Early Apocalypto Reviews: What The Hell’s Wrong With Mel Gibson?

Filled under: Directors, Movies | | Trackback

Permalink

51 Responses to “Early Apocalypto Reviews: What The Hell’s Wrong With Mel Gibson?”

1.  Julian Says:
   

   There is absolutely nothing wrong with Gibson’s artistic genius, only the envious mini-scule talents of the wannabees who put only partly selected wording from rave reviews.

   If you want to find out what critics think of this film than go to Rottentomatoes.com and you’ll see what real, genuine unbiased critics have to say, and not Roger Friedman’s anti-catholic, anti-Christian, bigotted reviews spew out.

2.  daryl Says:
   

   I think “artistic genius” might be pushing it a bit! But it’s a fair point that none of the above quoted reviews dispute that Gibson is handy with a camera.

3.  eoin Says:
   

   After The Passion, which I can only label as pornography, the artistic genius fades into the background for my opinion of Mr. Gibson’s direction

4.  Nolan Martin Says:
   

   Just 4 more days until the release of Mel Gibson’s Apocalypto and I (I’m going to speak slowly for the Libs out there who hate Mel Gibson. I…….. Am……Looking……….Forward…….Toooo…… It. Yes I am looking forward to Mr. Gibson’s next movie. I loved Braveheart and The Passion was one of the most moving film experiences I have ever had. (I’m a Christian and that portyal of my savior at his best, was sad and yet beautiful to watch, knowing he did that me,) Oh I’m rambling. Oh Sorry, Mr. Gibson is the last Artist in Hollywood. Why do I say that? Well, name a director who movies that don’t set the standard for typical Hollywood fare. Yes Spielberg is great and so is Scorsese, but those guys stick to a type of genre, that is comfortable in the movie world sense. ( Having said that, Munich was another tough film experience to sit through.) But Gibson is unique. He makes movies that portray history at it’s darkest. He’ll try things that most directors won’t and he’ll tell stories that are fascinating to observe. And all you people who are on Gibson’s back about it being violent, Come on. The Saw series borderlines Satanic with the kind of brutallity it shows. The Mayans were a brutal culture. Middle Age combat was brutal, Christ’s death and torture was bruuuuutalll. Mr. Gibson is not a sadist, he’s revealing history for what it was. This Movie will be a success.

5.  Eoin Says:
   

   The Passion is not fascinating to observe. It is the 2-hour torture of a man, nothing. It doesn’t even attempt to show the beauty of Christ, his teachings, etc. Hence my previous labelling it as pornography. It’s an endeavour of gratuity in order to shock. I saw no beauty in this movie, I just felt ill. It’s as moving as Saw.

   I do admit I can’t criticise Gibson for being violent, but I can criticse him for making empty, uninteresting films. And believe me, Mr. Martin, Braveheart is as Hollywood as they come.

6.  Paul Says:
   

   I haven’t seen the movie yet I’m waiting to see it on DVD.

7.  Taylor Says:
   

   I don’t think it’s a question of what’s wrong with Mel Gibson… I think it’s a question of what *isn’t* wrong with Mel Gibson, because everyone about that man is wrong.

8.  Rey Says:
   

   for those of us that understand history, Mel Gibson simply puts it on the big screen as only a great movie maker can do. this movie is historical fact

9.  eoin Says:
   

   And what is the fact? That people were brutal then? If that’s the most profound that Gibson can get then god help us all.

10.  Vern Says:
    

    Apocalypto is a great piece of filmmaking. Many people will say that there are racial innuendos in the movie because it is a Mel Gibson movie. I ask that people look beyond Mel Gibson and other filmmakers, actors, or writers that have had problems in their personal lives and look at Hollywood for what it is. It is about storytelling and entertainment. In Apocalypto that is what is given to the audience, a great piece of storytelling and visual excitement. The audience is drawn into the chase and the desire of a human being to get back to his/her family. This was not meant to be an epic or a true depiction of the Mayan history, but a story that we can all relate to. It was a great movie and I will recommend it to anyone.

11.  michtoatl Says:
    

    It is believed that Mel Gibson had to plagiarize a copyrighted work to make his movie. One of the themes of the movie is that Jaguar Paw has the favor of the Jaguar God. In the original copyrighted story it was an Ocelot God. More similarities: 1. Displaced tribe. 2. Villages burnt, slaves taken, women raped. 3. Seperation of main characters family. 4. Warring faction leaves behind only burnt villages. 5. The pyramid scene is created almost event for event. The scaffolding on the pyramid is from the original story. The heads on poles are from the original story. 6. Selling slave women. 7. Cutting out the heart of sacrifices (on the pyramid) and letting the victim see the pumping heart before he dies. 8. Climbing a tree to escape the enemy (in the first story he climbed a tree to escape a flood. 9. In the original sory there was a chase scene down a rapid filled river. In this story he was chased over a waterfall. 10. Wife has a baby at the conclusion. 11. the use of venomous darts in a blowgun. One or two things could be coincidence - afterall - we are talking about a culture and a civilization. But there are far too many coincidences for this to be realistic. I put forth the theory that Mel Gibson and Farfad Safinia conspired to change a copyrighted work sufficiently to claim it as their own. It is true that the original story and this story have differances, yet when both are viewed side by side, one would seem to come to the conclusion that Apocalypto is a rewriting. The original story was called Michtoatl and was copyrighted 27 February 2003. I recieved a copy of Michtoatl to review two years ago. I passed on representing it as I felt the subject matter was extreme. Perhaps I should have taken it.

12.  Patrick Family Says:
    

    Get a life & move pass what occured with Mel Gibson & the DUI. Now move on!! Apocalypto is about the facts and part of history (teachers teach about Aztecs & Mayans in 8th grade and yes inform students of “some” of the scraficial ceremonies that occured (a good history teacher does this). When Platoon was released many years ago it showed the facts about the vietnam war some people where shocked & refused to see the film because of the bloody scenes. Anyone that puts historical films on the big screen & portrays them how it really was will always get heat for it. We saw Apocalypto with our teenagers (17 & 18 years old) & there isn’t anything in there that they didn’t already know from history books, the blood is nothing you don’t already see in mature video games. If you live in a closet & do not watch tv you do not need to see this film. If you are an mature, individual and have an open mind, go see Apocalypto, it has wonderful cinematography and truth about what happened during that time. Unfortunately history has blood and even gore, look at what is happening in the world today and guess what…When they make a movie about the current middle east war (& it will be made one day) it will be very bloody: Mel Gibson I hope you are the one to make that film, it will be greatly made and in good taste as all your films are. Apocalypto is a great film worth seeing! Mayans & Aztecs were like this, Mel Gibson just put it on film. We highly recommend Apocalypto.

13.  Jose Says:
    

    I went to see this movie today and I think it was very well done. I don’t understand why people criticize Mel Gibson. He did a good job here and plus he makes movies no one dares to make for the simple reason that they are afraid of what the media may said about it. This movie shows violent scenes but that is how real life is. If you don’t want to accept reality then you are living in a fake world. I read about the Mayan culture and in fact they used to remove hearts and sacrifice people to their gods, so if that actually happened why banned from a movie? The Passion was another excellent movie done by Gibson. I hope he continues making more movies because he’s very talented. We need to see more of his work. Viva Mel Gibson!!!

14.  WiTeBoi Says:
    

    The movie was great 3.5/4 stars. I also want to comment, which I am surprised that others haven’t caught on to is that the movie has a strange relation with The Lord Of The Flies throughout the movie. The ending surely suggests this theory of mine.

15.  Brenda Says:
    

    Just saw Apocalypto an hour ago….it was great. I went to the movie with ideas of “uber-violence” and other critical tidbits I had encountered in some press and reviews lately. I was pleasantly surprised to not have those expectations met. There was violence in the film…some gory and uncomfortable close-ups…but I appreciated it…reminded me of how easy I truly do have it. History has told us that people were sacrificed…..slaves were taken, women raped, etc, etc, in places all over the world, during many different time periods….oh wait, that stuff still happens today (Sorry to bring up the Sudan here, but can’t help it) and if anything, this film reminds us of how human we truly are and how cruel life can be for some of us. Please remember, though maybe not perfectly accurate, Gibson is portraying events, albeit fictional in specifics, but occurences that take place during history and have been supported by historical and archaelogical facts. If one wants to trash this film based on the “violence route,” please choose the thousand other Hollywood movies NOT based on history that depict violence. What I didn’t appreciate about the film was laughter from audience members when someone was being killed…I am going to hope it was nervous laughter, and nothing else. There IS allegory in the film between our world today and the one portrayed, if one wants to see that. I agree with above that it is a story one could relate to….provided one does not think getting violently killed is giggle-worthy. Kudos to Gibson for brilliant camera work, story telling, and the ability to make us think a bit. Loved the acting.

16.  Felipe de Ortego y Gasca Says:
    

    Apocalypto is more like a pornographic looney tunes than a serious film about the Maya. Looking for cover from negative reviews of the film, Mel Gibson aserts that he consulted “experts” in the field in order to portray the Maya authentically. We don’t really know what the Maya were like. What we have are perspectives based on Spanish accounts which were unlikely to represent the Maya in anything but a savage and brutal point of view. From these accounts have emerged secondary sources that only poison the pot further against the Maya and the other indigenous peoples of Mexico. My research uncovers a different Maya than the one portrayed by Gibson’s Apocalyto.

    Dr. Felipe de Ortego y Gasca, Ph.D.
    Visiting Scholar, Texas A&M University–Kingsville
    Professor Emeritus, Texas State University System

17.  Aluna JOY Says:
    

    Are the Maya Getting a Bum Rap with film Apocalypto?

    Many are feeling emotional about the upcoming film by Mel Gibson entitled Apocalypto. From viewing the trailers and information on the official Apocalypto site, it is clear that Mr. Gibson is working hard to cement into the mass consciousness a history of the Maya that is misinformed and based in contaminated history.

    We could understand who the ancient Maya were by the way modern archeologists do, by jumping to conclusions. Famous guide to Palenque, Mexico for over 4 decades, Moises Morales, said “Archeology is not history, Archeology is assumptions.” Morales boldly states that 90% of archeology is based on understanding of the Maya that is wrong. Morales believes we are not much closer to the truth of the ancient Maya than we were when sites was uncovered decades ago. There is NO physical evidence found of mass sacrifice anywhere in the Maya lands. It is time we quit perpetuating these lies. You might want to read …SPIRITUAL ARCHEOLOGY at http://www.kachina.net/~alunajoy/2003june.html

    Those of us who do love and honor the Maya traditions know that Mayan history is contaminated. We understand that most of Maya history was taken from a book written by Bishop De Landa that was shipped back to Spain. He wrote to justify the killing thousands, maybe millions, of innocent Maya people. The living Maya themselves have a different perspective of the history of their ancestors, but no one asks them. Most historians pretend the Maya don’t exist anymore, and had mysteriously vanished. But they didn’t vanish and are still in the Maya lands, serving tourists meals and eking out a living on corporation run fincas. They do not have the financial or political power to defend the memory of their ancestors. They are become victims once again. This time Mel Gibson is the invader.

    Is there a any reason for such over the top violence and ugliness in movies like Mr. Gibson is famous for. First… there was Brave Heart, then Passion of the Christ and now Apocalypto. Even Archaeology based National Geographic News expert states “Apocalypto” Exaggerates Maya Violence. WATCH THE VIDEO HERE. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/12/061208-apocalypto.html.

    Is Mr. Gibson just processing out his own inner demons and violent nature in his films? If so why do we support him to do this? It is pretty clear Mr. Gibson has issues with Jews. What comes out of a person IS a part of who that person is! So Mr. Gibson do you have issues with native Maya people? The script was kept secret, and for what reason? To protect his twisted violent and ugly portrayal of the Maya so we can’t object before it is to late. Is Mr. Gibson movie the next mass media genocide? Is Apocalypto the second coming of Columbus? Haven’t the Maya been slaughtered and repressed long enough. In one of Apocalypto’s on line videos, Mel states, his job in first to entertain, second to educate, and third to inspire… I don’t see how this film can fulfill any of his own requirements.

    I have come to greatly respect Christopher Powell from Maya Exploration Center. Powell questions past history and looks at the remaining evidence left behind by the Maya. Mr. Powell is looking beyond history, and using sacred geometry on actual remains to tell a story about the Maya that boggles the mind. According to Christopher Powell, Mr. Gibson hired all his actors from Mexico City. It makes me feel sick inside knowing Mr. Gibson might make millions on perpetuating a slanderous history of the Maya, without employing a single Maya person. You might want to read Page 5 of ArchaeoMaya - Winter 2006 Newsletter at http://www.mayaexploration.org/pdf/mec_newsletter_winter2006.pdf

    As conscious people entering a new world that the ancient Maya themselves predicted, it is our duty to end the slander and continuation of a contaminated history written by invaders. It is time to quit supporting violence in all its forms, from all out war, to media violence.

    Aluna Joy Yaxkin
    Author and Guide to the Maya World for 20 years.

18.  Henry Says:
    

    You either get it or you don’t. Empires eat people, and we are, right this moment, fulling living in the world the movie presents - 100% - complete with open-fire zones, a callous torturing ruling elite, and a governement with no respect for your individual liberties. The only more relevant movie out there now is America: Freedom to Fascism.

    All of these discussions about the violence, Mel’s life, or historical authenticity from the shallow and offensive professor Felipe here simply miss it.

19.  Hunab Ku Says:
    

    Next time Mel Gibson decide to make a Movie about the MAYAS, PLease! Mel, PICK UP A BOOK!!!! OR GO AND ASK THE MAYAN PEOPLE IN GUATEMALA WHAT THE HELL THEY ARE ABOUT ???

    MEL GIBSON HAVE NO CLUE OF WHAT THE MAYAS WERE AND ARE TILL THIS DAY, THE SAVAGISM IN THE MOVIE REFLECTS PERFECTLY THE CAUCASIAN RACE, NOT THE MAYAS.

    P.D. THE MAYAS WERE GONEEEEEEEEEEEEE BEFORE THE EUROPEANS ARRIVED, THE ONES WHO STAYED LEFT TO THE MOUNTAINS, ALL THOSE DEAD HUMAN BODIES IN THE MOVIE REMIND ME MORE OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT GENOCIDE IN IRAK THAT ANYTHING ELSE!

    THE MAYAS ARE THE MASTERS OF TIME, THEY NEVER SACRIFICED A THING, THANKS TO THEM NASA KNOWS THE LITTLE INFO ABOUT THE COSMOS THAT THEY KNOW, 2012 IS HERE, BAKTUN 13 IS GONNA BITE MEL GIBSON IN HIS IGNORANT ASS, BE READY

20.  Alex Says:
    

    I read on one of these comments that ‘this movie is historical fact’
    I’m American Indian and walked out of this movie feeling livid.
    from the very beginning the idea is to depict the ignorant savages as bloodthirsty murderers/rapists/crude joke-telling simpletons. I’d also like to point out that
    there was no disease on the North American Continents until the European Christians arrived and in Mel’s point of view “saved us”
    in fact, one of the reasons settlers called us ’savages’ is because we bathed everyday.
    no no, in my opinion this is an outrageous piece of propoganda that allows everyone to feel alright about the mass genocide commited on this Continent,,,, of which we few and forgotten Indians (those who didn’t get the gifts of Smallpox blankets from our friendly Christian saviors) are still feeling the effects of. But I journied out from my reservation to see the film with high hopes of possible recognition and found just another western with the redskins playing the bad guys and the white man, the savior.
    I guess I shouldn’t expect so much.

21.  Box Beater Says:
    

    Umm… It’s a movie, people.

    Writers and Directors take creative license all the time (with “historical movies” and movies “Based on Actual Events.”)

    Most of them are enjoyed by the masses and never questioned (Invincible, Radio, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.)
    Some are controversial (JFK, The Passion of the Christ.) But ultimately, they are movies. (i.e. ENTERTAINMENT.)

    If you want acurate history:
    1) read some books
    2) talk to an expert or two
    3) research, research, research

    We should never take another person’s word at face value without some educational digging on our part.

    (This is the same reason we have a problems “Stupid Voters”… people, with no research done on their part, voting based on something said by a TV or Radio Personality (or asking a friend, “Who are you voting for?” and making it their own without knowing why.))

    Please, start thinking for yourselves.

22.  Apocalypto Review: Mel Gibson Does Hollywood’s Greatest Hits » screenhead.com Says:
    

    [...] 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. [...]

23.  Raj Says:
    

    I am from India and I felt disgusted with the movie. I echo the views of the some of my fellow readers about Mel’s potrayal of the people of ancient Mayan civilizations as savage and barbaric. Its very wrong to potray the people of such an old civilization as being ruthless when they were not.On the contrary it has always been the white race who has been inhuman and animal-like if you read the history of any of the ancient civilizations. When it comes to their own history, the europeans tend to glorify their past and show the same in movies. They have done it always-showing non-european civilizations and its people in poor light.

24.  Eoin Says:
    

    I agree with Box Beater. There is a debate in the accuracy of the film, but in the end, artistic licence is taken. I worked on a docu-drama, and watched as my producer tossed aside fact for dramatic impact. It happens, and anyone who gets annoyed at filmic inaccuracies are missing the point… they are not historic documents, and were never supposed to be. If you want to criticise the film, look into the lack of story/narrative/characterisation (see daryl’s review).

    That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if Gibson implanted some of his trademark personal opinions into the portrayal of the Mayans. Is this being irresponsible? Only if we consider this to be anything beyond popcorn fodder, which we should all strive not to do.

25.  Nick B Says:
    

    I find it odd that may people are starting there review with “what ever you think of Mel…..” To the point-My opinion is that this movie is lame! Why? I thought it was just another chase movie. Replace guns,cars and the city with the jungle and it’s just another gang movie. O.K. maybe that’s a stretch,but come on..can you really call that a story? And for those of you that are defennding it’s historical accuracy…I wasn’t there and niether were you. All I know is that it the Christian history books that we all studied in school. My favorite part was the story telling scene at the beginning”..man has a hole that can never be filled…”etc. I wonder if Mel will ever get his fill?

26.  man Says:
    

    relax everyone its just a movie….if you guys believe what you see in the movies as fact than you have more issues than mel..no one knows what happened back in mayan times and if you believe no violence ever happened back then, sorry to break it to you they were human also and humans tend to get violent at times no matter who or what you are. watch this movie for the story that it is and the work of the director. it thought it was a great movie.

27.  ely Says:
    

    I think the movie had some sort of plot… but sadly not historically accurate… maybe maybe… before they put things like this on the big screen they should try and understand the history of others. Depicting this people as they did only feeds to unnecessary stereotypes….waste of 12 bucks

28.  Brainwash Rebel Says:
    

    “Apocalypto is nothing less than the visual fantasies and fetishes of a very disturbed man. First, we had to suffer two hours of a film entitled PASSION OF THE CHRIST, in which Christ is tortured for two entire hours, as one atrocity after another is inflicted upon him. For some reason, all the gore freaks and torture buffs in America “got off” watching that appalling film. I don’t consider that kind of thing entertainment and I sure did not walk away from the film feeling enlightened about Christ. Now, we get another example of Mel Gibson’s disturbed mind, in the form of two hours of a jungle tribe being tortured, with one atrocity after another visited upon them. Gibson is truly in need of psychiatric assistance (not to mention his many sadistic admirers). What is appealing about watching people being tortured and maimed for several hours????? Gibson seems so fascinated with torturing and brutalizing characters that you have to wonder if in a former life he was a member of the Spanish Inquisition, possibly the head of a torture unit assigned to maiming the Jews he so despises? Or maybe he worked for one of the Russian Tzars and assisted them in torturing Jews during their vicious pogroms? Never have I seen a director who revels in splattering blood, cruelty, and sadism upon a screen as this sick individual. Anybody who “gets off” on this kind of film is probably the same kind of brain dead jackass who rushes to see Marilyn Manson concerts or worships Rob Zombie. In other words, this is a film that will appeal to the lowest common denominator of nasty freaks who like to see small helpless animals tortured. Of course, every anti-Semite in America is rushing to see the film and place dollars in the paws of this sick puppy, Gibson, masquerading as a human being. Never has there been such a lightning rod for anti-Semitic sentiment as this emotionally warped man, who embodies everything wrong about America and contemporary American cinema.”

29.  Amy Says:
    

    I have to say I agree with 25Nick B. This was a lame movie. There was no point, no real story, nothing. That is, nothing but far too much gore to be entertaining.
    It is the worst movie I have ever seen and I like (d) Mel Gibson. Sure, his drunken comments were wrong, but that has nothing to do with his work.
    Unfortunately, I think his angry comments were outward signs of a very disturbed, angry individual. This movie left me sick to my stomach and wanting Mel to give me back my wasted Saturday.
    Yes, it’s just a movie. But, aren’t movies supposed to enlighten or entertain? This one does neither.

30.  Francois de La Begassiere Says:
    

    Apocalypto depicts the MAYA, as a sanguinary and cruel civilization. The sacrifices sequence would be more appropriate as pertaining to the Aztecs. But even the latter viewed sacrifices as representing the restitution of blood for the God giver of life. The Maya produced sacrifices, but far from the gory depicted by Mr.Gibson and never in the vast amounts depicted in Apocalypto. In the final centuries of the Mayan empire, they had descended into ligues of cities warrying with each other. Probably this is relatively accuratly representd in the film. Having spent some time with Amazonian indian groups, the daily life of Jaguar Paw’s tribe doesn’t ring true. What is disturbing, is the relentless violence that permeates his films, and in my opinion diminishes the message and distorts the image of the great Empires of pre colonial America. The idea of using local dialects (Yucatecan Maya or Aramaic..) could have enhanced the understanding of these ways of life. Instead the gore only brings to the fore the negative approach of Mr.Gibson, rather than genuine observation or knowledge of the civilization created by the Mayas.

31.  Leaf Says:
    

    I agree that it is only a movie and I actually (and maybe wrongly for the same reasons I will state thus) really loved Braveheart. I had to walk out on Passion and found the representation vulgar as I did with this movie. Going by the way he (if this has even been acurately depicted) lived, I certainly don’t think Jesus would want to watch either one.
    I find it very strange that the history of dessimation and loss that still can be seen in tribes and on reservations today is so infrequently touched on and when Indians do make the media it is in a grotesque or patronizing way.
    indeed–it’s for entertainment—I think what makes it different in this case is the blatent disregard for these poeple in particular. To have been killed by the millions and in many, many cases completely erradicated and never have a national memorial or even (in my opinion) sincere apology by the public, media and governments of our nations makes it very understandable how there may be some angry, Native blood bearing poeple after seeing themselves described so savagely by a white man (who if we remember the settlers were more accurately the barbarians).
    It’s just a movie.
    But think how it might be reacted to a little differently if it were a movie about how African Americans were a lost cause anyway so why not just put them on a slave ship.
    This would be just as despicable but would never have been produced in the first place.

32.  Sara Says:
    

    Finals week hasnt allowed me to go watch this movie, but I am soooo looking forward to finally seeing it this weekend!

    I have read a lot of the reviews here and I will obviously not be able to form my opinion until I do watch it.

    To a certain extent, it is kind of exciting that a movie of the Mayans has been made. My issue is how the people are being portrayed.

    Someone mentioned that this movie is based on “historical events”, meaning on the ancient book of the Mayan - the Popol Vuh. According to Gibson, he tried to based the movie on this sacred book to the best of his ability. I hope to finish it before watching the movie to see just how “accurate” the movie is.

    I recognize that my ancestors did make sacrifices, and from what I’ve read so far in the Popol Vuh, vengance is a recurring theme. Of course I expect to see blood and hearts pumping in someones hand, but how much of the movie revolves around this religious ritual of the Mayans is the question.

33.  Kevin Fitzgerald Says:
    

    Mel Gibson is a legal psychopath whose films bring out the psychopath in all of us. Am I going to see “Apocalypto”? Nope. For the same reasons I’ve never bothered to spend time and money watching “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.” Passing up “Apocalypto” goes against one of my firmest rules, “don’t judge till you see all,” but, like “Passion,” this new Mel masterpiece of pornographic violence has been described so minutely by reviewers that my mind’s eye does the rest. I won’t pay for anything with money that will eventually end up in Gibson’s ghoul-guarded coffers.

34.  JJ Says:
    

    I went to see Apocalypto because I was fancinated by the Maya culture and history of that time. I always like films with a theme of history. I got a sense of that thru the pyramids and human frailty (whether it is crulty, fear or greed) and sacrifice.

    But I also noticed a veined hatred of Gibson first time as commonly reflected from many conserative christians who fill their hearts with hellish condemination on people who dont share their strong beliefs. In many respect, I can sense a Gibson’s way of thinking about Christianity very much in line of old testmony where violance and punishment based on your deeds are common theme.

    In this movie, he again has to hint that somehow christian faith has brought justice to the bad people; while forgetting about the fact that christ is about love and tolerance which makes new testmony so different from old testmony.

    If he wants to show cruelty, and gory details of human badness, why didnt he use early catholic treatment of protestants as story line while those days these protestants were burnt alive for hearasay. Do I need to name Jan Hassite, Joan of Arc, Joe Smith, Spanish Inquisitive, Queen Mary’s treatment of Protestants?

    This reminds me of FaLongGong which is another religion full of hate and curse mixed with buddism. In contrast true buddism is about love, mercy and forgiving.

    It is not suprising to hear people saying that wars are started by religons. The truth is that war is often used by some religous radicals who fill their hearts with hatred against those peopl who dont share their beliefs. If only if people are tolerant, forgiving and have the true gentle meaning of religion, then the world would have been much more peaceful and human.

    Afterall, we are human, we cannot judge, only God can. Hate is bad. No religion, no christian, no jews, no Muslims should have the right to judge, to hate non-belivers or other believers. Thats for God to decide.

    Mel Gibson’s movies make me realize why he shows such an extreme outburst against jews. As an old wise Chinese saying goes, you are revealing your true feeling when you are drunk.
    Mel Gibson needs to dig deeper into his soul about christianity and about love.

35.  Zooropa Says:
    

    Wow, it is scary to hear some of the coments from such bias and ignorance against Mel and truth of the Maya. I never had much interest in seeing Mel’s Christ movie because I am not a Christian or religious, but I am very spirital and have had a great interest in the Maya for a long time. Obviously no one knows exactly how the Maya were so what, does that mean we can
    t make a movie about them? It’s been done a million times before! Anyway we have a very good idea as well as facts we know about the Maya, and it isn’t from the bies Spanards as someone said above, but from many well respected scientists in many fields. Many people think the Maya were a completely peaceful society because that is what was believed by scientists for many years until farely recently they descovered undeniable evidence that showed the the Maya practiced brutal sacrifice and other acts of violence but this has been slow to get to the history books, not to metion the PC academia who are bent on keeping any non-white race civilization looking completely peaceful.

    The current evidence strongly shows this….the Maya were a very peaceful civilization until their mysterious living lord Cuculcan left them and then the Maya turned to sacrofice in despiration to bring back there lost god Cuculcan. As they did this, there civilization deteriorated which led to more violence and finally total destruction 500 years after Cuculcan left them. Anyone who knows Maya history knows that this movie takes place near the end of their civilization long after Cuculcan left them and there civilization was already very degrated by this time. So this movie was very acurate in its depiction of the Maya at this time period.

    The problem is we have extreme critics bashing the movie for one of two reasons. Either because some people are so brainwashed into thinking or just want to believe so badly that the white race is the only one with the corupt gene, the violence gene, the racist gene, or the conquer gene when you would have to be a major idiot (as well as a racist)to believe this if you know any real history at all! People are people where ever you go or whatever race you are and Mel did a very good job of showing this. Thank God for independent movie producers/directors.

    The other reason why many people are bashing this movie is out of bias of Mel after his Jewish slander incident. First, forgive me, but I thought we are grading the movie, not the man, and secondly, while what Mel said was wrong, I can completely understand why he said it being drunk. You would have to be blind (and most people are) to not see all the filters you must go through to make a non-politically correct movie these days, or ever in Hollywood for that matter, and these filters are largely controlled by a Jewish elite circle of producers all the way down to casters. The only reason why Mel was able to make this politically incorrect movie like he did was because he produced it himself, at least most of it and I am sure without a doubt he had to go through a lot of crap from power people (mostly Jews) in Hollywood to do it as well as his Christ movie. This film was nothing short of a great achievement!

    The points about the violence and especially the sub titles are good points though, but I understand why Mel did this.

    Please spare me any anti-Jewish comments, that is an insult to my intelligence!

36.  avid fan Says:
    

    the movie is brilliant, i love the way mel gibson handles the camera, the actors and a situation. though most of his directorial films depict violence, i love the way they were done, it comes from the heart, it shows reality and it leaves memory. to Director mel, continue doing good movies coz we love to travel time and places with you.

37.  Victor Says:
    

    Hey people take it easy. I saw the movie and there is not so much history, the movie is based on human feelings and entertainment for viewers. I don’t understand why people think that the foreigners on the ships are portrayed as saviors? I watched the movie and the feeling left was that another real bad was coming!
    The movie is great to be watched, I am sure it won’t let you fall asleep.

38.  Endrit Says:
    

    Artistically “apocalipto” is perfectly achieved We do not have to refer to history or other facts when we see a movie, otherwise many movies, including oscar awarded ones would be scarce without any value. In a movie we expect artisitc values and Mel Gibson made those values enjoyable. Those who want history, library is a perfect place.

39.  Steve Says:
    

    Just saw this movie and, to second WiteBoi’s observation, yes — I do believe I recall reading and seeing a scene where a life and death jungle pursuit leads to the beach where it’s interrupted by “civilized” men in uniform arriving in boats.

    Fortunately, since people don’t read anymore or even break out the old classics, Hollywood is at liberty to recycle dramatic themes and scenes without fear of being revealed as uncreative, shameless hacks, like cover singers and musical samplers. Hell, LotF was even remade, poorly, back in the ‘90.

    Mel, sucks to your ass-mar.

40.  JOHN Says:
    

    MELGIBSON IS A GREAT ACTOR,DIRECTOR AND SO ON.THERE IS NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT.TO MAKE SOMETHING BETTER SOMETHING MAY BE CHANGED IT’S NOT A CATASTROPHIC ERROR IN A STORY.GO AHEAD GIBSON BEST OF LUCK.

41.  JOHN(from bangladesh,Narayanganj) Says:
    

    YOU’RE A GOD GIFTED SON.WHEN U MAKE SOMETHING THAT COMES FROM HEAVEN.I LIKE YOU MOST.

42.  Pope Not-See Birthday Party Says:
    

    Mel Gibson - and his fans - are nutz.
    http://www.NoBeliefs.Com/nazis.htm

    …nuff said? I thought so…

    Malleus Loves You, so Vote for Cthulhu in ‘08! Cthulhu will privatize your social security and put an end to abortion and homosexuality once and for all! All Hale Cthulhu!!!

43.  Father Coughlin Says:
    

    Silly Rabbits! Christianity didn’t END violence and murder! REAL violence in society came WITH Christianity. See witch-burnings, biblical cannibalism, the holocaust. etc. etc etc. Just Google “Christian Crime-Line” and educate yourselves. Why isn’t Pat Robertson on trial in the Hague with his business partner, Charles Taylor? The BOTH owned the diamond mines and The 700 Club’s “Operation Blessing” airplanes flew in the guns and the mining equipment. Oh yeah. Pat Robertson is a rich, white Republican male, just like Scooter Libby or Shooter’s Lippy or Looter Skippy or whatever his name is. I just know that Paris Hilton is more of a man than any right-wing bible-thumper. Poor GOP, even their fall guys won’t take the fall, they can’t do ANYTHING right!

44.  Phillipa Says:
    

    I watched the film last night, overall I thought it was excellent, however there was fault from my perspective, the violent scenes did not need to be so in depth, to me this added nothing to the film, instead it took away from it. Also I do not believe the story was accurate to the Mayan culture. Yes most races through history practiced sacrifice normally to appease gods and such, and different tribes of any cutlure would fight to protect thier own, it did not make them bloodthirsty, it made them protectors. I am sure their sense of humor was not as crass and modern as it was made out to be.

    I think people seem to forget the main character in the film; who was a tribesman, a hunter, a protector, a family man; who fought his fear for the greater good of protecting his family and his way of life, and also to survive himself, and for those people who think you would not have killed off those who tried to take that from you I think are very much mistaken.

    Not all parts of history are seeped with roses and fluffy bunnies, and not all cultures were ’savage’. With a good knowledge of history I would reiterate the prior statements from others that certain religions (mainly but not solely christianity) and their followers were the cause of so much of the violence due to their attitude that they were the only right beliefs and they should be practiced by everyone. Look at slavery also, which is portrayed in this film very strongly; and look at the English.. we were one of the biggest contributors to the slave trade, and i for one am ashamed of the way some of my ancestors were back then, however I do not tarnish the whole european culture with the same brush; (look at some of the films about slavery; not every european was like that!!) just because some people did it, does not mean that all did, just the same with this film…. the mayan culture they showed does not include every Mayan person in history, just one aspect of them; among the many they must have had, at least it was contradicted in the film with the more peaceful forest tribes, although it could have been emphasised a bit more than it was.

    Waffling aside, overall i loved the film, and class it as entertainment in the sense that it is in no way a documentary about that time. There were some extremely powerful shots in the film, and I found the emotion behind the film second to none. I wish Mel would focus more on the emotion next time than the gore, and he couldnt go wrong!

45.  Bored Person Says:
    

    The biggest issue I have with all of Mel’s films is the melodrama, the acting is overdone to the point of being unbelievable. The indulgence in suffering, a trademark of Gibson’s films seen in both Braveheart and The Passion as well as this offering, make them silly and childish. I almost feel like I’m watching a high school production where all dignity is lost from the overacting. This film had some nice visuals but the story had the depth and believability of The Bold and the Beautiful.

46.  Adahn stewart(The man) Says:
    

    i liked it and thought it was a good movie. apocalypto was very entertaining and thought provoking. the scenery was great the camera angles were great
    the acting was great
    i dont really care that it was made by mel gibson, who gives a shit? the movie was good. you guys are spending to much time criticizing and bein pissed off that u fail to realize that it’s a MOVIE!!!! it’s there for your entertainment. who cares if it was accurate. at least it ws in the ball park. stop worrying about it and enjoy it. mel gibson probably wasnt trying to state everything as fact so get over it..watch th movie again and this time with no bias towards mr.gibson and ejoy the shit, damn.

47.  TruthSeeker Says:
    

    It is true that Mel Gibson took artistic license in the film, namely in portraying the Spanish arriving in the New World during the peek of the Mayan civilization instead of at the very end. But Mel readily admits to making such changes in his movies to make them more cinematically appealing. People who get too bogged down in his adjustments miss the points of his stories.

48.  oscar vistarIII Says:
    

    wow!!!!!!!!!!!!! da best kapen saakin nag ganda pala nang mga showwww!!! sana magkaroon din ako niyan nag pala super exciting naako!!!

49.  oscar vistarIII Says:
    

    hi!!!!! sana makita mo ako saakin friendster sana mabait kang kausapin ang ganda pala nag showwww!!! ang galing
    BYE BYE BYE !!!!!

    GOODLUCK!!!!

50.  oscar vistarIII Says:
    

    wow!!!! DA Best Ka paren
    yeah!!!!! YaeHHHH !!!!
    one true love its enough!!!!
    byEEE BYE BYE BYE!!!!!

51.  oscar vistarIII Says:
    

    thats is goOOD GooD GOOd
    bye bYE BYE !!!!!
    thakZZZ YOU soo MUCHHHH !!!!!*****

Leave a Reply