Like it or not, Mel Gibson’s professional rehabilitation is gaining momentum. Ever since his career exploded in a mess of drunkenness, antisemitism, domestic abuse and a string of genuinely horrifying voicemails, Gib has slowly set about clawing himself out from the hole he dug for himself. It started small, with bit parts in sequels like Machete 2, The Expendables 3 and Daddy’s Home 2. It picked up speed with his Oscar-nominated film Hacksaw Ridge, and then hit a pothole with Fatman, where he played a grizzled and embittered Santa Claus. And now it seems unstoppable.
Gibson’s upcoming projects include a CIA thriller in which he stars alongside Jason Isaacs, a John Wick spin-off series and a Lethal Weapon sequel that he also plans to direct. But before all that comes Father Stu. And Father Stu will require some explaining.
Based on a true story, Father Stu stars Mark Wahlberg as a cocky, womanising boxer who gets into a car accident, contracts a terminal illness and then becomes a priest. It seems like the sort of role that Wahlberg is seeking out these days to try to prove to the world that he’s a good person. He still gets to play a boxer and dress like it’s the 1970s (even though the film is set in the 1990s) but, like last year’s Joe Bell, it seems heavily weighted to counteract his negative public image. Joe Bell was about a father grieving his gay son; Wahlberg once angrily defended the homophobic remarks of Shabba Ranks and was “creeped” out by Brokeback Mountain. Meanwhile, this film is proof that people are able to change their ways for the better. And if the priest in this film can do it then maybe so can Wahlberg, a man whose history includes chasing black children while throwing stones and shouting racist epithets, and being charged with attempted murder after attacking a middle-aged Vietnamese American man.
If this had been a one-man redemption bid, there’s a sliver of a chance that it might have worked. But it won’t, because it co-stars Mel Gibson. Gibson – at least judging by the trailer – plays a grizzled mechanic who hates God but, and this is only a wild stab in the dark, will probably eventually come to see the light. He too can do good things, just so long as you can ignore all the unquestionable bad he’s done.
Now, Gibson isn’t playing the main role here. This is a supporting character, and one that initially doesn’t seem to add much to the story. And with the Oscars still smarting from all the accusations of racism it intermittently has to fend off, the last thing it will want to do is embrace a film starring a man who once told a police officer that “the Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world”.
So, if the film has awards ambitions and the role could be played by anybody, why take the risk of hiring Mel Gibson at all? This one, at least, is easy to answer. It’s because the film was written and directed by Rosalind Ross. And Rosalind Ross is Mel Gibson’s girlfriend.
This isn’t to do down Ross’s achievements at all. Although this is the first film she has directed, she was previously a writer on Matador, a show that aired in the states on the El Rey network that was about a soccer player who was also a spy. According to her IMDb page, she also has a Boudicca film in the works. By all accounts, she is an up-and-comer. And it’s hard to see how she could be riding Mel Gibson’s coattails, since he has spent the last 15 years as a toxic pariah. True, she might not have the best handle on Gibson’s career – he was 35 when she was born, and had already made three Mad Max films, three Lethal Weapon films and a Braveheart before she had even started school – but wouldn’t you cast the man you love in your film?
Perhaps I’m slightly biased towards Father Stu as a film. It has long been my belief that any character named Stu or Stuart in a movie is bound to be an irredeemable dick. Pierce Brosnan’s horrible character in Mrs Doubtfire is called Stu. The guy who runs the Overlook hotel in The Shining is called Stuart. Matthew Lillard’s character in Scream was called Stu. There is a Minion called Stuart, for crying out loud. There is nowhere to hide.
But Father Stu softens the blow a little. Its titular Stu seems like a truly inspirational figure, a man committed to helping people even in the face of an agonising death. He seems like he might be the One Good Stu. And, sure, the film he stars in looks terrible, like the sort of thing that will make the bulk of its revenue by playing in churches. And, sure, the director might be an untested 31-year-old. And, sure, it stars someone who has done so many bad things that it’s honestly hard to look at him. But, hey, Stus need to take what they can get.
