael caught in the bushes with a jobless man with a potbelly? Let's mention he was the lead singer for Wham and had a popular record with Faith. Britney Spears drives with her kid on her lap? They're sure to mention her albums and that her husband's cd comes out soon.

I don't see the point here.

[ceriserose 1]

I don't see the point here.

It's the age-old adage when it comes to stardom: no publicity is bad publicity.

[Alex+R 0]

It's their journalistic responsability to tell the reader who the guy is, why he's important, and why he's relevant right now. However, this time was a little over the top.