A Humanitarian's Review Of Mel's Latest Flick - 'Apocalypto'

[Bobbieo]

‘Mad Mel And the Maya’

http://nativeunity.blogspot.com

[Peace Patriot]

1. It's a good viewpoint to read, re this film--the modern day indigenous Maya

viewpoint. But it is mainly a criticism of the casting--all non-Maya (north American Indians instead). This isn't really all that fair, as a criticism. Actors are actors. They should be judged by how well they PORTRAY the characters and story they are asked to portray, not what they look like, or what their DNA says. If there is systematic bigotry in a theatrical industry or profession, that of course should be criticized and changed; but to judge a production as racist mainly by the choice of actors is...out of focus, off center. For instance, black actors have played Shakespearean characters who are not black. (Any Shakespearean character whom the writer intended as a black character is identified as such. Most of his characters are English/Northern; some are Italian.) Does this invalidate the black actor's performance? It surely does not. Does it invalidate the producer's or director's work? No. Similarly, white actors have played Shakespeare's greatest black character, Othello. The color of the actor's skin has nothing to do with the validity of his performance. IF the use of a white actor in "Othello" is due to racism in the SYSTEM, then of course this must be remedied. But that has nothing to do with the artistry, or the "message," of a production.

The article is not informative on the content of the film--except to say that Mel Gibson is into bloody scenes. It does have an interesting comment on "The Passion of Christ":

"Culture doesn't sell tickets. Violence does. Gibson has made what he calls 'a chase movie' ("Apocalypto.") As we saw his Scot disemboweled and his Jesus battered into bloody meat, we will now see a young Maya running through the jungle to escape having his still beating heart torn from his chest. The social philosophy of Jesus found no place in Gibson's Passion of the Christ, and the glory of Maya culture cannot be featured in a 'chase movie. 'Blood! More blood!' Gibson shouted during the filming."

That is the best criticism of "Passion" that I've seen. It FAILS to convey what Jesus was all about. (I also think that Gibson entirely missed the importance of the earliest Christians--the Gnostics--and their viewpoint on the crucifixion, which was that Jesus was a transformed person, by the time of the crucifixion, and did not suffer it the way a non-transformed person would. The Church has tried to obscure this earliest Christian belief--brutally and by burning the earliest gospels. But Gibson is not a deep thinker, to say the least, and probably isn't even aware of this alternative--and at one time mainstream--view.)

I also found "Braveheart" to be manipulatively bloody. It relied on the cheapest trick in the Hollywood book, for justifying blood and gore--the righteous revenger, out to slay the rapist. I felt that it was something of an insult to the "brave hearts" of Scotland.

And it appears that Gibson may have insulted the Mayans as well. Can't really tell from this review. (I haven't read any others yet.) The reviewer is upset that "the glory of Maya culture" is not depicted, or is drowned in Gibson's love of bloodshed. It seems quite a valid point--which I can't judge without seeing the film. The Mayans were quite amazing people--very advanced in astronomy and other highly sophisticated subjects--and, as for human sacrifice, do we as a culture not commit human sacrifice every day, with every US bullet or bomb that shatters an innocent Iraqi body? (I have an anthropologist friend who once joked that we should "bring back human sacrifice, and end war." His point was that we humans seem to need bloodshed, so why not do it ritually, on a limited basis, instead of leveling cities and slaughtering millions?)

One other point the review makes is that Gibson intended the film as a comment on the Iraq War. The reviewer doesn't believe him. But I think it's a possibility. I don't write off Gibson entirely as a racist, or as mad. I think he is struggling with a very bad personal history (and with alcoholism)--but at least he's struggling. Too much fame, too much money, and a tortured and troubled soul. His good side--the real Mel Gibson--is trying to do something with it all. I won't slander his intentions, before I've read more, and seen the film.

As Gibson didn't seem to understand, in the "Passion," all is redeemable, even for--or especially for--the troubled.