Apocalypto Review: Mel Gibson Does Hollywood’s Greatest HitsDecember 11th, 2006 in Directors, Movies, Reviews |
After watching Mel Gibson torture Jesus for two hours in The Passion, and with reports that Apocalypto was even more bloodthirsty, I was prepared for the worst.
And yes, the gore is all that and more, and possibly Mel Gibson shouldn’t be allowed near sharp objects anymore. Mayans watch as other Mayans have their still-beating hearts cut out, then have their freshly severed heads bounced down the pyramid steps. Not pretty.
Not pretty at all, but narratively necessary. I (and many others) refused to give Gibson a pass on the torture instead of narrative last time out just because his subject was Jesus. This time Gibson (just about) gets away with it. The violence isn’t just mindless blood letting, it’s filled with a horrific tension as the other Mayans watch in horror, learning what their fate will be. It’s the type of violence usually seen in nasty slasher pics, but Gibson uses it as an effective storytelling tool.
In fact everything in Apocalypto is taken from somewhere else, for better or worse. Gibson emerges as a cinematic magpie, compiling a Hollywood’s Greatest Hits of scenes stolen form everyone’s favourite blockbusters.
The opening scenes where we meet Jaguar Paw (pictured above) and the other peaceful Mayan villagers are more or less the Ewok scenes from Return Of The Jedi, with all the tweeness that implies.The ransacking of said village is basically the English invasion that makes William Wallace so mad in Braveheart, and the captive scenes are very Ben Hur. These two sequences are the most emotionally (as opposed to physically) brutal, and easily the film’s strong point. The ruthlessness of the invading (possibly Aztec, it’s never clear) army is like nothing the Mayans have ever encountered, and seeing their innocence annihilated on screen is quite moving. But once Jaguar Paw escapes his captors (after nearly being one of the heart-out, head-off victims) things get a little wild and unfocused.
It’s basically pick and mix scenes from Predator as Jaguar Paw is hunted by his former captors, including covering himself in mud, then a switch to Rambo: First Blood as he turns the tables and hunts them.
These are the scenes where Gibson crosses the line. Seeing Jaguar Paw make poisonous darts using a yellow and black frog is a bit much, and all but two of the bad guys chasing him are the traditional hired goons. Quite literally faceless after one of them has theirs ripped off by a jaguar. In close up.
A brief homage to the best scene in The Fugitive precedes a trip to the beach for a very Planet Of The Apes (the good one) style ending. There’s no Statue of Liberty but there may as well be.
So, yes, there are excesses of violence but for the most part they’re well handled and not even half as gratuitous as what happens to Jesus in The Passion (where it seems the audience and directors tolerance for violence is directly proportional to religious belief) because in this film it’s narratively necessary (except for the jaguar face biting bit) and effective.
And it’s OK to pick and choose the best bits from several blockbusters, though Gibson could be a little subtler about what’s being borrowed.
What’s not OK is to put these things together and sell them as some sort of artistic epic. Apocalypto is anything but. It may be in an ancient language and (very loosely) based in history, but Gibson’s film is no more than a compendium
of Hollywood blockbuster thrill rides, disguised as something more important.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Stumble it! / Bookmark:
December 11th, 2006 at 3:38 pm
[...] UPDATE: The first Screenhead review of Apocalypto is in. (22 Comments) [...]
December 11th, 2006 at 5:25 pm
This is probably the worst post you’ve every written. Where exactly are you drawing these conclusions from that Gibson’s Apocalypto is copying other great Hollywood “hits?”
Seriously. You really end up sounding like a dick when you make claims even you can’t back up. Pick up a book on ancient Mayan culture. I suggest you read it and then re write this article.
You sound like one of those dorks who might as well have stepped into the ring with Uwe Boll and gotten the shit beaten out of him.
Love,
Ollie
December 11th, 2006 at 8:13 pm
Ollie,
Are you saying you can’t see elements of other Hollywood films in “Apocalypto”?
I’ve never read a book on ancient Mayan culture, but am still fairly confident that Mesoamerican civilization predates The Fugitive.
I mean Harrison Ford’s old… but he’s not that old.
If you can’t see how Apocalypto is basically a Hollywood action flick with subtitles, then perhaps you should put down your book on ancient Mayan culture and pay a visit to your local Blockbuster.
December 14th, 2006 at 2:38 am
” army is like nothing the Mayans have ever encountered, and seeing their innocence annihilated on screen is quite moving.”
And your refuting all the Scientists in the world now who have came to the same conclusions time and time again that MesoAmerica was never at all innocent?
If you were ignorant of Hitler’s Halocaust, saw a movie about it, and pictured the Director as some type of bad person stripping away the innocence of Nazis, you would look like a complete fool.
The same scenario applies here, I suggest you pick up a book as the first poster recommends, by scientists who have done extensive studies on the violence of Central America and have the irrefutable scientific evidence to point to violence in Central America. And then redo your review.
Instead of sympathizing with the Hunter’s family who was surviving the reign of terror, just like you should sypmathize with a survivor of a concentration camp who escaped, instead you sympathize with the evil doers by a ill-informed history that makes them out to be innocent.
December 14th, 2006 at 3:52 am
You seem to have misunderstood.
I’m not sympathizing with the army, I’m sympathizing with the villagers.
Jaguar Paw and the villagers are clearly portrayed as innocents, with a simple way of life. The army comes in and destroys their innocent way of life.
It’s not about historical accuracy, it’s about the emotional impact of seeing innocents savaged by an army.
December 15th, 2006 at 5:23 pm
Its a movie that is all. This is a free country so if you don’t like it just walk out, theatres will give you your money back if you don’t like the film or they’ll let you see another movie. Thank goodness that intelligent individuals can make up their own mind. Stop with the political views of “poor” villagers, army, etc. its a film and a good one. Nothing is going to be accurate, books, films, etc. unless YOU were there and you weren’t not one person can say it was or was not like this. Talk to a current indians and they will only tell you what their ancestors have told them (may or may not be facts). Take this for what it is, a film. This is not a Stephen King film full of gore. Apocalypto shows things some people don’t want to see (I can see Mexicans feeling insulted by this - am Hispanic but I can tell them get-a-life its only a film): It makes you think of how things may have been (Mandingo a 1975 shocked everyone for what is showed - films will shock). You want facts fo see a documentary (and still it may not all be facts). Apocalypto is another one of Mel Gibsons films that rattles cages. When Stephen King makes a gore film there is nothing outrageous said. When Mel Gibson makes a film with some things that some history books show as being done then the guys has a “dark side”. History was violent for every ethnic/religiou group in one way or another. Film makers can stories how they want - that is the beauty of the USA, freedom. Don’t let others that are hung up on racial or political ideas of who is not portraying who correctly influence you to see the film. Go see it and see if you like it. It is a a movie nothing more, if you feel you need to get “ready” for it then just read-up on some of the “sacrafices” that the Mayans “may have” done in name of their Sun God - you will see there were bloody ones; then go see the film. This is a good movie, this is not a documentary, Apocalypto is a movie by Mel Gibson a good producer that rattles peoples cages. How beautiful to be able to do this, how beautiful is freedom and what great free pubilicty. The more you put-down the film, the more others are going to want to see it. I love it. Apocalypto a good movie, enjoy it for what it is a film.
January 12th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
I don’t know what everyone’s problem here is. I just saw the film and the film is pretty much just as Darryl describes it. Note, he is describing the film and his responses to it, not writing a historical essay. Mel Gibson has made it a clear good/bad confrontation for the purposes of a good story and to get an obvious response from the audience. The action scenes are very good and it’s a decent story but, as Darryl said, the borrowings (hommages?) are fairly obvious.
January 13th, 2007 at 8:54 am
I thought the movie was absolutely great.I did want to see more of the magnificence of the Aztec city (and of course it was the Aztecs! Simply look at the headdress of the emperor which was more than likely the illfated Montezuma II). I could not sit still during this movie. I cannot wait to go see it again.
February 9th, 2007 at 3:53 am
I thing the movie is absolutely GREAT, Mel Gibson is, still, a Powerful film maker.
February 9th, 2007 at 3:54 am
I thing the movie is absolutely GREAT, Mel Gibson is, still, a Powerful film maker. I´m from Mexico and I know the Mayan´s hystory, their were blodys as hell.