Radio Lady Reviews: Mel Gibson's "Apocalypto" (WARNING: SPOILERS! Opens Friday, December 8, 2006)

“Apocalypto”

Part 1. My Review. Please be forewarned! This Review Contains Spoilers!

Mel Gibson is the director and shares scriptwriting duties on his new film, “Apocalypto”. My quick assessment? This movie is bloody and boring, gory and grim. If Gibson is done with acting, he should stick to directing and forget about writing. What Gibson did in this movie really shocked me.

“Apocalypto” is make-believe Mayan history. It even has a made-up name. “Apocalypto” isn’t listed in Merriam-Webster, the Encyclopedia Britannica, or anywhere else. Of course, it’s a corruption of the word ‘apocalypse’ – so maybe he thought that Apocalypso would be too cutesy! (Sounds like a Caribbean dance!) You could argue that fiction is fiction and the writer can make up whatever he or she wishes and the audience can either like it or lump it. Well, in the case of “Apocalypto”, I’d like to lump it.

Here are the plusses as I see them: The film is well executed visually and the technical people should be proud of their work. The characters are interesting and Gibson provides good motivation. I didn’t have much trouble with the subtitling of the Mayan language. However, the plot of this movie is extraordinarily thin. Most of the movie – 136 minutes in length – is about a long and bloody massacre of a group of peaceful Mayans. This is done by other warlike Mayans who are seeking slaves and candidates for sacrifice.

Now, my understanding is this kind of thing was more a part of the Aztec civilization than the Mayan. I am not a historian and I don’t think Gibson is one, either. I do expect moviemakers to make some attempt to create a well-researched basis for the story. If it were a novel, “Apocalypto” would belong on the dung heap. Mel, you could have at least read James Michener’s book “Mexico” which I believe is really good historical fiction that is a much better and more accurate telling of the Mayan and Aztec histories.

So, I’ll save you the expense and wasted time of going to see this schlock flick. I’ll summarize the story in a nutshell and, if you still want to spend your money to see it – good luck.

The beginning of the movie is stunning, primitive, evocative, and even comical in places. Then, there is a horrendously long scene that is full of gore and violence. It doesn’t even make sense to me why the intruders would want to kill and maim so many of the peaceful people, if their objective is to obtain healthy slaves and impressive sacrifice victims. The captives are taken to the home location of their captors and we witness brutality and sacrifices to the Sun God, which seems more typical of what the Aztecs were known to have done. Gratefully, this is only dragged out a little by comparison with the rest of the film. Finally, our hero from the peaceful tribe manages to escape. But he has two serious wounds that don’t really stop him for a minute. His captors chase him relentlessly, and so does a black jaguar that doesn’t look real for a moment…on and on and on and…well, you get the idea. Then there is a twist at the end that leaves you saying, “What?” The anachronism rings out immediately as your mind wrenches itself at the spectacle.

So, that’s “Apocalypto”… a long siege of carnage in the beginning, a moderate amount of blood-letting atop a pyramid in the middle, and a long, long, LONG chase scene near the end which was, except for the length, not too badly done. Of course, that considers that they couldn’t use vehicles or this topsy-turvy history would have been even more screwed up…but that’s hard to imagine.

Mel, maybe you’re still hankering for the “Lethal Weapon” kind of thing. Maybe you have, at this point, more money than… you know who. However, I’m advising everyone I know to stay away from this piece of tripe. Maybe you’ll have less "moola" to spend on your personal projects in the future. You know, I used to like you before you got carried away with yourself. Sorry, Mel – “Apocalypto” is “el crapo.” I give it a “D” on Ellen’s Entertainment Report Card.


It’s a long way from Malibu: Mayra Serbulo and Ariel Galvan ford a river in "Apocalypto".

*******************

Part 2. “Apocalypto” Review -- Epilogue

More spoilers. For those of you who want to know a little bit more, I’ll share my research with you.

Mel Gibson’s “Apocalypto” is so much at variance with what I remember from our four trips to Mexico that I went back and reviewed our photo albums and did some on-line research. The result is a confirmation of the horrendous distortion of Mayan history and culture that is presented in “Apocalypto”. Given the primitive nature of the first Mayans presented in the film and the coming of the Spanish shown in the final scene, it’s not clear whether the film’s timeline even makes any sense. This is especially true since the Mayan civilization had collapsed centuries earlier, with the Mayans no longer prominent anywhere. It was the Aztecs who greeted the Spaniards, not the Mayans.

I would imagine that modern day Mexicans will hate this film for presenting such a false and unflattering picture of their heritage. One person who liked the film said that the jungle chase scenes were great, so what does historical accuracy matter? Well, what if a filmmaker in the U.S. made a movie set in the time of the Revolutionary War around 1776, and presented us as being a bunch of bumbling idiots living in dirty huts and lacking reading, writing, mathematics, and other sophistications? Would we say the battle scenes were great, even if the history was crazy?

What I learned from my visits to Mexico City and to the Yucatan is that their Indians had much more highly developed civilizations than the Indians of the north in what is the now the United States. Indeed, some of the early Mayans boasted of advances that in some cases may have been far ahead of what was understood in Europe and elsewhere in the world. They achieved the most during their Classic Period of 600 years from 300 A.D. to 900 A.D. Then, they vanished from their wonderful cities and system of roadways leaving behind their legacy of fantastic structures that exist to this day all over the Yucatan. No one knows exactly why the Mayan society ebbed, but they moved to farming and fishing villages, and were no longer known for their sophisticated culture.

The Aztecs came into being in what is now Mexico City after 1100 A.D. but had developed an extensive empire and huge cities by time the Cortes arrived in 1521. It’s true that the mania of their temple priests for more and more blood sacrifices had produced such a level of discontent in the populace that a few hundred Spaniards easily conquered the many thousands of Aztecs.

We learned in our visits to Mexico that the modern day Mexican is proud of both his Spanish and Indian heritage, but considers the former to not be the best part. This is because the Spanish were often mean and self-serving. Also, the number of Spaniards who came to rule was comparatively small. They mostly intermarried with Indians and were absorbed by the new Indian-Spanish culture. The Mexicans are extremely proud, as they should be, of their Indian heritage and to this day celebrate each of the many tribes in costumes, song and dance.

So, after you’ve seen “Apocalypto”, if you think you understand Mayan history – and therefore Mexican history – guess again…

Mel Gibson, a liar extraordinaire, has had you.


MPAA RATING -- R, for sequences of graphic violence and disturbing images
RELEASE COMPANY -- Walt Disney Pictures/Touchstone Pictures/Icon Productions
GENRE -- Action, Adventure, Indians, Mythology, History
RUN TIME -- 136 minutes
OFFICIAL SITE -- http://apocalypto.movies.go.com

I'm not all that keen on subtitles, but I do like historical-type films, so had been considering this.

I guess I'll pass, as I'm really not big on violence either.

:hi:

You're wise to pass this film for that reason only.

Warm holiday greetings,

Radio_Lady

I wondered about that -- because I felt this movie was more of a gripping summertime action/adventure.

From the Internet Movie Database www.us.imdb.com

Trivia for Apocalypto (2006)

Because of heavy rains in Mexico, the release date had been changed from 4 August 2006 to 8 December 2006.

Is "Apocalypto" pornography? -- On line review posted December 5, 2006



http://www.archaeology.org/online/reviews/apocalypto.html

With great trepidation I went to an advance screening of "Apocalypto" last night in Miami. No one really expects historical dramas to be accurate, so I was not so much concerned with whether or not the film would accurately represent what we know of Classic period Maya history as I was concerned about the message Mel Gibson wanted to convey through the film. After Jared Diamond's best-selling book Collapse, it has become fashionable to use the so-called Maya collapse as a metaphor for Western society's environmental and political excesses. Setting aside the fact that the Maya lived for more than a thousand years in a fragile tropical environment before their cities were abandoned, while here in the U.S, we have polluted our urban environments in less than 200, I anticipated a heavy-handed cautionary tale wrapped up in Native American costume.

What I saw was much worse than this. The thrill of hearing melodic Yucatec Maya spoken by familiar faces (although the five lead actors are not Yucatec Maya but other talented Native American actors) during the first ten minutes of the movie is swiftly and brutally replaced with stomach churning panic at the graphic Maya-on-Maya violence depicted in a village raid scene of nearly 15 minutes. From then on the entire movie never ceases to utilize every possible excuse to depict more violence. It is unrelenting. Our hero, Jaguar Paw, played by the charismatic Cree actor Rudy Youngblood, has one hellavuh bad couple of days. Captured for sacrifice, forced to march to the putrid city nearby, he endures every tropical jungle attack conceivable and that is after he escapes the relentless brutality of the elites. I am told this part of the movie is completely derivative of the 1966 film "The Naked Prey." Pure action flick, with one ridiculous encounter after another, filmed beautifully in the way that only Hollywood blockbusters can afford, this is the part of the movie that will draw in audiences and demonstrates Gibson's skill as a cinematic storyteller.

But I find the visual appeal of the film one of the most disturbing aspects of "Apocalypto." The jungles of Veracruz and Costa Rica have never looked better, the masked priests on the temple jump right off a Classic Maya vase, and the people are gorgeous. The fact that this film was made in Mexico and filmed in the Yucatec Maya language coupled with its visual appeal makes it all the more dangerous. It looks authentic; viewers will be captivated by the crazy, exotic mess of the city and the howler monkeys in the jungle. And who really cares that the Maya were not living in cities when the Spanish arrived? Yes, Gibson includes the arrival of clearly Christian missionaries (these guys are too clean to be conquistadors) in the last five minutes of the story (in the real world the Spanish arrived 300 years after the last Maya city was abandoned). It is one of the few calm moments in an otherwise aggressively paced film. The message? The end is near and the savior has come. Gibson's efforts at authenticity of location and language might, for some viewers, mask his blatantly colonial message that the Maya needed saving because they were rotten at the core. Using the decline of Classic urbanism as his backdrop, Gibson communicates that there was absolutely nothing redeemable about Maya culture, especially elite culture which is depicted as a disgusting feast of blood and excess.

More at link above ------->

he needs it. Poor misguided fool. Bad Conception. Bad Movie. Bad Mel...I can't tell if he's glorifying native civilization or praising it, either way he's just plain confused.

:puke:

See Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Conquest_of_Yucatan#Final_conquests_.281540.E2.80.9346.29

And while I can't speak for all Mexicans, I can say that my family and I, on both sides of the border, are ashamed of our Spanish blood. Maybe it is easier for us because the Spanish blood we have comes from a rapist.

"This is especially true since the Mayan civilization had collapsed centuries earlier, with the Mayans no longer prominent anywhere. It was the Aztecs who greeted the Spaniards, not the Mayans."

Every time I've ever stated that Mexicans are Native Americans, I always get the "but they're of spanish descent' argument... like no one has ever LOOKED at a Mexican? Not one single Mexican I've ever encountered and met has looked like the Spaniards I've known and met... yet the US Americans insist that the Mexicans are by all rights Spanish in origin.

Some people don't think very hard I guess.

My point is that people are woefully uneducated about all aspects of Mexico and Mexicans. Most Americans don't even know about the existence of Copper Canyon, a natural wonder that is larger than the Grand Canyon.

So... it's not a stretch that true Mexican history is ignored and confusing for anyone north of the Rio Grande.

And they look like the full-blooded native americans that you see in pictures of the old west, even more so than the Cherokee that I encountered when I lived in Western North Carolina. It really gripes me the attitude of so many of the local people around here at what are certainly illegal immigrants, at least a certain percentage. I just want to say: this is called 'karma'.

And I confess I'd never heard of Copper Canyon either, so thanks for that.

http://www.bconnex.net/~humm97/barranca_del_cobre.htm

January 13, 1997

After two months of preparation we were ready to head to the "Copper Canyon" region of central Mexico. Hank was attracted to this area because of its unique landscape and its remoteness to any "civilized society". Barranca Del Cobre, or Copper Canyon as it is more commonly known, is a network of canyons deeper than the Grand Canyon yet not as wide on average making it truly breathtaking.

I found this timeline to be quite interesting:

http://www.mayan-world.com/time.htm (Please scroll down a little bit; you don't see it at the top.)

This is only part of what I read:

1511 A.D. Spaniards Gonzalo Guerrero Jerónimo de Aguilar are shipwrecked on the easter shore of Yucatán. Guerrero marries into a Maya noble family and becomes foe of the Spaniards. Aguilar goes on to serve as interpreter for Hernán Cortés.

1517 A.D. The Spanish, under Hernandez de Cordoba arrive on the shores of Yucatán. With the Spanish come smallpox, influenza and measles which kill 90 per cent of Mesoamerica's native populations before 1600.

1519 A.D. Hernán Cortés begins exploring Yucatán.

1524 A.D. Cortés meets the Itzá people, the last of the Maya people to remain unconquered. The Spanish leave the Itzá alone until the seventeenth century.

1528 A.D. The Spanish under Francisco de Montejo begin their conquest of the northern Maya. The Maya fight back keeping the Spanish at bay for several years.

Mayan always refers to the language group of the Maya people. The term should be used for Mayan languages. The word "Maya" should be used for the name of the people and their culture.

http://www.mayan-world.com/time.htm

The notion of them as peace-locing noble savages died along with the 1960's. There were violent, fought wars, sacrificed people, had slaves, etc. They also achieved some amazing feats of civilization that "civilized" people like Mel Gibson promptly destroyed in the name God. And, while significantly degraded, there were many Maya living throughout southern Mexico and Central America at the time of the Spanish conquests. If I'm not mistaken, Tikal was thriving at around that time, and Chi'chen Itza went through a short renaissance not long after.

My ancestors strangled their victims & threw the bodies into the bogs.

The Mesoamerican cultures fought wars to capture sacrificial victims--not to kill them in battle. Even the Aztecs, who sacrificed in a big way, were more interested in setting up tribute from other peoples than killing everybody. This did make them less "popular" & some of the other peoples allied with Cortez. However, all these cultures had some excellent aspects--& a review of the last century should reduce our "shock" at these "primitive savages."

This sounds as though Gibson confused Classic Mayan society with the "Postclassic" existing when the Spanish arrived. And left out the Aztecs completely.

Gary Jennings wrote Aztec--a huge novel full of sex & violence. Not high literature, but extremely readable & based on sound historical research. Too bad Gibson didn't direct his talents toward telling a better story. (Hmmm...there are sequels to Aztec--by Jennings & others. Check out Half Price Books!)

Or something to that effect. I wish he would put that on the movie poster, then maybe not so many people would take it seriously.

interviews with Mel Gibson. Also, there was a death in my extended family last Friday 12/01 which limited my access to previews all last week. I'm trying to make that up now.

Thanks for your comment.

the dying God, reborn every year.

It kills me how westerized cultures can balk at cultures that practice/d human sacrifice while wearing their crucifixes displayed prominently.

"Braveheart" was #1

"The Passion of the Christ" #2

"Apocalypto" #3

And I am so glad that they included Braveheart in that. Gibson loves the gratuitous kinds of stuff....if someday he turns out to be a Jeffrey Dahmer or Hannibal Lecter type I will be the least surprised.

a dicussion about this film :hi:

Funny! I bounced right out of that theater after the last frame unspooled!

i ask because you mentioned he wanted to see it--

He is also skilled in verbal and written storytelling.

Hubby has also taken on the process of digitally correction and uploading our Mexican adventure photography. All of it was shot on 35mm stock during our four visits to the Yucatan. The photos include Chichen Itza, Cozumel and Cancun -- as well as Mexico City, Merida, Acapulco, Tasco, Guernavaca and Puerto Vallarta -- during the 1980s and 1990s.

He actually steeped himself in the culture and was on-line for about two hours after we returned from the film.
Ultimately, we were both sincerely disappointed with the ridiculous and simplistic plot. In the hands of some other screenwriter(s), there were so many possibilities.

We also both agreed that the casting, direction, location filming, make-up, music, and scenic design were top notch.

Dawn does not rate her films with numbers or a grade. But the last paragraphs are interesting, including her backhanded compliment in the last paragraph:



It’s all quite fascinating in the same way as a particularly gruesome multicar collision – you don’t really want to see it, but you can’t look away – and the historical accuracy of it all is questionable, but one can’t dismiss “Apocalypto” entirely.

As with “Passion,” this is a film made by someone who is seriously disturbed but not without talent.

You may not agree with Gibson’s politics or with his view of ancient cultures, but one thing’s for certain – this is sure to be the best R-rated Mayan adventure film with graphic depictions of vivisection that you’ll see this holiday season. Just don’t eat a big meal first.

Read her whole review at:

http://www.portlandtribune.com/features/story.php?story_id=116552006468430700

:rofl:

that is hysterical!

thanks for the review and this great thread, radiolady.

It's nice to have DUers in the Internet audience!

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20061218/shorris

He didn't use any Maya people on the cast or crew, and this reviewer found movie and the making of the movie to be racist.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061205/ap_en_mo/apocalypto_mayas

In the film Apocalypto... there are many major roles. The lead is a lithe, handsome young man, a dancer from Oklahoma named Rudy Youngblood. He has indigenous ancestors, but he is not Maya, and like most of the other featured players, he is not a professional actor. None of the four other major parts went to Maya either. According to Gibson, they are played by people from the United States, and the other featured players are either from Mexico City or Oaxaca. Yet every word spoken in the film is in Yucatecan Maya, a difficult language to learn or even to mimic, because it is both tonal and accented.

It is not as if Gibson had few Mayeros to choose from. There are more than a million Maya in Mexico, and more than 100,000 of them are monolingual Yucatecan Maya speakers. Yet Gibson chose not one Maya for a featured role. In so doing, he has made a film that reinforces the prejudice against the Maya, who have defended their cultural autonomy as fiercely as any people on earth.

I won't give that rat once nickel of my money for his racist trash.

I think it is going way too far to call this Racist because Mayans weren't used in every role, because, hell, this is not a new phenomenon...

Just look at the number of blind roles played by non-blind people

Same with deaf roles

Same with almost any Asiatic themed movie, as Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese are all seen as being interchangable for any of the three cultures (a huge pet peeve of mine...I find "Memoirs of a Geisha" and "The Last Samurai" unwatchable for this reason.)

etc., etc.

I give credit to Gibson for hiring non-known natives for the movie instead of disguising A-listers.

Accidentally posted my thoughts to my earlier reply. Correcting this.

I would not have gone to see the film anyway...I don't like violence and gore. And now I will certainly not change my mind. Good review.:hi:

Here is Brandon Gray's page from www.boxofficemojo.com which does a weekly forecast of movie box office figures:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/forecast/

BOX OFFICE FORECAST™
by Brandon Gray
The most accurate box office predictions since 1998.

He predicts that "Apocalypto" will bring in $10.8 million U.S. in its first weekend, and will take third place, behind "The Holiday" and "Blood Diamond" as first and second place, respectively.

I don't usually pay any attention to movie box office figures, but this should be interesting.

He writes for the Portland Oregonian newspaper. The headline says, "Movie review: 'Apocalypto' bloody, overheated and thrilling"

He gave it a "B" -- maybe it's a guy thing!

Also, he leaves history out of his review completely!

http://www.oregonlive.com/movies/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/entertainment/116544570450900.xml&coll=7

I don't have issues with violence in the context of a story, but I do have issues with gratuitous vivisections in the midst of uninteresting movies.

It's like you're waiting for the next animal or human entrails to be gratuitously exposed on screen. You've got your tapir guts distribution and the eating of the testicles, meat on full animal legs, bloody, beating hearts, and what looks like hundreds of decapitated human bodies in one pit scene -- and I don't remember what else flew or splashed our way.

Others may be astounded -- or repulsed -- by scenes of a full human birth -- under water -- in a rock pit. Oh, and extensive cruelty to abandoned children to the point of true horror caused me to well up with tears and really lose it.

I'm not usually squeamish at movies, but I averted my gaze briefly -- several times. I did go with only a light lunch of yogurt, an apple, and bottled water -- at the suggestion of another DUer. Thanks for that tip.

I wonder how many animals were harmed in the filming of that film.

put their disclaimer on the film.

Interestingly, this film is being touted as a possibility for an Academy Award for the "Best Foreign Language Film."
That's fascinating! It's being released by Walt Disney/Touchstone Pictures -- Filmed in Mexico, subtitled in English, with an American, Mexican, and Indian cast speaking the Mayan language that not that many audience members would even understand.

Stand by for further announcements!

apparently the tapir was animatronic, at least in parts:

No real animals were harmed during the filming--an animatronic tapir was built with help from staff at the Los Angeles Zoo who measured their Baird's tapir for the production company.)
http://www.tapirspecialistgroup.org/news/interviews/apocalypto-interview.html

Of course, I didn't know anything about tapirs before I saw the movie. Now I do!

The pictures http://www.tapirspecialistgroup.org/news/photo-albums/apocalypto-gallery.html">here are wonderful!

Can you get any information on the black jaguar?

Thanks for your help, idgiehkt...

star:

http://www.tapirspecialistgroup.org/news/photo-albums/apocalypto-gallery.html

I couldnt' find anything about the jaguar, probably because one of the characters' names is jaguar paw or something, so that is all that is coming up. I know if they'd hurt any animals PETA would be all over Gibson's ass, for sure.

I'd prefer to remember him this way... from 2000's "What Women Want"

You've confirmed my decision not to see it. I'm so tired of Mel Gibson.

M. Night Shyamalan -- Excellent director, but his scripts are ultimately preposterous.

http://www.us.imdb.com/name/nm0796117/

of a compliance audit of the DLP system so it's comp't, but based on what you've reviewed here i'm glad we won't be having to pay :thumbsup:

:popcorn:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DLP

Hey, I completed my university degree in 1962 in TV, Radio and Film.

Pretty much everything is obsolete in whatever technical stuff I studied at that time.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Hope you don't upswallow your popcorn at the bloody parts! You could choke!

too bad about the film, that would have been a great opportunity to do good work, but i hear you on the bloody stuff too, i think gibson is off the map anyhow

I'm starting to think he's got quite the fetish.

Do you plan to see this movie?

I didn't see his last movie, either.

After reading reviews of "the passion," I passed. Somehow, I had a feeling that he couldn't treat the Mayan culture objectively.

That, and I'm just not a fan of violence and graphic bloodshed. :shrug:

I haven't seen any of the following, so you're on your own:

The Holiday
Blood Diamond
Unaccompanied Minors
The Nativity Story
Deck the Halls

Gave favorable reviews to:

Happy Feet
Casino Royale
Deja Vu

Wishing you a very happy holiday season,

Radio_Lady Ellen in Oregon

I'm spending the weekend huddled up with a book and some favorite dvds. The dvd stack includes:

Baraka
The Grass Harp
The Trip to Bountiful
Big Fish

And these 2 that I've never seen:

The girl with the pearl earring
Higher education

As a matter of fact, I'm going to put one in now.

:hi:

Bronchitis and laryngitis. Guess it's "going around..." Hope you feel better soon.

We had to cancel our plans to go to Chicago to see the Egypt/King Tut exhibit! Ah, well, I'm happily cleaning closets today. We travel all the time, and this is a rare break!

Big Fish is quite good -- Tim Burton's flick
The Girl with the Pearl Earring -- has a rather simplistic plot, but Scarlett J. is gorgeous.

I don't think I've seen the others.

Feel better -- drink lots of juice and water!

Radio_Lady in Oregon

Generally Favorable Reviews.

http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/apocalypto

For some unexplained reason, the Internet Movie Database has not compliled user votes into a chart! That's very odd. However, there are many excellent user reviews at the site.

http://imdb.com/title/tt0472043/

I saw Apocalypto yesterday afternoon because I was genuinely curious what the movie would be like. I left conflicted as the movie is really good and really bad at the same time.

The Good:
1) Acting in general was quite good and it was exciting to see so many native actors.

2) Costuming was also quite impressive, detailed, intricate, and diverse. It's honestly award-worthy.

3) The scenes in and around Generic Mayan City were incredible, believable, and amazing. This is the first and only time I can say I've had a genuine feel for what a Pre-Columbian city in Central America would have actually been like, despite having visited some, seen tons of dioramas, and Discovery Channel CGI. If these were real sets (I imagine a lot of it was CGI), they deserve awards.

The Bad:
1) No one in Jaguar Paw's village seemed to know anything about the fact there was a huge city full of hostile people less than two days walk from them. They seem genuinely shocked that they were being attacked and genuinely curious as to where they were going. This would be akin to people in Anaheim being unaware of the existence of Los Angeles....

2) The scenes of human sacrifice seem to be much more in line with what actually happened in Aztec cities, not Mayan, and even then on these types of sacrifices happened on extremely rare occasions.

3) The Maya were arguably the best astronomers in the pre-scientific world and would have known an eclipse was coming. It probably wouldn't have surprised the crowd and certainly wouldn't have surprised the priests.

4) After Jaguar Paw escaped he ran, and ran, and ran, and ran without stopping for literally 36 hours. And he was shot with arrows. Twice! And he jumped off the top of a waterfall at least 50 feet high! If he's such an invincible superman, how the hell did he get captured in the first place?

5) The scenes of Seven and Turtle Run (Jaguar Paw's wife and child) trapped in the well are superfluous, and well... silly. Add to that the fact that a few hours of rain causes the well to fill up with 6 to 8 feet of water despite the fact that it was empty when they went down into it.

6) The gore was overdone. I'm not saying this as a person who is afraid of blood (although if you are afraid of blood, do not see this movie), but someone who can see the line between necessary and excessive. Hunting, human sacrifice, and animal maulings are all real things that really are really bloody. But do we need to see a jaguar chew a man's face off? For three scenes? Does blood rhythmically squirting out of a wound really need to be seen? After the gore-fest we've endured Jaguar Paw finally kills his main tormentor with a blow to the head, but it just seemed cartoonish and over the top it caused the entire theater to erupt in laughter.

7) AND THEN THE FUCKING SPANISH SHOW UP! Talk about anachronistic! The decline of the classical Maya civilization happened almost 600 years before the Spanish arrived in Maya lands, and the great cities with the stepped pyramids were abandoned and overgrown with jungle at that time. Shall we have Elizabeth I and Shakespeare talking on cell phones in movies from now on?

I could live with this movie if it was about the decline of the Aztecs, and the last days of Tenochtitlan, as almost nothing would have to be changed, but forcing the Maya into this framework just sinks the movie.

I thoroughly agree with everything you said.

As before, the critics seemed to gloss over this movie's problems.

I was astonished that this movie is getting GENERALLY FAVORABLE REVIEWS at both www.metacritic.com as well as www.imdb.com

By the way, here's the post that will take you to the link of our photographs from four trips to Mexico.

Go to:

http://cards.webshots.com/invite/pickup/125023582HyDl/album/556316985ihRiYk

Then, choose "No, thanks, just show me the photos." (You do NOT have to join Webshots to see the photos.)

On the next page, with thumbnails, there is a yellow box in the upper right. Choose "slideshow" and you have a choice of 2 - 5 second per shot.

Let me know if you have any difficulties.

Thanks so much for this post.

my husband said to me after I asked about the Maya being 'confused' about the eclipse...I had the same reaction to that that you did.

--the royalty were not surprised by the eclipse, it was planned to make the masses believe the royalty were all powerful and that the sacrifices were working, the God was pleased and brought the sun back, that is why Jaguar Paw was released. This is shown in the young boys reaction, he is not surprised at all, neither are any of the executioners.

I don't know if this is what Mel meant to portray, but he didn't show it well if he did. And I was under the impression that most of the Maya had a deep understanding of Astronomy and Mathmatics.

anyway, just thought I'd mention that reaction (from a mexican, no less, and one who is very proud of his Toltec and Maya background)

Mexico.

James Michener is also remembered for: Alaska, Caribbean, The Source, Hawaii and others.

:blush: SO sorry.

See my next post.

Radio Lady with the Mexican gals!

Have a good evening...

We posted 117 of our Mexico photos (Aztec and Mayan sites) from several trips (1984 to 1990) this afternoon.
If you tried my post last night and it failed... well, it's working now!

Please go to this link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=5932989&mesg_id=5932989

Not what I like to report about a film that I rated a big "D" on Ellen's Entertainment Report Card.


From: http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com

UPDATE: Mel Wins Friday: #1 'Apocalypto' Bigger Opening Wkd Than 'Braveheart'; Cam's 'Holiday' #2, Leo's 'Diamond' #5

UPDATED -- SATURDAY AM: Call it a Hollywood shocker: Mel's Apocalypto will have a bigger weekend opening than his Braveheart. Despite scandal, an R-rating, subtitles because of an ancient dialect, rumors of walkouts on account of the violent content, no stars, and direct competition from movieland AAA-listers Leonardo DiCaprio and Cameron Diaz, Gibson's Mayan epic won Friday's matinees and evenings, I'm told. At first, box office gurus were warning me that the weekend victor among very competitive films running up against each other would be too close to call. But now I've learned it looks certain that Disney's Apocalypto will win the weekend -- bearing out my reporting back on December 1st that early tracking showed Mel's movie (playing in 2,465 theaters) would edge ahead. I'm told Mel's movie took in $4.9 million Friday, with the best per screen average of the top movies at $1,988, for what's expected to be at least a $12 mil, and possibly a $14 mil, weekend total. That easily beats Mel's Braveheart, which made $9.9 mil for Fri-Sat-Sun when it opened in 2,037 theaters during Memorial Weekend back in 1995 ($12.9 mil for the four-day holiday) and went on to rake in $75.6 mil in the U.S. and $210.4 mil worldwide, helped by winning the Best Picture Oscar.

Sunday link with projected figures and a discussion of the "curiosity factor."

http://www.comcast.net/entertainment/index.jsp?cat=ENTERTAINMENT&fn=/2006/12/10/538724.html

'Apocalypto' Wins With Modest Opening
By DAVID GERMAIN, AP Movie Writer
Sunday, December 10, 2006

LOS ANGELES - Mel Gibson's bloody epic "Apocalypto" debuted as the No. 1 weekend movie, proving the filmmaker still can deliver a winner despite his drunken-driving arrest and anti-Semitic rant last summer.

"Apocalypto," a Disney release set in the Mayan civilization and told in an obscure Mayan language, opened with $14.2 million, according to studio estimates Sunday.

It was a modest haul compared to the $83.8 million opening weekend of Gibson's last movie, the 2004 religious blockbuster "The Passion of the Christ," which went on to do $370 million domestically.

But "Apocalypto" overcame the baggage of Gibson's personal troubles as well as its difficult subject matter, which features a no-name cast in a hyper-violent tale that includes beheadings and images of hearts ripped from people's chests.

"The movie obviously succeeds on its own level. I think people probably are a bit on the surprised side around town that it's No. 1," said Chuck Viane, head of distribution for Disney. "Two months ago, nobody would have bet on that."

MORE AT LINK:

http://www.comcast.net/entertainment/index.jsp?cat=ENTERTAINMENT&fn=/2006/12/10/538724.html

If you look at the per screen gross, "Volver" did $3000 more per screen and it's been out for 6 weeks. I think we'll be seeing Mel's movie drop off big time in the next few weeks. It will also be interesting to see if it makes back it's $40 million budget.

and then wonderful and important little independent movies -- and occasionally even heavily marketed ones -- slide by without notice. But that's the way it's always been.

In Portland, Oregon, as in many other cities, we have three or four old and dilapidated movie houses dubbed "art theaters." They do short-runs of some wonderful movies (and some junk) but the places are so distasteful that we rarely go there.

There is a new marketplace emerging -- re-designed upscale space used as art film theaters, running movies in a digital format. They are working directly with filmmakers to get their product first. In essence, that would cut out the middle men (studios and distributors). One such place is the Living Room Theater at 341 SW 10th Avenue here in Portland, Oregon. It's just opening -- a combined theater and eatery.

You can read about it if you wish at this link, written by Shawn Levy, top writer at the Portland, Oregonian newspaper:

http://www.oregonlive.com/search/index.ssf?/base/entertainment/1165452925221560.xml?oregonian?alfs&coll=7

The theater company also has its own web site:

www.livingroomtheaters.com

Nice to speak with you, Jack! Have a great week and happy holidays to you and your family and friends...

Um... still hanging out of the window this week? :sarcasm:

No comment.

The Mayan culture was only used as a background for a hero's journey story, and one that was done quite well. I didn't see anything even resembling trying to make this an "important" work; it was just situated in an interesting place.

Also, frankly, the gore factor is being blown way overboard--the bloodshed was no worse than the first 20 minutes of Saving Private Ryan. You never see the dagger shoved in for sacrifices, you never see them reach in for the heart, all you see is a priest holding it up. The decapitations are not glorified and are, frankly, no worse than any other movie featuring head removals.

The only thing even coming close to "eww" for me was the Jaguar meets Mayan scene, and that was still over quick.


I thought it was a decent action movie.

I guess you could say that your tolerance for bloody scenes is higher than mine. I do not have to screen movies that I don't wish to see, and I usually avoid slasher and chase films. I also felt a bit queasy at "Saving Private Ryan" and I only went to this movie out of curiosity. It was my husband who really propelled me to the theater.

On the other hand, I really liked "Casino Royale" and thought "Deja Vu" was a pretty good movie.

If I had had to pay for it, I wouldn't have seen "Apocalypto." So, I'm not trying to change your opinion. Clearly this movie has exceeded the studio's first weekend box office expectations, and many people have... (ahem) "enjoyed" it. Frankly, I just don't see how that would ever be a word I would use for this film.

In peace,

Radio_Lady

Most recently while discussing "Lady in the Water".

And I'm not worried about you changing my opinion, but I did want to offer my own. :)

For several months in 2005, I designed and entered information in an MS Word document. I kept brief descriptions of people with whom I was exchanging messages.

I got about 50-75 people on the list, but then it became way too complicated to keep up with it. Personal information is scant for most folks -- most people fudge important information anyway. Sometimes I don't even know if I'm speaking to a woman or a man. That's kind of odd!

I wish there were a better way, even at the DU, to remember people easily. Like a "NOTES" area on the OPTIONS page.

Oh, well, glad to encounter you (again)! I'll be sure and check that archived review of "Lady in the Water." Haven't heard a peep out of M. Night Shyamalan this year, have you?

In peace,

Radio_Lady

I want to preface this by pointing to comments I made in this thread, not merely the single post to which that link points, but some other comments I made later. I offer this preface because I know what I am about to say will be misinterpreted.



I will venture a guess that your trips to Mexico did not take place 1100 years ago. I mean that not as a sarcasm, rather as a point to be considered seriously when interpreting how modern descendants view their own historical heritage, which is a part of what you did during your visits. Historical memory is a subject with which I am intimately familiar in other contexts, and regardless of that context, some universal truths emerge, one among them being most important. Cultures idealize their past, often to the point of invention. Other cultures idealize a certain segment of their past and engage in a process sociologists might call "other-ing" to explain away less savory aspects of their apparent heritage with which they do not personally identify or from which they want, for one reason or another, to disassociate themselves. I'll not compose a thesis on this point explicitly, but it needs to be mentioned, given your commentary.

The more removed from the present a culture is from its roots, the more dramatic this idealizing becomes. Greeks brought us democracy. John Locke brought us philosophy upon which the notions of unalienable rights are based. Americans brought us the experiment in self-government upon which so many modern societies are based. Quite a pedigree, this is, and it is taught and learned as something akin to holy writ. What is less often discussed is that in each example we have a system of social hierarchy so barbaric as to be called evil by modern society. Our heritage includes ideas, legal formulations, and lengthy arguments that demand the absolute propriety of justifiable warfare based on economic exploitation, enslavement, and blood-letting to the point of genocide as a means to an end.

What all this has to do with the Mayans is simply this. The level of knowledge we have about the Mayan civilization accounts for no more than a single digit percentage of all that could be known were the right discoveries made and the record clear enough, which is to say a lot of guessing takes place, much of it educated guessing, but much more of it less so. Until about the 19th century, the educated guessing wasn't a part of it at all. What was known of the Mayans was known from legends, vague ones at that. The first major scholars of Mayan culture perpetuated these myths by using a technique that is broadly discounted today, to wit making broad judgments about an ancient people based on linking the lives and culture of current descendants to selective archaeological evidence that supports a direct lineage. Were the same standard used today, little more than a hundred years after the fact, the heritage of the American experiment would be one in which slavery never played a part in any dispute between anyone ever. We have the advantage of clear records that show that to be the lie it is.

The clear truths about Mayan culture are few, and a good number of entrenched myths get in the way of educating others as to what those truths are. It is true that Mayan civilization was one of the most advanced civilizations on Earth during its age. It is true that by any reasonable measurements, some of their scientific understandings far surpassed their European counterparts during their contemporary age and in some cases for centuries afterward. It is true they developed one of the most advanced systems of writing ever conceived. It is true that their art was profound and varied and went through phases that could be grouped into schools or periods if enough of it were retrieved to allow for representative samplings and analysis.

It is not true, however, that Mayans were a peaceful people. The evidence of blood rituals on par with anything and everything in which the Aztecs engaged is, by now, conclusive on this point. Myth would have us believe otherwise, in an idealized fashion. (And I call this a myth based, in part, on the writings of Carlos Navarrete, a Mexican anthropologist who has studied Mayan civilization extensively.) Perhaps one might be able to say, based on your review, that Gibson's greatest assault on Mayan heritage, if we are to be truthful about it, is the mere notion that a group of "peaceful" Mayans existed against which to juxtapose the "warlike" Mayans. My reading of your review leads me to believe Gibson did little more than take the theme of the so-called Western of the 50's and 60's and transplant the story into a different place. The "white hats" and the "black hats" are apparently rather easy to see.

The central, most perplexing question among those who study the Mayans is by what mechanism and for what reason its civilization seems simply to have collapsed in a rather short period of time around 900 CE. The attempt to answer that question has led to the many discoveries that paint a broader and clearer picture of what Mayan civilization was and was like, and this picture has allowed various theories to develop. For example, we now know that the Mayans weren't a single people living under a centralized system of something like a government, but a collection of varied, independent groups all sharing a common culture. Over twenty distinct groups have been identified. The notion of a common culture in this context is important because it suggests that what was typical among one group of Mayans was also typical among others. Certainly variations would exist, but at the point the variations become so dramatic as to create a totally separate group of "peaceful" Mayans that can be identified as such, we border on defining a new culture altogether, perhaps simply a sub-culture; regardless, that kind of evidence has not been found, except among legend. Thus one emerging theory is that Mayans self-destructed through what amounts to unending civil war, over-use of resources, expansion into areas already occupied by others that somehow resisted subjugation, etc.

You ask in your review why the intruders would want to kill and maim so many peaceful people if the goal was to claim slaves or candidates for sacrifice. Certainly this is a plot device, but not one without some basis. One theory of the so-called rise and fall of Mayan civilization divides the era in which it existed into two periods, one before about 750 CE, the other after. The archaeological record and modern scientific testing provides the basis for this division. Arthur Demarest, among others, argues that before this time, the culture as a whole was relatively well ordered. Wars were in a sense planned contests between groups, the goal of which was to provide rites of passage and formed a core of dynastic rituals. After this point, society seems to have become more unhinged, with all-out warfare taking place during extended periods, with the ritual goals of the previous era more and more being ignored or at least subjugated. Demarest wrote, ". . .wars led to wholesale destruction of property and people, reflecting a breakdown of social order comparable to modern Somalia." In the year 761, evidence has lead to the discovery of a massive battle involving one Mayan king against another, and afterward the archaeological record shows that the defeated kingdom declined and faded rapidly, suggesting a massive level of slaughter and a complete breakdown of its internal society.

Like you, I will not pay to see this movie. As I said in the other thread in which this is discussed, I see no point in helping Gibson line his pockets with his "blood porn." I very much doubt Gibson had much a true understanding of Mayan culture at all when he wrote or produced this movie, meaning I offer none of the above as a justification for the portrayal he gives. I do, however, suggest than in criticizing this movie for its assault on Mayan culture that we remain at least somewhat realistic about it. Referencing another post I made on the subject in agreement with the individual who suggested the real problem here, that real problem is that "Western" filmmakers have this very bad habit of focusing almost exclusively on the negative aspects of cultures of "brown" people. Gibson, I suspect, sees the art and the science of the Mayans, if he knows anything of it, as a backdrop to the violence he craves to display in his movies. Were Western history presented this way in popular expressions of art, Gibson could never have made _The Patriot_ or devised that idiotic character sketch of a Southern plantation owner who "employed" people who could not legally be employed as anything but slaves at the time. The problem is the hypocrisy, in other words.

You are a very thoughtful person with an astounding ability to express your knowledge on the cultural and moral issues raised in "Apocalypto." I want you to know that I took the time to read your responses on the other thread.

I wish we could talk directly and in person about this movie. Best I can do is to thank you very much for your excellent, incisive observations -- I certainly understand what you have said and accept your views completely. You write so eloquently -- your response leaves me in awe of your superior verbal talents and your ability to present these ideas on this kind of a general Internet discussion forum.

Warm regards to you and your family for a happy and healthy holiday season!

Radio_Lady Ellen in Oregon


Mayan Profile by Hyatt Moore

giant steam-powered robot spiders.

The guy that brought us Braveheart, and The Patriot.

He's like "Mr. Peabody's Improbable History," for adults.

Nikki Finke in Hollywood:

Disney's New Oscar Campaign For Mel: He's "Not As Bad As Roman Or Woody"



OK, I wish this were a bad joke, but it's real: Disney's new and quiet Oscar campaigning for Mel Gibson is to convince Academy members that he's "not as bad as Roman or Woody." Specifically, I'm told that, to plead with Oscar voters "to look at Mel the artist and not Mel the man", the studio is saying that Gibson's drunken anti-Semitic ranting was not as bad as Polanski having sex "with an underage girl", or Allen having sex "with his step-daughter". Disney is also pointing to Elia Kazan's role "naming names" before the Hollywood Un-American Activities Committee to try to bring what Mel did into perspective when it comes to judging Apocalypto. I should point out this is part of a modest attempt by Disney to snag some key nominations for the film. It's long been my belief that if a litmus test were given for behavior, nobody would ever work in Hollywood again. Nevertheless, I just don't think Oscar campaigning that underscores the character flaws of other film directors will work.

From: http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/disneys-new-oscar-campaign-for-mel-not-as-bad-as-roman-or-woody/

General link: http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com