Gary Oldman Slams "Political Correctness," Calls Dark Knight Movies "Work"

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

PLAYBOY: What?s your view of the future? Are you optimistic about where society is heading?

OLDMAN: [Pauses] You?re asking Gary?

PLAYBOY: Yes.

Okaaay...... a little odd....

They're in the middle of talking about the upcoming Planet of the Apes film in which he plays the leader of a band of human survivors. I guess he wanted to clarify whether the interviewer was asking "What's your character's view of future society?" or "What's your view of future society?".

What Grouchy said. It was still a bit awkward. xD Could have said; "Are you asking about my character, or me?", but eh. Actors. ;p

You know, I read the interview, it was neat, and I was kind of warming up to the guy before the 4th page.

Went way down hill from there, but I guess it could have been worse. Though, such is true of almost anything.

I think there is a vast difference in tone between how MovieBob's article reported his comments and how his comments came across in the interview. That having been said, he did manage to put his foot in it a few times.

I find myself agreeing wholeheartedly with the whole "Reality TV to me is the museum of social decay. And what passes for music - it's all on that plateau. Who's the hero for young people today? Some idiot who can't fucking sing or write or who's shaking her ass and twerking in front of 11-year-olds." rant.

 

[The Material Sheep]

Of course Gary Oldman says something like "political corectness is bullshit!" and "you have the right to use racial/homophobic slurs when you're mad!" everyone cheers to that "yeah show them Gary!".

Everyone has the right to say racial and homophobic slurs. You don't have to like it but they have the right to say it. It could say something about the character of the person who says those in a malicious context when describing the group of people in question.

There is also the point that someone shouldn't be media lynched for saying something stupid while lashing out or miscalculating something. As long as it's not like sincerely held and acted upon 95% of the time. Especially since said media lynching doesn't always cut both ways for equal stupidity. Everyone says something stupid, gets angry and puts their foot in their mouth occasionally. There is a bit of hypocrisy when such strict expectations of those in the spotlight are unevenly applied.

 

[Something Amyss]

I always love it when this kind of thing is called "political correctness". It furthers my opinion that PC is code word for "acting like a jerk", and that a bunch of angry privileged men are mad at being called out on it.

Basically, yeah. "You mean Mel Gibson can't rant about Jews without anyone commenting! Double standard! Political Correctness! He's a natural born 'Murrican and he has the right to free speech!"

And yes, I know Gibson's not native to this country. I'm just being absurd.

And he didn't call anyone a c***, he just stated that if he were to do so, he would get in trouble, but if he did it as part of Jon Stewarts comedy act, it would be A-Ok.

You mean a comedy show and a polemic are treated differently!!?? Well, that is a double standard. And how cum you can kill someone in a movie, but if you kill someone on the streets, the cops get all up in your grill? What sort of madness is this?

Seriously, I don't think this helps Oldman any.

(edited to fix extra quote tag)

 

[Verlander]

Oh fuck off. I'm a very liberal person, extremely much so, but that doesn't make this article any less sensationalist and cherry picked to make him seem worse.

I can criticise a poorly presented article without being a "disenfranchised white boy... ...suffering in a land of socially acceptable discrimination against the straight white male minority" you smug, superior, lifeless toad.

Not everything in the world is black and white, there are a billion shades of grey. 7 billion to be closer.

Get your head out of your ass. YOU are not better than anyone else.

Wow, you've been here long enough to know that those kinds of posts end up with mod wrath. I ain't gonna report you, but if you've got something to say it might be worth taking some time to say it properly.

Most people here aren't cricising a poorly presented article (having read the original, I don't think it's poorly presented myself, but opinions and all that). What they're doing is defending someone they think they know, but don't, against the dangers of the ultimate libertarian boogey man of "political correctness".

I hate to break it to you, but libertarianism is the ultimate in white male politics. It's "cut support for everyone, let people rise to the top on their own", knowing full well they live in a society that naturally favours them. It's got the added bonus of relieving guilt by not discriminating against anyone, and having no religious obligation - the biggest downfalls of conservatism. It's the epitome of white privilege.

I have never said, nor indicated that I'm better than anyone. However, YOU opened your statement with "I'm very liberal, but...", as though that distinguishes you in any way. Do you know who's not liberal? The guy who was just interviewed as saying that "everyone thinks it" about racist abuse, the guy that just said that comedians and satirists are just socially acceptable hate speech in a world looking to condemn social conservatives, and the guy who said that an American public school that teaching Creationism is acceptable and the people suing them (for breaking the constitution) were in the wrong.

Just because he was in Batman, doesn't mean that he's awesome, and exempt from being a dick.

 

[Buckshaft]

People on the escapist having a knee-jerk reaction to a sensationalist headline and not reading the article? Why, sir, I couldn't even begin to comprehend.

Without opining either way on Oldman's views, I have just this to say.

"Cup a tea, ya cahnt. And two sugars."

 

[Ohlookit'sMatty]

Leon barely gets a mention

-M

 

[Robert Marrs]

Did anyone criticizing him actually read the article? He said some things that were a bit insensitive but the point stands loud and clear to me. We have huge double standards, not just in hollywood but in all of the developed world. People get crucified for saying objectionable things when in reality everyone has done something similar or worse at some point. Its nice to see someone just be honest for ONCE. I didn't come out of the interview thinking Gary Oldman is a bigot. I came out thinking Gary Oldman might be the only honest man in show business. I have a really hard time thinking people could be so deluded from politics and political correctness that they would really have a negative opinion after reading that interview.

Who am I kidding? This is the escapist! Why look into the deeper meaning when you can take things out of context to send someone up the river?

 

[lacktheknack]

He said "In a town run by Jews"

That doesn't fly no matter how you spin it

Yes it does.

Take this line, for instance:

"So he claims that Admiral Byrd's expedition discovered ancient aliens in Antarctica, much like how Bush knocked down the towers and the moon landing took place in Nevada."

Am I actually claiming that Bush staged 9/11? Nope.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

PLAYBOY: What?s your view of the future? Are you optimistic about where society is heading?

OLDMAN: [Pauses] You?re asking Gary?

PLAYBOY: Yes.

Okaaay...... a little odd....

They're in the middle of talking about the upcoming Planet of the Apes film in which he plays the leader of a band of human survivors. I guess he wanted to clarify whether the interviewer was asking "What's your character's view of future society?" or "What's your view of future society?".

What Grouchy said. It was still a bit awkward. xD Could have said; "Are you asking about my character, or me?", but eh. Actors. ;p

You know, I read the interview, it was neat, and I was kind of warming up to the guy before the 4th page.

Went way down hill from there, but I guess it could have been worse. Though, such is true of almost anything.

I think there is a vast difference in tone between how MovieBob's article reported his comments and how his comments came across in the interview. That having been said, he did manage to put his foot in it a few times.

I find myself agreeing wholeheartedly with the whole "Reality TV to me is the museum of social decay. And what passes for music - it's all on that plateau. Who's the hero for young people today? Some idiot who can't fucking sing or write or who's shaking her ass and twerking in front of 11-year-olds." rant.

Yeah. I agree with the reality TV thing too, but then again, who doesn't think shit stinks? xD

As for the tone of what he said about the movies, I agree it sounds more aggressive/pompous than it really was. Like I said, he was a nice guy tell page 4. Three pages of just pleasant and interesting talk tell then.

That said, and maybe I'm just reading that part wrong, but for the Apes movie he said his character thought there could be peace between humans and the apes, right?

But don't all the trailers show him being the one so gun ho about shooting them all dead? A quote from one, "There all animals!", or something like that.
Eh, maybe he just has a change of heart in the story. :/

Spoiler: For space, but I promise it's all still here. Not broken or anything. No need to open it and check..... :( Please do not open it.

> HA! You thought there was something here! But it was just more words! Your words! Except for the red ones. Those are mine. MINE!

Read the source and didn't see the big issue, it was interesting and accurate in its context (hypocrites). The Jew line is the only thing even slightly hot, everything else has to be taken out of context to be deemed offensive.
I've read the thread and like that others have called this out, and not all are slaves to what Gary Oldman spoke of.

It is kind of ironic that someone like Moviebob who is from what I gather the type of person Gary Oldman is referring to is the one who posted the article.

Heck people have ragged on how it was written, but the picture itself seems loaded. Why Zorg? Why not his character in Batman (it is in the title after all), or just a picture of the man in "real life"?
People will likely attack me for this, but what picture is put up can say a lot in itself. Say here in Britain, you a paper more left leaning? Have pictures of Cameron looking like an idiot when there is an article on something him, or his party did.

I'm not discounting everything said against the man, but some fairness is needed from certain folk.

As for the movie stuff,[sub][sub]besides what he said about 12 years a slave[/sub][/sub], I don't really care.
It's all work. Maybe he's just more of a Marvel fan? ;p

Okay I'll bite, what is the issue you take about what he said about 12 years a slave.

Eh, the notion that if you don't vote for 12 years a slave that people will think you're racist.

For one thing, do we even get to see who votes for the oscars, and what they vote for? Isn't it anonymous?
If not please let me know, I'd be interested to find out.

For another, I think it's fine to vote for a movie besides 12 years a salve as long as you thought some over movie did better in whatever category it was up for.

Heck, I hear it's a good movie, but I doubt it would be a sure win for the best looking, best CGI, or hell, maybe you just liked the story of another movie more.

xD Now, I would worry about someone who voted it best comedy. That would be odd, to say the least.
However, anyone who says you have to vote for 12 Years a salve or you're racist/will be seen as racist, is just being silly.

 

[Therumancer]

Give the guy some points for guts, with the way the left wing dominates the media he speaks his mind with a lot more to lose than someone like me. I myself tend to think Political Correctness is bunk, and has gone way too far. As far as a lot of the specifics of what he said goes, it's not like he's involved in a prolonged conversation with a neutral interviewer given how this has been spun.

I'll also say that him claiming some of his more visible movies were "just work" isn't surprising, I mean that's probably how it is for most actors and actresses, who are professionals and selling themselves as a product based on what is going to get them the best returns. Albeit most realize promotion is a big part of the job, and them claiming that their movies were something special to work on, helps sell them, which puts more money in their pockets.

I think there are a few actors who are an exception to that though. Nicolas Cage for example seemed to like to work before he even got into financial trouble (and that's how he made the tons of money he wound up getting into trouble with), and seems to really enjoy doing quirky products. Bill Cosby is another guy who has done some odd stuff like "Leonard Part 6" (perhaps a candidate for worst movie ever made) just to help friends apparently, and at that
point he was arguably one of the most powerful guys in Hollywood.

At the end of the day Gary Oldman is part of the other 50% of society from most people who post here and are involved in the media nowadays, that's not especially shocking, it's simply impressive that the guy is willing to be vocal about it. Of course I'd imagine part of it is that he's probably made enough money where he doesn't need the work.

 

[Quickman]

He has a point.

Many people point their fingers at the so called "privileged demographics" of the US for the sole sake of harming the aforementioned "privileged demographic", not aiming at equality. Too many people pick and choose what to be offended at without looking at the other side of the fence and history within a neutral context.

To win in an event there are times in which people will point fingers their enemies, or the people they perceive to be their enemies, for the sole sake of getting ahead because they couldn't achieve what they wanted to without playing a certain card. Everyone seems to forget that for every wrongdoing they see others see the exact same thing.

Problem is not everyone is equally called out for it. That is the point he is getting at.

 

[PunkRex]

Woah, hang on... BOWIE'S A CONSERVATIVE!?!

Bowie.

David Bowie.

Major Tom.

A Conservative.

WHAT!?!

 

[Manni]

Everyone has the right to say racial and homophobic slurs. You don't have to like it but they have the right to say it.

Of course they have the right to say it. It's a free world, most of it at least. That's just make them stupid, intolerant, cruel people. I just don't believe there's any possible explanation for calling someone racial/homophobic slur, no matter how angry you are. It's just a matter of culture and tact. And basically Mr Oldman just said it's ok, because when you're angry you can call someone "f*g" because, hey, we all use those words, right?

 

[Ratty]

Meh, brilliant actor and shitty person isn't that unusual. Surprised he dismisses his most popular movies like that though.
Wonder what he, as an apparent social conservative, thinks about his werewolf humping of a half naked woman on top a grave in
Bram Stoker's Dracula now.

Woah, hang on... BOWIE'S A CONSERVATIVE!?!

Bowie.

David Bowie.

Major Tom.

A Conservative.

WHAT!?!

The guys gotta be in his 70s now right? Not that surprising when you look at it from that perspective. Opinions that were "extreme left" when he was in his prime like "Maybe we shouldn't lynch people for their race." and "Maybe men having long hair is ok." are just centrist generally accepted opinions now.

People get crucified for saying objectionable things when in reality everyone has done something similar or worse at some point. Its nice to see someone just be honest for ONCE.

I object to this part of your post. That's like when it came out that Paula Dean said the N-word and I heard a bunch of other white people state matter-of-factly that all white Americans say it in private. No, no we do not. Don't assume I do shit just because you and people you know do. It's honestly reminiscent of how psychologists have discovered that male rapists genuinely believe all men rape and just hide it better than they do. Do most people carry some degree of racial/cultural baggage toward certain groups outside their own? Yes, probably, but that doesn't mean people aren't aware of this and don't strive to be better, or that everyone is secretly a member of a hate group.

We need an honest dialog about race and culture, but complaining about "political correctness" is just complaining that you can't say any shit you want about minority groups without being held accountable for your words. Freedom of speech works both ways, people are allowed to criticize your words and opinions and not support you if they disagree with you. That's true freedom of expression.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

I have to say Bob, I'm pretty disappointed in your reporting here. You took a five page interview of with an interesting actor detailing everything from artistry to politics to his own sense of self and pulled out the quotes from the one paragraph where he mentions political correctness and says the word Jew.

Granted, he wasn't exactly sensitive about it, but stop making things like this catchy article titles.

Overall, the interview was pretty fascinating, as you are good enough to mention. I like hearing viewpoints that are different from the status quo even if I don't agree with them entirely. Pretty surprised at the level of intellect and quality of questions given that it's Playboy. It's refreshing to hear an actor of his stature being so brutally honest even if he steps on some toes along the way.

That's just make them stupid, intolerant, cruel people.

Now that's just silly.

 

[Ratty]

Did anyone criticizing him actually read the article?

When I went back and actually read the interview, there's nothing in there that's particularly shocking to hear from a 56 year old man. Especially a straight white cisgendered man who was lucky and talented enough to come up from poverty to wealth by his own hand. The one thing that jumps out and sticks with me from the interview is that Oldman seems like the kind of guy who will never find contentment and happiness no matter what he achieves, which is really kind of sad all things considered.

I still very much disagree with the assertion that "everyone's used the n-word/Jew" etc. that he makes. But again, 56 year old white straight cisgendered dude. Not an unusual or unexpected opinion considering that.

 

[WWmelb]

Oh fuck off. I'm a very liberal person, extremely much so, but that doesn't make this article any less sensationalist and cherry picked to make him seem worse.

I can criticise a poorly presented article without being a "disenfranchised white boy... ...suffering in a land of socially acceptable discrimination against the straight white male minority" you smug, superior, lifeless toad.

Not everything in the world is black and white, there are a billion shades of grey. 7 billion to be closer.

Get your head out of your ass. YOU are not better than anyone else.

Wow, you've been here long enough to know that those kinds of posts end up with mod wrath. I ain't gonna report you, but if you've got something to say it might be worth taking some time to say it properly.

Most people here aren't cricising a poorly presented article (having read the original, I don't think it's poorly presented myself, but opinions and all that). What they're doing is defending someone they think they know, but don't, against the dangers of the ultimate libertarian boogey man of "political correctness".

I hate to break it to you, but libertarianism is the ultimate in white male politics. It's "cut support for everyone, let people rise to the top on their own", knowing full well they live in a society that naturally favours them. It's got the added bonus of relieving guilt by not discriminating against anyone, and having no religious obligation - the biggest downfalls of conservatism. It's the epitome of white privilege.

I have never said, nor indicated that I'm better than anyone. However, YOU opened your statement with "I'm very liberal, but...", as though that distinguishes you in any way. Do you know who's not liberal? The guy who was just interviewed as saying that "everyone thinks it" about racist abuse, the guy that just said that comedians and satirists are just socially acceptable hate speech in a world looking to condemn social conservatives, and the guy who said that an American public school that teaching Creationism is acceptable and the people suing them (for breaking the constitution) were in the wrong.

Just because he was in Batman, doesn't mean that he's awesome, and exempt from being a dick.

Yeah was a bit of a knee-jerk post on my behalf that one, for that i apologise. I was a little tired and run down, and took a particular part of the post to heart.

I said in earlier posts that he came off as a bit an insensitive prick, but expressed my opinion that this article on this site was dishonest in its portrayal of the interview itself, as it really seems designed to push the hate buttons on the majority of the readership here.

Seriously, i am what americans would describe as a liberal (I'm australian, and the Liberal Party here is something i DO NOT identify with much at all).

I believe in equal opportunity, representation, legislation and freedom for everyone.

I have absolutely zero racial prejudice against any skin tone, and although an atheist, i have no hatred towards any people because of their religion. I may dislike and disagree with a lot of religious points, but that's an entirely different kettle of fish.

I was still a little pissy about a previous part of this thread where someone were defending racial intolerance against specific white nationalities because of past wrongs (ie germans) because the persecution was worse.

I think it's wrong for the Jewish community to institutionally hate germans, as much as i think it is wrong for them to hate Palestinians. I think it's wrong for American's to hate all Muslims because of 9/11 or Japanese because of pearl harbor. You can see where i'm going i'm sure.

Yes, i can see how difficult it would be to get past for a lot of people, however, as many people have pointed out, we ALL should be striving to be better.

The gist i got from Mr Oldman was simply that it's hypocritical to ostracize or outcast or metaphorically crucify someone for an insensitive outburst, because, honestly, nearly every single person has said something stupid in a moment of frustration or drunkenness or anger.

That is not the same saying "Everyone is a racist" or "everyone says this shit behind closed doors". Just that nearly everyone has said something that would offend or upset something else at some point, and the average joe of the world is going to be able to get past it, but the knee-jerk PC media and internet denizens do their best to destroy a celebrity for the one bad moment of their lives.

I can see how that would be upsetting to someone in the industry. And a LOT of the posts here are proving that exact point within this thread, including the original article itself.

Anyways, i think that's enough to make my point.

TLDR

Gary Oldman came across as a prick, but his prickishness was grossly and unfairly compounded and exacerbated by the sensationalist article.

 

[wooty]

I don't mind when actors/politicians/footballers actually voice what they think rather than have some handler telling them what to stay away from.

Even if it can be taken out of context. The place would be boring if everyone thought everyone else was "a great guy, such an inspiration, like a brother". Just feels too fake for me.

 

[Verlander]

Yeah was a bit of a knee-jerk post on my behalf that one, for that i apologise. I was a little tired and run down, and took a particular part of the post to heart.

I said in earlier posts that he came off as a bit an insensitive prick, but expressed my opinion that this article on this site was dishonest in its portrayal of the interview itself, as it really seems designed to push the hate buttons on the majority of the readership here.

Seriously, i am what americans would describe as a liberal (I'm australian, and the Liberal Party here is something i DO NOT identify with much at all).

I believe in equal opportunity, representation, legislation and freedom for everyone.

I have absolutely zero racial prejudice against any skin tone, and although an atheist, i have no hatred towards any people because of their religion. I may dislike and disagree with a lot of religious points, but that's an entirely different kettle of fish.

I was still a little pissy about a previous part of this thread where someone were defending racial intolerance against specific white nationalities because of past wrongs (ie germans) because the persecution was worse.

I think it's wrong for the Jewish community to institutionally hate germans, as much as i think it is wrong for them to hate Palestinians. I think it's wrong for American's to hate all Muslims because of 9/11 or Japanese because of pearl harbor. You can see where i'm going i'm sure.

Yes, i can see how difficult it would be to get past for a lot of people, however, as many people have pointed out, we ALL should be striving to be better.

The gist i got from Mr Oldman was simply that it's hypocritical to ostracize or outcast or metaphorically crucify someone for an insensitive outburst, because, honestly, nearly every single person has said something stupid in a moment of frustration or drunkenness or anger.

That is not the same saying "Everyone is a racist" or "everyone says this shit behind closed doors". Just that nearly everyone has said something that would offend or upset something else at some point, and the average joe of the world is going to be able to get past it, but the knee-jerk PC media and internet denizens do their best to destroy a celebrity for the one bad moment of their lives.

I can see how that would be upsetting to someone in the industry. And a LOT of the posts here are proving that exact point within this thread, including the original article itself.

Anyways, i think that's enough to make my point.

TLDR

Gary Oldman came across as a prick, but his prickishness was grossly and unfairly compounded and exacerbated by the sensationalist article.

Fair enough, I appreciate you taking the time to expand on your opinion. I'm not American either, and by the looks of it I think I'm pretty much side by side with you on a lot of issues (and for the record, the Australian Liberal party confuse the heck out of me).

I think that the area where his opinion turned sour to me is when he started talking about libertarianism, and how Bill Maher "wouldn't qualify". It seemed to me like he's representing the worst kind of libertarian (the most common, sadly), where it's an excuse to be as hateful as you like, and hide under the guise of being a victim to PC. Honestly, the only people I've ever seen talk about political correctness as though it's an actual thing, are those fighting it. PC, to me at least, is the perceived persecution of hateful attitudes by society as it naturally progresses. Therefore, I'm not really on board with anyone who criticises it, because they're essentially criticising a better world than they are prepared to change themselves for. But hey, everyone's entitled to an opinion.