Unexpected great survival movie

[Troop]

Apocalypto was entertaining regardless of how much of it was historically correct.

Yeah....just enjoy all the action; you guys are letting the truth get in the way of your fun.

 

[StretchNM]

I'm guilty. It was indeed an exciting movie and had me cheering for the main character and his babes in the pit.

 

[not2sharp]

I see many of you are somewhat confused. This movie, be it historically acurate or pure fantasy, was rubbish. You can't shoot a movie without a real story written by experienced storywriter. Just like aforementioned The Passion of the Christ is another example of a movie where storywriter weren't present. If you try you end up with something like these. :barf:

Do not judge what is not present in the movie, judge the movie

I thought that it was an example of excellent story telling; each to his own taste. Then again I judged the movie by its content, and not by any pre-manufactured bias for or against it's director. I found it engaging and entertaining; something that the rest of stale-formula-bent Hollywood would be well served to pick up on.

n2s

 

[not2sharp]

Well, but 300 had a lot of publicity making it clear that it wasn't exactly the way things were. Gibson made a point of stressing his authenticity.

It is far more authentic then anything Michael Moore has ever produced; has Archeology Magazine commented on those?

n2s

 

[not2sharp]

Not to argue so much so as to beleaguer the point, but:
while the Aztecs were indeed suspected of killing and sacrificing into the tens of thousands, make no mistake - so were the Mayans (estimates again, remember...could've been 3 thousand...we don;t know). My point is not that they did (because scientists have written that they use those numbers as an estimate based on the numbers found and the approximate period when those numbers were believed to have died, coupled with the civilization's lifespan, and also based on the period of the civilization when the Mayans were believed to be more heavily involved in human sacrifices) but rather that, while the body pits may have been exagerrated for effect, they could not hope to represent the vast numbers believed to have been killed. In other words, if someone wanted to, they could say Gibson was being kind to the Mayans by showing SO FEW in the pits.

A "short time" being relative here... relative to the age of the Mayan civilization. Yes, I do remember reading that slavery and sacrifice was not always such a gruesome makeup of their culture, but again a short time is relative. Like the fable of the man who asked God: "God, how long is a billion years?" God: ""Awhile". Man: "How much is a billion dollars?" God: "A penny". Man: "God? May I have a penny?" God: "In awhile"

The Mayans didn;t all live in one place, nor did they all sacrifice or practice slavery. There were divisions, factions, different language dialects, different jewelry, different terrains between the tribes, and on and on. To his credit, it appeared Gibson at least got that right in the movie, if nothing else.

Aztecs were a different story and a good point is to be made of you bringing that up. Point being: to any who might refute the idea of human sacrifices and slavery, another civilization no too very far from the Mayans who, again evidence shows, were at one time involved in the same things.

Not all the deaths portrayed in the movie stem from human sacrifice; the vast majority seem to have been related to desease; and, that is certainly something that did happen, along with the first arrival of European explorers. Why would we jump to the assumption that the ships seen in the movie represent a first contact? The same ships may have been landing all along the coast spreading an epidemic at every point.

n2s

 

[Ming65]

We all know that Mel was born stateside but grew up down under - so when he does something goofy he's an american but when he exercises his genius (like with Apocalypto) we'll claim him as a proud Aussie

I actually reckon he's been an over-rated actor. But as a director he's something else..

 

[StretchNM]

DELETED: Double Posting

 

[StretchNM]

We all know that Mel was born stateside but grew up down under - so when he does something goofy he's an american but when he exercises his genius (like with Apocalypto) we'll claim him as a proud Aussie

I actually reckon he's been an over-rated actor. But as a director he's something else..

That reminds me of some Aussie opinions of the late and great Steve Irwin (God rest his soul). In a forum, I was speaking to some Aussies about Stevo. One proclaimed that he was an "idiot". Another commented "Yeah, maybe he is maybe he aint, but he's OUR idiot!!" Hilarious. We watch every episode we can.

I never thought of Gibson as an over-rated actor. His performances in Conspiracy Theory (is that right?), We Were Soldiers, Man Without a Face, and Braveheart were excellent, if not purely outstanding. Even his comedic roles in Lethal Weapon series were pretty good.

 

[huugh]

I thought that it was an example of excellent story telling; each to his own taste. Then again I judged the movie by its content, and not by any pre-manufactured bias for or against it's director. I found it engaging and entertaining; [b/ something that the rest of stale-formula-bent Hollywood would be well served to pick up on. [/b]

n2s

I don't care whether it was directed by Gibson or not. Crap is crap no matter who made it But based on the two aforementioned movies, both directed by him, I think of him as a director that hasn't created a good movie yet. What bias are you mentioning?


I often remember a quote that what is presented today as feature-length movies wouldn't make it even to VHS 15 years ago.

 

[matthewb5016]

I don`t care how historically accurate it was its a movie meant for entertainment purposes . I loved it and bought the DVD !

Now on the other hand if it was labelled for educational purposes only i`d care about what half of those whining about it think .

 

[Ming65]

Also a ground breaking cinematographical milestone - the first film made in digital video that looks as good/better than film IMHO. Michael Mann has been using video for a while (Collateral, Miami Vice) and I think one of the later Star Wars were shot on video - but Apocalypto looks fantastic....then again the cinematoghrapher is an Aussie, so whadya expect..........