Apocalypto

Mel Gibson. All you need to know about who made the film.

Actually, I object to certain advertising campaigns that have titled this film "Mel Gibson's Apocalypto" because, to be honest, the hype surrounding this movie is too much Gibson-centered rather than story-centered. That includes all the reviews that are for or against. It's impossible to tell whether this is a good or bad movie RIGHT NOW, because of the anti-Jewish comments earlier this year during his arrest, the consequential fight for him even to distribute this movie, AND add to that his own press trying to make this film some sort of allegory about the current war in Iraq.

That last bit further outrages me. Only because I firmly believe that the art should be graded on the art itself, and to have it "mean" something supposedly "relevant" to current events is pure crap. Maybe he's likening it to Arthur Miller's The Crucible, the play about the Salem Witch Trials which was supposed to have mirrored the contemporary event of the McCarthy Reviews.

But even then, the difference is that the Crucible is a damfine play. And this is a movie that is like a date with a person who is sooo good looking and you've wanted to go out with them for a long time, and even during the date you think they're great, and only when you drop them off and head back home you suddenly realise that they really weren't worth the money that you spent on the date.

A rather long sentence, but true.

Experience in the movie, from both my wife and I: truly, while you are watching the movie you are caught up in the rush of the movement. You are truly rooting for Jaguar Paw to get away from these vile villains and get back to his pregnant wife and young child, who are in danger of drowning in a well. However, after the adrenalin rush wore off, the nagging concerns and the doubts about the movie come to the fore, and we were left with a slight disappointment that this thing could have been better.

Maybe it goes back to what you expect: if you haven't seen this movie yet, take what I read in one review and simply be prepared for Rambo in Mayan Country. If that's all you want, then you'll be fine. However, ALL of the pre-commentaries set us up for a "glimpse of the dwindling glory of the once-proud Mayan Civilization," and thus, it has sadly disappointed us on the delivery. These are stock characters and most of the action takes place in the jungle and only about 1/2 hour is actually dedicated to the Mayan city and even then I wonder how truly accurate Gibson's depiction was. For example, their cities were a lot cleaner, they had better methods of disposing decomposing bodies, and yes, while they did engage in ritual sacrifice, to the extent that it was depicted in this movie I have my doubts.

Little insert here: The ONLY connection I saw between this movie and the supposed relevance to our time is this - the little fat tub of lard pre-pubescent child who was so numbed to the priest digging beating hearts out of people and waving the blood all over the stone that the boy was simply yawning and picking his nose. Kinda like our overweight balls of fat and their hip-hop video gore/bloodshed, etc.

But using this as a symbol for Iraq? I don't think so. Heck, I'm no fan of the war, guaranteed, but let's be fair in our artistic comparisons. As stated previously, that hype simply detracts from the movie.

Best scene of the movie, in all honesty, is this: Jaguar Paw's friend has a nagging mother-in-law who calls him worhtless because he can't impregnate his wife. This leads to some ludicrous frivolity in the beginning of the film with red paste catching genitals on fire, which is supposed to "humanize" the savages but (let's be honest) simply paints them as savages. OK, but then when the villagers are captured by the comically bad "cityfolk" and they are led to the town . . . the nag is so old and so useless that she can't even be sold as a slave. The scene shows JP's friend being led away to be slaughtered, and he looks across the street and catches the eye of the old woman, and without any dialogue - you know . . . you know the connection between them. At that moment, they feel respect, love, pity for each other. He's going off to die, and she's left to die of starvation in the streets. And that, my friends, was a part of the story that was well told.

All in all, there's plenty in this movie to debate - the interpretation of the Mayan culture, what it means to be "civilized" etc. and I suppose that this is this season's movie to debate. So let it be. Time will tell if the film is worthy of being called "good." Anything that anybody says right now is simply an emotional reaction to the film or the hype or a mixture of both.

As far as my personal emotive response - let me "spoil" the final scene, where JP runs out onto the beach with the last two baddies after him, and they all stop.

Because,

there they are,

the Spaniard.

And for those of us who know our history, that was a big, "Oh, crap. Here come the REAL bad guys!"

But then, after the obnoxious quote at the beginning of the movie and what we have seen for the past two hours, the feeling that we're left with is that the Mayans, on some level DESERVED to be massacred by the Spanish.

Which simply PO's me on so many levels that I have to go simmer down.

TTFN

VG