Wats wrong with Apocalypto?

Question

Mel gibsons new movie Apocalytpo seems to offend many ppl that have a mayan ancestory i mean they said in an intreview that mayans were human being not monsters.mayans did have self sacrifice and they did have there faces painted and so on..some might have not but they should be honored that some one is making a movie about them giving them some kind of fame would u get offended if some one made a movie of ur ancestors do u think that Mel gibson went over the limite?

if u dont like mel gibson plz dont answer i dont like him either

i dont liek him but i dont like when ppl take things too personally

Answer 1

This movie was great. Yes, the Mayans were brutal, like many other tribes/people were back in those days. Imagine a movie about how the Romans treated their slaves. This movie is hard to watch at moments, but these types of rituals did exist.

I personally have no ill feelings towards Mel Gibson. I don't know him and don't care too. But, damn, can he make a fricken movie.

Answer 2

I think you should learn how to spell.
I saw the movie yesterday. I don't think it was meticulously researched to be historically accurate, as Gibson is claiming. I do think he tried to show what happened at the end of the Classic period, when they were deforesting and there was drought and famine and war.
HOWEVER, Jaguar Paw's village was only 2 days walk from the city. They would have know the city was there, and the climate conditions would have been similar. I don't want to give away the ending, but what happens at the very end was hundreds of years after the end of the Classic period, not at the same time.
There was a message in there, about the decadence of the culture, the separation of the haves and have-nots, with the girl looking bored and yawning during the sacrifices, the fat royal kid laughing at the captives while down below the people were starving and sick.
The movie really tried to establish the small village as just regular people, with the whole mother-in-law thing and the men playing jokes on the other guy. They were not depicted as monsters at all, just regular people at a different level of civilization than us.
As far as Mel's politics and personal beliefs go, I didn't see the Passion because I'm not a Christian and I could care less about Jesus. If he hates Jews, well that's his problem that he needs to work through. Also if he's an alcoholic, then he needs help with that, not derision.

Answer 3

The fact that he got authentic people to play the parts in the movie should tell you that not everyone is offended. There are ALWAYS going to be people offended, especially given his recent drunken rants against Jewish people. Surely the people who are complaining haven't actually seen the movie- the main characters are presented in a POSITIVE light, and there is a clear distinction between good and evil. The main characters were also Mayan, so saying anything negative about the film in this respect seems ignorant. If I were them, I'd be more offended with the cliches towards the end than anything else. :)

Answer 4

No. He showed Jews in The Passion of Christ as blood thirsty Christ killers. Sure, Jesus really pissedoff the establishment, and there where those in the upper Jewish society that did want him dead- but even the Romans kinda wanted him gone, cause if one guy could cause an uproar and have people follow him, Rome might have been doomed... But Mel is a nutbar. Shot his mouth off this summer, and people got mad (when your drunk, u say the smartest things- so y'all get over it, alright? Bigger fish to fry... Like sending the youth off to die in an unjust war ((just put your country name here))), and now it seems he is blacklisted in Hollywood.

Now with this movie... Believe it or not folks, if you pay $10+ to see this film and are disgusted by it- tough. YOU forked over the money, and based upon Mel's last romp in the park- weellll, ya should have expected more gore for your buck. So if your going to get offened, head across the hall and watch Borat. Ya whinning maggots... But Oh well, what do I have to loose.....

Answer 5

Mayas lived in a violent society. They looked for ways to please their gods. What's wrong with portraying them as they were? Besides, the main story of the book was one of the sweetest stories. A man that will try anything to save his family, what's wrong with that? I don't think he portrayed the mayas as monsters. He portrayed them as flawed human beings. By the way, I loved the fact that the movie wasn't in English. It gave it authenticity and realism. Give Mel a break, after all, isn't he a person that makes mistakes like any one of us?

Answer 6

Maybe they're upset because it was made by Mel, who revealed himself to be a Jewhater, so who knows what other prejudices he harbors, I don't know but thought the movie would tank just because of the uproar Mel caused himself.

Answer 7

i don't think there is anything wrong with the movie i mean its just a movie. I don't know why they would be offended, its their culture they cant change that and if i were them i would be proud because everyone has different cultures from anyone else i mean would u like to be all alike?

Answer 8

well i haven't seen the movie, but the bad thing bout the MOVIE is tht u hav 2 read the subtitles to understand the movie and it was #1 during the weekend i came out ($14.2 mill!) and it seems like it was pretty bad if it was really tht bad and it rpobably was then he probably did go over the limit...

Answer 9

It's a free country, you can make any movie you want, you can say anything you want. People take things too personally. I can't hate him, I don't know him.

Answer 10

what isn't wrong with Apocalypto? I hate mel gibson ever since he made those remarks about Jews