Wait, wait, don’t have me committed! I’ve been planning on steering as clear as humanly possible from Adam Sandler’s latest attempt to destroy the fine legacy he built with classics like Happy Gilmore and Billy Madison. Another movie based on borderline-homophobic stereotypes, and this time he had the boundless chutzpah to jack his title from a Big Lebowski catchphrase (link very NSFW, but oh so necessary)? No thanks.
Then today I caught sight of an online report (h/t) that Zohan features "a two-pronged attack on Mel Gibson for his anti-Semitic comments of a couple of years ago." Hmm…as an inveterate Gibson-hater, this certainly appeals to me. Still, I feel like I might have gotten that urge out of my system somewhat by loudly booing every time I saw the Apocalypto trailer in theaters throughout 2006 (true story) and adding a masterful treatment of the Gibson question to my DVD collection. There’s gotta be something more to get me interested in this horrendous-looking Sandler movie. Something like the following revelation from the same report: Gibson’s "movies are used to underscore the neo Nazi rantings of a redneck" — wait for it — "played by rocker Dave Matthews."
Whoa, whoa, whoa! The Dave Matthews? As a virulently bigoted film buff?! I might be tempted to pay money to see that, just for the head-spinning cognitive dissonance of it all. I can hardly imagine how Dave — that frat-tastic yet politically outspoken bundle of contradictions — interpreted a racist diatribe, let alone a defense of Mel Gibson’s offensively bad oeuvre. Does he play it funny or straight? Does Dave Matthews, the man, the legend, really have a problem with Mel Gibson (as well he should), or was he just going along with the Sandman’s directions? Everything about this casting choice boggles the mind.
What do you say? Should I take precious time out of my weekend to see this no-doubt-awful movie for that one scene — or just wait til it shows up on YouTube? (Note: Under no circumstances should this be construed as encouraging PopWatchers to bootleg the relevant portion of Zohan with their cameraphones and put it up on YouTube. Don’t do that!)
Oh dear lord no. Don’t spend one penny on this movie. I saw a screening earlier this week and it was the longest two hours I’d spent in a while. Matthews was fine but incredibly stereotypical and one note (in fact, he didn’t even come up on the list of potential redeeming factors we were discussing after the movie). Don’t do it!!
You’re WAY overthinking this.
Matthews had a silent cameo a silent and inexplicable cameo in “Chuck and Larry” (which I HATED) so I wouldn’t expect too much of this alleged scene. (In fact, I might not even expect dialogue).
I generally like your writing, Simon, so I wouldn’t subject you to this flick. I would only save that for people I don’t think too highly of.
Then again, maybe you should go see this on your own as punishment for writing a few weeks ago about Indiana Jones running away from a boulder, “Temple of Doom style”. It’s the least you can do…then make an “I Saw it so you don’t have to” out of it.
Wait for the youtube clip! Don’t waste your money on Zohan.
no. absolutely not.
just…no.
If only so I don’t have to see it.
The fact that you would consider seeing this movie at all, let alone for spite, makes you almost as bad as Mel.
Relax with the Gibson hatred. Tell me that you or one of your friends hasn’t said a completely politically incorrect thing while drunk. Then tell me how freaking embarrassing it would be to have it broadcast to the whole world. Especially when you sober up.
By the way, Apocalypto has nothing to do with anti-semitism or neo Nazi rednecks. I guess that means I should have banned seeing The Pianist because Roman Polanski banged a 13 year old girl. Or maybe I should just keep my opinions to myself.
There is no reason to hate Mel Gibson. He’s got three good movies under his belt (Braveheart, Apocalypto, and yeah, The Passion), and made a big mistake with the drunken tirade, but he (gasp!) took responsibility for his actions and has tried to be as humble as possible since then. What more is he supposed to do? But anyway, see “Zohan” if you think it’s funny. I’ll be steering clear.
Waaaaaah. Let’s booo a guy who obviously has mental problems. Grow up.
Cruise is a wackjob but still makes a good movies that I’ll see. Same goes for Gibson.
I think you should see it for the popwatch “I saw it so you don’t have to.” That way you can see it, but have the helpful excuse that it’s for your job.
Why? Why, oh why?…
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks Simon should have kept the Mel vitriol to himself, or better yet rethink it. Of all the Hollywood a-holes who have run to rehab in the past few years, Gibson’s the only one who went for the right reasons.
As the only person who remembers the Mel Gibson spectacle, I’m surprised you devoted a whole blog to it. Also, if I didn’t watch all the movies that ever insulted Christianity, I would have so much time I took up something else..like exercising : ). Lighten up!!!!
I see someone else has my name. Anyway, DON’T! PLEASE!!! I watched it so that you don’t have to. Didn’t pay for it and I wish I could get back the two hours I lost Tuesday night. The movie offends Israelis, Palestinians, gays, geriatrics, Jews, Muslims, Cab drivers, hairdressers, restaurant franchises, animals, soccer lovers, disco lovers…need I go on?
I agree with everyone else on three points:
1) The movie, should it follow the pattern of the last Adam Sandler flick, will probably suck and run amok in Middle Eastern stereotypes the way Chuck and Larry delved into typecast homosexuality
2) Even if you do watch it, do an ‘I saw it so you won’t have to’ style blog article. (though I think you already redeemed your worst blog entries by the informative Sex and the City debate you posted last week)
3) The Mel Gibson vitriol should’ve been kept to yourself. The rant was unquestionably bad, but he hasn’t gotten in trouble since and doesn’t seem bitter in the aftermath. Give him a bit of leeway.