Maya scorn Apocalypto
MEL MEL MEL (Gibson, that is) His Movie, His Motives. And Indians.With more than half the population of Guatemala descendants of the Mayan people, it is not hard to see why they are up in arms over the movie Apocalypto that promotes the lies that were originally made to mask the wholesale murder of a race of Natives along with the theft of the prized gold. Surly.
So now Mel is making the “Big Bucks” with this film. The Maya also believe that Mel has sent them back many years as a culture since they have been struggling since the conquest. They also feel the movie is derogatory and demeaning to say the very least. And, of course, it promotes many lies about their culture and history.
I think people of Mayan descent are upset about this film because of it's one dimensional and hyper-focussed plot. It's not often that an epic about Mayans is thrust before the millions...so I guess scope and breadth of content means more than the film-makers might have considered.
ReplyDeleteMaybe Carole Levine can tell us more about "Colorado writer Carlos Guevara."
ReplyDeleteGuevara wrote, "The last thing the US or any other nation would want is for ALL the Natives of the America's to unite or even make recognition of the fact all us Skins are related." This isn't an assertion that all Natives are united or should unite. It's an assertion that the world's nations wouldn't like it if they did unite.
People can form groups to act in unison without giving up their individual cultures or languages. AIM is such a group. So are mainstream organizations such as the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) and the National Indian Gaming Association (NIGA).
ReplyDeleteIs descent the main qualifier of objectivity? Sorry for the silly question. What is the value of the contributions of the culturally immersed to rational thought and perspective? And, how can balance ever be achieved without these intrinsic points of view? Mel Gibson is immersed in fiction to a degree unfamiliar to normal people. His conceptions of this great civilization of the past is tainted by his hollywoodness. Should his fabrication be part of the discussion? Yes. It is, however outrageous, a point of view. Reason and objectivity will, in the long run, rightly deposit his ideas into the landfill of ignorance.
ReplyDeleteIt's a film, a story, a fairytale, not a historically accurate documentary by Richard Attenborough. If you want accuracy watch the history channel or a documentary on the culture. Apocalypto is a Hollywood movie. Where is the problem? If everything starts having to be accurate to every minor historical detail in movies why aren't people freaking out over Transformers (I don't remember any news reports from a few years ago of giant Robots attacking the Hoover Dam!) or Pirates of the Caribbean - because I certainly don't remember any historical details about the adventures of a Pirate called Jack Sparrow!? What's this? Artistic licence? Creativity?! AN IMAGINATION!!? We can't be having any of that now! What is Hollywood thinking using something so damnable as creativity to create an entertaining movie!? Next we should demand to know why Die Hard was not based on a true story.
ReplyDeleteRe "It's a film, a story, a fairytale, not a historically accurate documentary": Ho-hum...Anonymous. I've literally addressed this complaint dozens of times. See Educating Russ About Historical Accuracy, Why People Believe Movies, and Only Three "Licenses" Allowed? for some of my responses.
ReplyDeleteFeel free to respond to some of the obvious flaws in your argument. For instance, why do creators of historical dramas strive for authenticity if it's just a movie and it doesn't matter? Good luck with your answer...you'll need it.