Dec 11 2006
Apocalypto Fails to Impress
GUESTS: Charles C. Mann, Correspondent for Science and The Atlantic Monthly, author of 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus, Julia Guernsey, Professor of Art & Art History at the University of Texas at Austin, specializing in Pre-Columbian Mesoamerican Art
Mel Gibson’s latest film, ”Apocalypto” opened this past weekend as the number 1 movie, making $14.2 million at the box office. It is an exceptionally violent film, focusing on the last days of the Mayan civilization, right before the appearance of the Spanish conquerors. The Central American indigenous characters speak entirely in various Mayan dialects and are alternately depicted as child-like buffoons with exaggerated mannerisms or bloodthirsty killers who violently prey on each other. For those whose only education about Maya cultures is Gibson’s film, the historical message is obvious: tribes spent most of their time attacking each other, raping their women, abandoning their children, tearing each others hearts out, and engaging in mass sacrifice. Gibson’s intent is quite clear – the film opens with a quote by Will Durant, “A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has conquered itself from within.”
Visit the Maya Education Foundation for more information at www.mayaedufound.org.
23 Responses to “Apocalypto Fails to Impress”
Here goes Sonali again.
Here’s another slam on a movie that was clearly predetermined before she even sat down in the theater. (She proudly states that she bought her ticket for another movie and therefore wasn’t “putting any money into Mel Gibson’s pockets.” And she makes sure to get in the reference to Gibson’s anti-Semitic tirade, just in case the listener didn’t remember it)
To be fair, one of her guests, Julia Guernsey, was well-informed and had some specific criticisms to offer.
But the other guest, Charles Mann, openly admitted HE HASN’T EVEN SEEN THE FILM! So what is he commenting on? Previews? Rumors? Hearsay?
This gets compounded by Sonali repeatedly asking leading questions that are designed to get her guests to say that the film is a kind of pro-Imperialist, pro-Christian, bigoted racist tract.
I have to ask the question of why Sonali even watched the movie if she was already predisposed to dislike it – why lose 3 hours of your life that way?
What can you expect from a movie ?, a commercial movie ?, a commerical movie from the US ?, a commercial movie from Hollywood ?
CRAP !, That’s what you get, not a truthfull story; no blood no money….
Even before seeing the movie – and I rarely see movies before they’re released for rental – I can make several informed criticisms based on interviews I’ve seen with Gibson and film clips I’ve seen posted on various websites.
First, no one has yet commented on the fact that the chronology is way off, though it is alluded to in Sonali’s interview with Charles Mann: The movie is said to dramatize the fall of the Maya civilization, yet the Maya “fall”, such as it was, occurred several centuries before the arrival of whites at the end of the 15th Christian century. As Mann says, the Maya evacuated their urban centres in roughly the 9th century by the Christian calendar, 600 years before Columbus and his marauding ilk arrived! Why is no one making a big deal of that?
Second, interviews with Gibson and his research team have revealed that he combined aspects of Classical Maya civilization and 16th century Aztec civilization, particularly the latter, to achieve the kind of overwhelming gore he sought. The Aztecs, according to European accounts, likely did sacrifice dozens, at times even hundreds of people per ceremony, particularly under the influence of Tlacaelel. Compared to the Aztecs, the Maya did comparatively little sacrificing. Furthermore, we know little of the character of Mesoamerican sacrifice – was it sadistic and brutal as European tortures/executions were (and are)? Was it reverent and spiritual? We don’t know. In any case, the Aztecs of the 16th Christian century and the Maya of the 9th Christian century are two quite different cultures, mutual influences notwithstanding! Why isn’t anyone making a big deal of that?
One thing I have heard several people comment on, including Professor Guernsey here, is the oddness of having the protagonist be totally unfamiliar with a neighboring area of his land. I suspect this was included because many moderns/Westerners/whatever have had a false urban vs. rural divide implanted in their heads in the course of their education, and GIbson is no exception, sort of a “Beverly Hillbillies” gee-whiz lack of knowledge of anything beyond their holler. As Guernsey says, the Maya, and Native Americans generally, were far less ignorant of their lands than private property-obsessed Europeans of the same era (or even today) were. There are stunning trade and communications networks researched from throughout the Americas that indicate quite a lot of communication among peoples, and my feeling is that the lack of the territorial nation-state idea (and of jealously guarded private property) resulted in far greater freedom of movement than was possible in Europe.
The most egregious idea promoted by and reflected in the film is that of non-Western cultures being base, brutal, and inferior to white cultures. Beginning with the IndoEuropean invasions, Western cultures have shown a level of consistent brutality unmatched by any culture I’m aware of, and I include today’s US-based culture with its nuclear weapons, doctors assisting with sadistic tortures, and mass imprisonment. Yet, most of us have been taught that wherever whites went, they brought peace to crazily, tumultuously violent “natives”. Though no culture is without some amount of violence and aggression, the idea of redemption by white conquest is simply wrong, factually wrong, and that’s what Gibson’s film implies happened.
Gibson himself ought to be questioned in this regard less on his recent anti-Semitic comments and more on his being a white Australian, with white Australia’s history of aboriginal genocide. White Australians aggressively slaughtered indigenous Australians, completely obliterating the population of Tasmania and treating the mainland populations with such brutality that some have said it exceeds US treatment of Native Americans in its cruelty. Were Gibson’s attitudes toward nonwhites influenced by white Australia’s attitudes to the Aboriginals, a population which today lives in 3rd World conditions within the “developed” country of Australia?
On a more minor note, for all Gibson’s trumpeting the research that went into this movie, right off the bat I noticed a costuming flaw seen all too often in films set in the preColumbian Americas: the use of Ring-Necked Pheasant feathers in headdresses. There were no Old World pheasants in the Americas before whites brought them for hunting. Mesoamerican peoples favored feathers of Resplendent Quetzals and Lovely Cotingas, and, unlike cruel whites, they gathered quetzal plumes not by killing the birds but by removing them during molting season. To be fair, these feathers would not be easy to come by today (despite Charles Mann’s description of Maya deforestation, there was much more forest overall than there is now), but surely special effects could have approximated the right look.
One does wonder what Gibson, as a Catholic Christian, had in mind as a message. He has said, as Mann suggests, that he just wanted to set an action film in an exotic historical locale. Yet, the Maya are actors on the present-day political stage as well as on that of the past. There is still tremendous racism directed at indigenous people by European-descended Latin Americans, a racism that contributes to recent and current unrest in Mexico and Guatemala. This film will do nothing to dispel white Latins’ hatred of “indios” and will likely exacerbate it.
Indigenous Rights Group Slams “Apocalypto” for White Supremacy
http://www.mexica-movement.org/ENTERHERETEXTONLY.htm
This show convinced me not to see the movie. I’m glad I didn’t waste my time and money on it.
Many Americans will argue that films such as this are “only entertainment” and should be regarded as such. Yet, quite a few Americans base their world views on TV/movies and video games.
That’s one reason why the military still looks attractive to some young people.
Also, many in this country seem to believe that all hippies take drugs; never bathe; don’t have jobs; don’t have “lives”; live off of wellfare; are flakey; and, of course, are communists.
Yet another “Oogum Boogum” view of the indigenous and all pretty much one dimensional. The Indigenous/Mayan people are once again vilified in order to make a good case for the Spaniard Latinos and other European Catholics/Protestants to conquer and save the bloodthirsty “Indians” from themselves. How sad, I really was looking forward to this film and was expecting a more realistic portrayal of everyday Mayan life and instead was treated to a full epic stereotype of “Indian” savagery that only good old fashioned Roman Catholicism could save- thanks Mel. Nothing of the Mayan prophecies, art, architecture, food, mathematics, astronomy, etc. was shown, just another Hollywood racist stereotype film. The truly sad part is, is that most people get their information about history and culture from Hollywood movies and this will “teach” them about pre-Columbian civilizations that will be passed on for years to come. This is exactly why we of the Brown race and our other brothers and sisters have to teach ourselves and not rely on institutions, the media, or tinseltown to educate us on history or current affairs.
Randy Muñoz
The People’s Channel
East Los Angeles
Saw it after someone gave me a cinema gift certificate. Wanted to look at the panaroma and enjoy the beauty. Instead found myself holding back the disgusting scenery and the complete fabrication of a great civilization. It was strangely reminiscent of 17th century Europe and not 15th century Mesoamerica. And would people please do your research and quit bringing in the aztecs and the human sacrifice myth it was debunked already sort of like the world is flat.
APOCALYPTO WAS VERY IGNORANT WAY TO EXPLOIT OUR PEOPLES WAY OF LIFE AND BRING SHAME TO ARE ANCESTORS .I THINK MEL GIBSION SHOULD APOLAGIZE,BY MAKING A BETTER MOVIE WITH SPECIFIING OUR ANCESTOR TECHNOGICAL ACHIVEMENTS.
NOTE: THAT DID NOT GET ANY OF MY BUSSINESS AT THE BOX OFFICE!
Well, well, well
Mr.Mel Gibson has just inspired me not to attend any of his up-coming movies. When I first saw the previews while watching a movie feature I said I can’t wait for this movie to premiere. I was shock and disgusted on the portrayal of
the Great Maya Civilization. I suggest we should all boycott Mel Gibson’s movies and hurt in their’s (Disney’s) Pockets.
Cualli Tonalli (Have a good Day)
It doesnt matter wat everyone says about this movie ..But this movie is really great ….now tat the world is goin on wit all kinda techy stuffs Gibson has made us know about wat was the life of our ancestors…Noone can deny the truth of most of our ancestors were killing each other ..It’s all to become the leader of the party.. As the only world they knew waz Mexico….
Note : “Survival of the Fittest”
this is it… lets face it IGNORENCE is the worlds most potent disease,plague and epidimic etc., that has been in humanity it seems since the beginning,till this day.whatever reason we have the need to discuss reality, in this case the great civilizations of anahuac(“western hemisphere”)or in worse cases “the new world” we argue about it over a “MOVIE”, that a european descentindividual has made.obviously it will be made with distortion, exageration and sometimes flat out lies.hence as it does in todays u.s. history books.so instead of discussing it with or over “movie” makers,which the only background history check they worry about is if their films are gonna bring in “dollar signs”, lets try to see if we can discuss it with the so called “leaders of this great nation”, sarcasticly saying this, but that seems like a dead in as well for most “europeans”(americans) will deny the genocide of the so called “NATIVE AMERICANS”.(American holocaust). by david e. stannard thank you that is all.
I don’t know I like to think that I have a mind of my own and am fairly intelligent. When I go to a movie it’s just to watch a movie. Unless it’s labeled as a biography or documentary, it’s fiction plain and simple. I am African American and am no stranger to the enslavement and persecution of my people and yet I don’t get up in arms every time a new movie comes out depicting our slaughter or our slaughter of each other. Why? Simply because I’m intelligent enough to know that a movie is a figment of someones’ imagination. It’s very little truth and a whole lot of crap. Movies are made to cater to fantasy to inspire you to seek truth. I rarely hear of horrendous books that have violated the images and cultures of many… why? simply because they are clearly labeled as fiction? Movies should be enjoyed for their creativity and visual excellence. Why do so many insist on taking a work of fiction and making it a reflection of reality. They are not they are more like the distorted images you see in the mirror house at the fair and we all know that those reflections are false. The same concept applies here. It may be you but the reflection is so skewed it could never be taken at value until it has been reshaped and corrected. The scientific minds have such a hard time dealing with the creative ideas of others that they protest anything that they deem to close to reality yet not based on facts. Don’t sit and judge when somewhere out there someone may be judging you for your scientific ideas out of a difference of ideas and or opinion. Fiction is fiction and if you can’t handle it, don’t watch it
Its a movie.
Movies are engaged as a type of entertainment.
My knowledge of maya/ aztec culture is not as stong as many of you.
I did enjoy the movie. And it encouraged me to learn more. Yes the film is not similar to the actual history, and also the bad spacing of time.
Buts its just a movie!
The whole “anti-christianity” point of view is stupid.
So in conclusion, even if i may seem ignorant. Its just a movie.
yea Louise you are ignorant! though i agree that movies are to be engaged in as a form of entertainment, however, what you are failing to understand is that jus as our brother Randy Munoz said above and i quote ” the truly sad part is that most people get their information about history and culture is through hollywood movies.” Its painfully obvious that you and ol rex up there are only 2 of those poor souls! so let me put it to you in terms that even you can (or at least should be able to) understand….
you admitting you’re lack of knowledge about our indigenous culture (before the real terrorists came to our land) then commenting that “its just a movie”, is almost as upauling as listening to George W. talk as if he knows whats best for this country! You probably dont even know that the same people (terrorists) that came to our land preaching so called “christianity” were also the same parasites promoting cultural genocide, spreading diseases and robbing us of our rights (not to mention slavery and rape) to be a free people on our own continent! Forgive me but your whole point of view is “stupid”
So, in conclusion Louise, even if you are ignorant, and even tho it is just a movie, ill pray for you. and offer just 1 tiny bit of advice, pick up a book (not written from eurocentric points of view) and learn something about a civilization that if only had it been left alone,(like it shouldve been) would be far more advanced than we are today.
It would be nice if ol melly mel would make a film that would entale the true history of the crimes commited by the europeans and their terrorists acts that eventually killed off 95% of our people of the great nation of Anahuac (no my friends, not the city in texas). Im interested in just how much research he would do for such a film being that if he did the movie based on strictly actual factual with out any sugar coating or european idealism, it would bring nothing but shame to each and every white(of european decent)person in the so called u.s.a! The commercials had me waiting in anticipation but the movie was cuacha! I know its only a movie but to make such a movie and only depict the violence, is just ignorant on Mel Gibsons part. I dont think that its coincidence that whn he made his directing debute for the film “braveheart” he was successfull in glorifying the great (white) william wallace who just happens to be of european decent. however he miserably faild to do so with apocalypto and displayed us to the world as a savage irrelevant civilization that was “saved” by the europeans. but of course what am i trippin on right? i mean what else should i expect from a white man in hollywood in the good ol u.s. of a. sadly i admit, i expected more from you mel. and for those of you like alicia out there, its good to know that you are intelligent enough to know that most movies are just someones point of view or figments of their imagination. and in all honesty its not even about getting up in arms (as you say) whenever a film depicts the slaughter or enslavement of your people, but just try to imagine what it would feel like to have a knowledge of your people (not the eurocentric explanation or version of your ancestors history) and who and what they were and stood for before your way of life was interrupted by european invasion…and then to watch a movie that depicts the slaughter and or enslavement of your people, and have them(the whites) refer to it as if it was all done for the better of your people without even considering what your people thought about it. if youre the intelligent person you claim to be, im sure you would be offended too.
disregard the morons knocking this film (i’m not a fan of mel gibson) but he’s a great director and also…….i’m sure before filming this. gibson did more research on the culture and has learned more then most of these fools posting here would ever even understand. You don’t go and make a project like this without tons of hard work and dedication put into it. Get over it people, the mayans WERE savage and brutal. Just because gibson didn’t make a “feel good” movie about your happy little indians doesn’t mean this movie is bad. THIS WAS A GREAT MOVIE. Like i said before, i’m not a fan of gibson but man can he direct a film.
Hiya very nice website!! Man .. Excellent .. Amazing .. I’ll bookmark your site and take the feeds also¡KI’m glad to find numerous useful information here in the publish, we’d like develop more strategies in this regard, thanks for sharing. . . . . .
There is perceptibly a bundle to realize about this. I consider you made certain nice points in features also.
This is a good blog i should say, normally i don????t post comments on others???? blogs but would like to say that this post really forced me to do so!
There is noticeably a whole lot to realize about this. I suppose you created certain nice points in features also.
But a smiling visitant here to share the enjoy (:, btw wonderful style and design .
I have been reading out a few of your stories and it’s pretty good stuff. I will surely bookmark your blog.
Can I just say what a aid to find somebody who really is aware of what theyre talking about on the internet. You positively know how to convey a problem to gentle and make it important. More individuals have to learn this and understand this side of the story. I cant imagine youre no more fashionable because you positively have the gift.