I'll probably see it, too.
I hope it does well,
if only to pi$$ off the rest of Hollywood.
And even though I was disappointed in him in his drunken rant,
rules are rules...
He proved he wasn't perfect, but he sure looked the part.
Posted on 12/08/2006 9:26:29 AM PST by TaraP
Release Date: December 8, 2006
Ever since Mel Gibson directed the amazingly successful “The Passion of the Christ,” he has been dogged by questions of whether that film is anti-Semitic in its portrait of Jewish complicity in the death of Christ. He also has been accused of reveling in cinematic violence – an action-movie star who chooses violent roles in front of the camera and violent stories to film as a director.
Gibson’s recent outburst after being arrested for drunken driving revealed an ugly streak that emboldened those who believe him to be an anti-Semite. Now, with “Apocalypto,” the filmmaker gives his detractors plenty of additional evidence to bolster their claim that he has an unseemly obsession with violence. What’s missing this time is a larger context for the graphic images to which “Apocalypto” viewers are subject.
No central theological debate, as in “The Passion of the Christ.” No ties to European ancestry and national pride, as in “Braveheart.” No, “Apocalypto” is a savage, repellent film that raises serious questions about Gibson’s interest in the worst kinds of human suffering.
The film begins with a group of jungle-dwellers, including Jaguar Paw (Rudy Youngblood), living happily as a group. They hunt for their dinner and play practical jokes on each other. Some of these are crude. When one warrior confides that he can’t impregnate his wife, the cruel advice of friends leads him to engage in behaviors that end in public embarrassment.
The tribe’s problems don’t appear to extend beyond these personal problems until word of impending trouble arrives comes from a group of uprooted natives. In the film’s strongest, eeriest sequence, one of the members of the group reveals that they have been chased from their homes by fierce mercenaries. After they continue on their journey, an insightful elder tribesman, sensing fear among the fleeing natives, lays out the film’s central message. “Fear is a sickness,” he tells Jaguar Paw. “It will crawl into your soul. Strike it from your heart.”
With the arrival of the marauding warriors, Jaguar Paw will have to confront his own fears and attempt to overcome them. He and his fellow tribesmen – minus his pregnant wife and child, whom Jaguar Paw hides in a deep pit during the attack on the group – will undergo a lengthy march to a ritual sacrifice, where their blood will be shed to appease a Mayan deity.
In a strange twist, Jaguar Paw finds himself not sacrificed by the Mayans, but on the run from them, determined to return to his wife and child before their lack of food and exposure to natural elements can doom them. Dialogue is minimal, other than Jaguar Paw’s taunts and verbal reminders to himself. As his confidence grows, he remembers the advice from earlier in the film. “I am Jaguar Paw,” he says. “This is my forest. I am not afraid.”
“Apocalypto” can be divided roughly into three sections. The first section portrays Jaguar Paw’s tribe and their harmonious existence within the jungle. The second section is the long death march of the surviving tribe members. The final section is an extended chase, with several men pursuing Jaguar Paw through the jungle, over a waterfall and on to Jaguar Paw’s destination.
Gibson claims to have made a film that shows how civilizations – in this case, the Mayans – destroy themselves from within. But the film’s message is not coherent. If anything, “Apocalypto” boils down to one man’s attempts to protect his family from captors, and then free himself in time to rescue his loved ones. On that much diminished level, the film is somewhat effective, but the outcome so strains credulity that it tests any good will viewers might have saved up for the finale. Moreover, the film is so soaked in scenes of stabbings, human organ removal and beheadings that it provokes disgust rather than any sort of thoughtful engagement.
Gibson’s interest in violence was apparent in the director’s Oscar-winning film “Braveheart,” then confirmed by “The Passion of the Christ.” But that film’s very subject matter – crucifixion – arguably lent itself to such explicit imagery, leading “The Passion” and its director to be championed by conservative commentators and many Christians who admired the film and its director’s uncompromising artistic vision.
“Apocalypto” is an uncompromising artistic vision of its own, but with no theological framework to guide it, it’s difficult to see how this gruesome film could be recommended for Christian audiences of any age. Although technically impressive – the cinematography is outstanding, and the unknown faces cast in leading roles are striking and memorable – “Apocalypto” is the worst kind of failure. It wraps a tepid tale of a woman and child in peril around a story of violent spectacle, recreated with passion and precision, but never illuminating or edifying. For a film full of intriguing visuals, it’s a remarkably ugly work.
Already planning to go twice again next week.
Wow - what did you like about it? Can you give us your thoughts?
I just saw it today - stunning. It is the movie of the year. It is non-politically correct because it destroys the leftist myth of the "Noble Savage" who is destroyed by the evil white Spanish Catholics - the truth is that the Mayans were just savages and the Spanish saved them from themselves and their evil witch doctors. The movie "Conquest of Paradise" shows the leftist view of western civilization destroying the Indian New World - Mel's movie shows the Spanish coming with a cross to destroy the hellish world that the Indians created for themselves and to bring them a better future. Excellent.
Very interesting. Thank you!
A friend of mine advised me to avoid all reviews before seeing it, and I'm glad I followed his advice. But if you're here, it's probably too late for that for you. LOL! I won't give any plot spoilers, but I was amazed by the story itself. Even apart from the big-picture "meaning" of the film, Gibson is just a good storyteller about these characters. And the cast of unknown actors were fantastic. There is complete conviction and believability in every character. Dean Semler did the cinematography -- he did the filming of all three "Mad Max" movies, and was the perfect choice for this film. Having the dialogue completely in Mayan was genius. Kudos to everyone involved with the costuming and special effects.
I saw the movie last night.
I believe that Mel was trying to show the audience that the native culture was terrible, bloody, savage, etc.
That the "invasion" of the Spanish Catholics was an improvement.
The audience applauded after this terribly bloody movie. That's California, I guess.
We had the same observations about the movie...
I kept wondering why it was so bloody; it was worse than "Saving Private Ryan." At the end I understood, and agree with you.
Fantastic film on so many levels. Too bad the reviewer is caught up in ugly ignorance.
This film is a masterpiece!
Don't worry. Pres. Reagan came from Hollywood's Golden Age. this Italian psychopath came during Commieweird's septic age. The movie was about 2-3 years ago.
HE would be very disappointed at the quality of movies today. The graves of actors, actresses, and directors of the Golden age have been turned into electrical generators, if you catch my drift.
I saw a deep Christian message throughout the movie, which this reviewer apparently missed. I can understand how the bloody violence in the story would distract away from the underlying Christian theme, though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.