Mel Gibson's Apocalypto

What did I think of this kino Sup Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=U5pBZKj1VnA
youtu.be/U5pBZKj1VnA
youtube.com/watch?v=LT9YKjn67Og
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

It was pretty good. People criticised the portrayal of the mayans but I personally think mel did nothing wrong.

The part where the panther rips the dude's face off is one of the most metal things I've ever seen.

Probably in my top 10 all time. Since watching it I've acquired a taste for historical high budget movies with native language spoken but there aren't any other around. For that reason alone it's great.

>TFW Based Mel used an actual Jaguar for those scenes

It's fucking great

Probably about a 7/10. Pretty good movie.

What I really liked about it was how uncompromising it was in its depiction of natives. You rarely if ever see movies of this scale, which really adds to its charm

>ywn be in some god forsaken amazonian jungle with never-before-acted natives as Mel puts a hand on your shoulder and asks you to run away from the jaguar as he gets the camera for the sake of ART

they were literal mayans, doing literal mayan things. Anyone that said otherwise is a retard, all that stuff was historically accurate, simply condensed.

The movie was kino. Pure and simple.

Absolutely based

Uncompromising? It looked to me like he just made them all out to be bloodthirsty savages. I assume Mayans did lots of other stuff aside from enslaving and killing each other. I think it's a good movie, but there's no way it's an uncompromising portrayal.

>how uncompromising it was in its depiction of natives
Yes, I know it's not completely historically accurate, showing a blend of the classical maya and the late era ones, but this vibe the movie gives off really makes it feel like you're back in time obeserving actual history. The way it's purposefully not easy to relate to this foreign makes it that much better.

>I assume Mayans did lots of other stuff aside from enslaving and killing each other

Yeah they were into astronomy.

we don't deserve Mel.

They did all that stuff, it was a bad time for them, so they were doing stuff for their gods m8. This was clearly expressed by the fact disease was ravaging the countryside. There are Mayans still alive - almost 2mil of them. That shit really happened.

I mean...if you were part of one of the tribes that got captured and brought in as a sacrifice I think the experience wouldn't be much different. You gotta remember we're watching it from the pov of an outsider here. Plus you did get to see the city and the market and ornate clothes they wore so you did get a feel for the civilization. They also made a point to show the mayans knowledge of the movements of the heavens in the eclipse scene which I liked.

I'm not saying it didn't happen. I'm just saying they did lots of other stuff that wasn't related to murdering each other that isn't really shown.

Yeah I can't imagine why Mel didn't take out a half hour to show them shitting in the woods and building a ziggurat.

Yes, but how would any of that fit into the movie?

You can say this about every movie ever made. TV needs flags so we can see if people are Australian or not.

that qoute is accurate

I just love when the natives are shown as aggressive and actually dangerous, same with The Revenant.

>all wars
They didn't provoke the Punic Wars that's for sure

As far as you know.

It was wasted potential. Mel turned a possible epic into Mayan Rambo. He also went full retard.
youtube.com/watch?v=U5pBZKj1VnA
6/10 Flick

>that stuff was historically accurate, simply condensed.
Except it wasn't, for starters the movie thinks that the Maya Indians are the same as the Aztec.

youtu.be/U5pBZKj1VnA

>vibe the movie gives off really makes it feel like you're back in time obeserving actual history
this
for me this is more important actually than historical accuracy; if the film makes you feel youre actually in the past or not. very very few manage to achieve it, off the top of my head i can only think of perfume story of a murderer, master and commander, some scenes in kingdom of heaven and thats about it

Haha beat you by 3 seconds.

>yes yes Romans, you NEED Sicily and the Mediterranean eh eh eh

If this movie had a pussy I'd fuck it with my dick if you know what I mean

Just be glad he didn't portray the Aztecs

Those fuckers were Imperial Japan tier

*rubs hands*

Exactly! Now you're getting it_

>that video
end yourself

Nice argument.

But user, the movie starts out by showing you what normal life was like - they were hunter-gatherers mostly, supplanted with agriculture. There's scenes of young courtship and playful banter also. It looks pretty realistic imo, it's just that the movie focuses on the tribal warfare and enslavement aspect, which was actually predominant. Amazonian societies still around today continue to have blood feuds and intrr-village raids. People who know nothing about tribal native societies shouldn't jump to virtue signal by browbeating anyone who suggests they were and continue to be warlike people

>all that stuff was historically accurate,
It really wasn't. Read any criticism of the movie from a Mayanist to figure out why; no academics consider it an accurate movie. Mel was just able to get away with a lot of shit because most people don't know or care about Mesoamerican history. If he would have made a movie with a similar level of accuracy set in a western environment, people would have given him lots of shit about it (see Braveheart for sort of an example).

It's a good movie, but it gets pretty much everything about Mayan history wrong. I actually thought it was supposed to be about the Aztecs for the longest time until I recently rewatched it.

>nice argument
Okay then. That video has many flaws. The movie obviously knows it's placed in the 1500s, not in classic era, he's making a big deal out of it just so he can make a rant but he's just playing stupid.

The late era mayans used the same sacrifical rituals as the aztec, such as the heart removal, so you wouldn't have seen much difference there. The settlement is a bit too large but it could conceivably have been set in one of the remaining larger classical maya settlments which would have had a larger pyramid. If not it's an acceptable compromise since you want to show things from the maya in different eras in the same movie, just as how kingdom of heaven features a mashup of different helmets and armor from all the crusades.

The main character's tribe are not mayan but could be a village living at the edges of the empire so their language would be similar or the same. Again he insists on something being something it probably isn't , just so he can get a rant in.

The way he complains about the disease spreading before they've even encountered the conquistadors, when in reality this is exactly what happened in most cases since the disases spread ahead of them showing up physically to all places.

Better?

Hey fuck you dude. When I watch movies I demand nothing but historical accuracy. Shit better be exactly like it would be in real life. I don't fuck around.

Mel doesn't have a good track record of being historically accurate.
How can disease travel ahead of Europeans? Explain or you're making shit up.

>being a fucking retard

>he's making a big deal out of it just so he can make a rant but he's just playing stupid.
But it is a big deal, as he mentioned it's 600 years between the classic Maya and the Conqisadors. You should not accept this, the same way that you shouldn't accept a movie where Charlemagne goes to war with the Polish commonwealth.
>The late era mayans used the same sacrifical rituals as the aztec,
Yes but the movie doesn't know if it's set during that period or not.
>The main character's tribe are not mayan but could be a village living at the edges of the empire so their language would be similar or the same
Then they are Mayan if they speak a similar language
>The way he complains about the disease spreading before they've even encountered the conquistadors, when in reality this is exactly what happened in most cases since the disases spread ahead of them showing up physically to all places.
No it's not better because we know for damn sure that smallpox did not exist in the new world until Europe arrived
> Better?
No

Excellent contribution and demonstration of your intellect.

>How can disease travel ahead of Europeans?
Not the guy you're asking, but through trade networks. That's how European diseases spread to most of the New World. After Columbus's initial contacts, diseases spread rapidly through trade routes, and by the time Europeans started moving to other areas, diseases had already affected them pretty heavily. Historically, this was actually documented in the Yucatan, and it's not an issue.

As many problems as the movie has historically, that's not one of them. Diseases spread faster than people do.

What trade routes? And again the time line doesn't add up here, if it's set during the classic period then Columbus wasn't even born yet. If it's set during the exploration era then the Maya shouldn't be living the way they do

>Conquistadors arrive somewhere else
>People somewhere else get diseased
>Disease spreads to ball eater's village's surroundings
>Ball-eater encounters other conquistadors

Mel made it seem that Europeans only showed up at the end of the film, so it's confusing and ambiguous. Disease would have had to magically fly ahead of the ships over ocean to be there. I like Mel and the subject he chooses, but hate how lazy he is when it comes to filmmaking. Same with Clin Eastwood sometimes.

Yes. This is the only explanation, but if the city Mayans had contact with Europeans then how come the bad guy was just as surprised to see the conquistadors as the MC was at the end? Mel just doesn't give a shit I think. Like how a guy picks up a 100lb torso as a shield to charge the Japanese with a 20lb BAR one handed.

>But it is a big deal, as he mentioned it's 600 years between the classic Maya and the Conqisadors
Right, but why does he insist on feigning ignorance of it being set in the post classic period? He sees some failing crops and he instantly assumes it's the maya collapse, he sees a pyramid and he instantly assumes it's a classical period, instead of just a larger settlement in the post classic period. You may as well assume that it's the post classic period since, y'know there's europeans and smallpox and they're using heart removal rituals.

>Mel made it seem that Europeans only showed up at the end of the film,
no, that doesn't have to be the case. The smallpox can just as easily be a signal that the europeans are close and it's a buildup to the end.

The point is, why couldn't Mel just be clear about it instead of being confusing? Most audiences have like zero knowledge on the subject.

It was pretty good. I especially liked this scene
youtube.com/watch?v=LT9YKjn67Og

>how come the bad guy was just as surprised to see the conquistadors as the MC was at the end
because the europeans had not yet entered that city, but mayans travelling between that city and the places the europeans had already been to would have spread the disease.

Extremely underrated

Because historical records tells us how they lived during the classic and after the classical. When the Spanish showed up that's long after the classical

Also the Aztec didn't exist during the classic period.

>What trade routes?
Do you know anything about precolumbian North America? Trade routes covered the whole continent. Hell, the first encounter between European explorers and Mayans happened when a Spanish ship ran into a Mayan boat on its way to trading with Caribbean Islands.

>And again the time line doesn't add up here,
Stop taking that video's joke about time travelling seriously. Since Spaniards show up at the end, it's obviously supposed to be set sometime in the 16th century. Yes, that means a lot of the architecture and social structure is anachronistic, and it was a big mistake on Mel's part. I'm not arguing that, again, I think the movie fucked a lot of things up. But having smallpox exist in 16th Yucatan is not a mistake, because it actually happened. And yes, it showed up before the Europeans did, because the Mayans were trading with groups that had been exposed to it beforehand (and in 1511, Spaniards themselves who survived a shipwreck).

The movie has enough problems without needing to focus on something that Mel actually got right. If you want to criticize it historically, focus on the actual mistakes.

>Most audiences have like zero knowledge on the subject.
Yeah, so when the europeans show up they woudln't think it strange since most people only know about the maya as the europeans arriv,e they don't know the difference between classic and post classic. So they wouldn't be confused.
A history guy watching it maybe would be confused if he assumed it was the maya collapse, but after seeing the smallpox and the heart removal they shouldn't be so sure it's the classic period, and this should be confirmed when they see the europeans.
I really don't think it's a big deal, but I suppose it would have been "better" if he had made it clear so some history buffs wouldn't be confused.

>Make a religious porn movie that only rednecks and white trash like
>Get drunk and when a cop pulls you over you express your love for sand niggers
>Beg your Jewish overlords for forgiveness and apologize multiple times, but they show no mercy and kill your career
>Become an even bigger alcoholic in your depression
>Your wife cucks you for a nigger
>You get caught on tape crying about how upset you are that your wife is cucking you for a nigger
>Now trying to appease his masters by making an anti-war movie glamorizing a soldier who refused to kill the enemy, starring a Jewish actor

Is there a bigger cuck in Hollywood than Mel Gibson?

yeah, so if he assumes it's classical at first, and then he sees things depicted later which are post classic in nature, maybe he sould get a bit unsure of whether it's the classic or post classic instead of insisting on that it's the classic.

>Mel made it seem that Europeans only showed up at the end of the film
Do you think that there was only one instance of European contact, and that when Columbus landed in the Bahamas in 1492, everyone knew about the Spanish?

>Australians

>seriously. Since Spaniards show up at the end, it's obviously supposed to be set sometime in the 16th century.
But the architecture and way of life does not reflect this.
>The movie has enough problems without needing to focus on something that Mel actually got right. If you want to criticize it historically, focus on the actual mistakes.
I am, you're the one trying to brush them aside while defining the movie.

Or maybe the film writers should make things historical accurate

But what can we expect from the man who made a movie where the English burned down a church full of civilians during the American Revolution.

It's one of my favorite movies, Mel is pretty autistic though

>made me want more historical periods pieces
>made me want more movies set around the Mayan/Aztec/Incan empires
>made me want to rewatch The Mission
>made me realize that Mel Gibson is an excellent director

Okay but Mel was still being inconsistent in storytelling. So why not show more people dead from small pox? Why were they so surprised to see the ships?
It's like that frogpost.
>not what but WHEN?

Really nice pacing, he did a good job maintaining the level of continuous tension for basically 70% of the movie. Still, the best stuff came before it turned into a chase movie. The villagers were all really well developed in the first act and it was sad to see most of them die. The pyramid sacrifice/eclipse scene was kino and probably the high point of the film.

As far as flaws, there's a little bit of wonky continuity editing especially in the panther scene
>shot of Jaguar Paw running with panther like 10ft behind him
>shot from hunters' pov of Jaguar Paw running with panther nowhere in sight
>hunter goes after Jaguar Paw and panther is suddenly right there again
On top of the lack of realism that a dude could outrun a panther in a straight line like that for as long as he did, it was just made very obvious what was coming with the panther attacking the Mayan. They didn't need to stretch it out as long as they did, especially when the continuity of the panther's position in relation to Jaguar Paw was constantly broken to give him more ground, which ruined the suspense of it. Also when the panther mauls the guy to death you see it ripping his face off, but then you see the body afterward and his face looks fine.

One gripe is that it was weird that the Mayan general ended up being the final boss when there was a lot more investment in the conflict between Jaguar Paw and the crazy guy who killed his father. I wasn't expecting them to fight when they did, and it was pretty anticlimactic.

There were diseases and famines that existed in the Americas prior to European arrival user.

No it didn't dude this entire movie is fucking bullshit. Native people were kind caring nature loving people who had never experienced sickness or violence until the white world ruiners showed up.

why do you bother writing this inaccurate post when his point has already been adressed by others in this thread. Fuck.

But not smallpox
Did you miss the point that hard on purpose?

>But the architecture and way of life does not reflect this.
Yes, that's the mistake. Everything about the film besides the architectures indicates that it's supposed to be set around the time of contact. The architecture is the mistake, not time traveling Spaniards. I'm genuinely confused as to why you're not understanding this; I'm not brushing anything aside, I'm just describing to you what the actual mistake is. For example, say a movie is made about Thermopylae and the Spartans are shown wearing Roman armor and weapons; would you complain about what Romans are doing at Thermopylae, or would you just accept that the director fucked up some aesthetic details?

Again, the historical record shows smallpox arriving in the Yucatan before the Spanish did. Architectural fuckups in the movie don't change that.

>Why were they so surprised to see the ships?
Because they hadn't landed there before. What's hard to understand about that. It's not like the Spanish landed everywhere in 1492; the Yucatan peninsula actually has one of the messiest and most complicated histories of contact in the Americas. They were surprised because they hadn't seen Spanish ships before. Direct contact with the Spanish wasn't necessary for disease to spread.

>The Mission
haven't seen this one, thx user

Dude we know for a fact that people didn't live in cities like that during the contact period, so that's a huge error right there.
>I'm genuinely confused as to why you're not understanding this;
Then imagine my confusion over the fact that you won't accept that the movie doesn't know what time period it's set in
>would you complain about what Romans are doing at Thermopylae, or would you just accept that the director fucked up some aesthetic details?
I would complain because that's a huge error right there
>Again, the historical record shows smallpox arriving in the Yucatan before the Spanish did. Architectural fuckups in the movie don't change that.
Not by 600 years

>would you complain about what Romans are doing at Thermopylae, or would you just accept that the director fucked up some aesthetic details?
Not him, but kek. I don't understand people insisting on feigning ignorance on it either.
>Architecture
I'm genuinely curious what architecture and way of life shown is out of place? Could there not have been one of the larger cities and one of its pyramids still maintained in the last days of the empire that we were seeing? The pyramids still exist for us to see today after all. And what about the way of life is inaccurate if we assume (unlike the video) that the tribe in the intro of the movie are not part of the mayans but rather live on the outskirts of their territories.

Illustration of that famous quote about true talent and skill being frustrated at every turn by a confederacy of dunces.

Because people didn't live in cities like that during the contact period

And if the tribal people aren't Maya then why do the speak the same language

the fucking madman

I just wish there were more films and film makers with the ambition Mel has

>that's a huge error right there.
Yes, it is. That's exactly what I'm saying. You're going along with History Buff's video and complaining about time traveling Spaniards. Again, the movie itself makes it completely obvious that it's supposed to be set in the 16th century, and I can't believe your autism is making me defend this piece of shit.

To make my point clear: Mel fucked up some aesthetic details, but that doesn't change when the movie is supposed to be set. It's basically the same thing is when he made William Wallace anachronistically wear a kilt. Movies do things like this all the time, and it's worth pointing it out, but if you're going to do that, complain about the right fucking thing. That is, the mistake itself (inaccurate architecture), and not some ridiculous situation that you can argue as a result of the mistake (Spaniards time traveling to the Classic period).

The problem people had with this movie is that it was a more accurate depiction of the Aztecs, not the Mayans.

>Because people didn't live in cities like that during the contact period
Were really ALL cities abandoned at that point? What about something like pic related

>And if the tribal people aren't Maya then why do the speak the same language
Maybe because they have had contact with mayans from time to time and maybe only speak a dialect or essentially the same way since they're only a generation or two removed from being in contact with the mayans.

Not him. But the point of HB's video isn't that Spaniards time traveled. It's that he hates Mel because Mel doesn't give a shit about historical accuracy and only cares about telling his stories. It's the same way /k/ommandoes get triggered by the Walking Dead, or Sup Forums in general about "hacking" in media. I think it's a valid gripe.

I understand that. The point I'm making is that it's stupid to frame complains about accuracy in a nonsensical way. Yes, it's annoying that Mel didn't give a shit about accuracy, and it's a valid complaint to have. But the right way to bring the complaint up is to address the actual mistake, not go on a stupid tirade about time travel. We all know what Mel meant, and we know how he fucked it up, so talk about that, because it's better than making yourself look clueless. The same goes for some of the complaints (like smallpox showing up before contact with the Mayans) aren't actually mistakes.

If you want people to take your complaints seriously, make serious complaints. Don't throw out ridiculous arguments about the mistakes and make points that show you know less about history than Mel Gibson.

I love where this was filmes.

>It looked to me like he just made them all out to be bloodthirsty savages

Because they were.

good but forgetable

>small pox was a thing before the spanish arrived
yea this movie might have been good visually and exciting but it was laughable in many parts

>complains that the movie portrays natives as too savage
>people point out that this stuff was accurate
>"OH YEAH WELL FUCK YOU WHO SAID THINGS NEED TO BE ACCURATE?? I CAN'T BELIEVE THEY DIDN'T MAKE A MOVIE THAT JUST PROPAGATED A FORCED MEME LIKE THE NOBLE PEACE-LOVING HIPPIE NATIVE!!! MY FEELINGS"

I don't think you understand what that term means.

>he just made them all out to be bloodthirsty savages
>amazing awe inspiring cities combined with extensive knowledge of the heavens and brutal sacrifices done by capturing slaves and by sacrificing their own
sounds pretty accurate to me

When I rented the movie the captions weren't automatically turned on. Ended up watching the whole thing with out realizing that you were supposed to know what they were saying. Still was able to follow the story, so pretty great film in any case.

bait

But you don't seem to understand that the way of life shown in the movie does not reflect the way of life that the Maya had during the contact period.
>but that doesn't change when the movie is supposed to be set.
Oh but it does, the same way that a movie set during the crusades can't have a subplot about a scientific being in trouble with the church because of his theory of evolution.
Not all but a majority and certainly the ones seen in the movie

and yet the one in the image is said to be the capital and is comparable to the one shown in the movie so...?

Zaculeu didn't have the pyramids shown in the movie

But the image clearly shows a big pyramid. So then the idea that a city with a big pyramid where sacrifices happen in the post classical period isn't that far fetched?

The amount of butthurt in the comments is just soo, soo good. hmmmmmm

>All big pyramids are the same

what?