According to the International Herald Tribune, Gibson and his son Edward met and dined with tourism spokesman and singer Ruben Blades recently.
At the same time, the paper reports that Panamanian filmmaker Jose Severino was in negotiations with Gibson to produce a movie about Spanish explorer Vasco Nunez de Balboa, the first European to see the Pacific Ocean from its eastern shore.
10 comments:
Writerfella here --
Gibson may do WHAT again? Would a projected film precis become another APOCALYPTO? Not likely, given the US box office for the first film. No one uses a film's initial failure as the basis for any next film. If one did, one might as well hang it up and do MAD MAX IV...
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
Produce another film featuring Mesoamerican Indians, obviously.
I didn't claim the proposed movie would be an artistic or financial success or failure. I merely noted that he's talking about doing it again.
Writerfella here --
Mel Gibson as easily could do a film about the construction of the Panama Canal and still some people would see it as yet another version of APOCALYPTO. Will James Cameron do BRITANNIC? Tune in tomorrow!
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
And other people, like me, would judge the film on its merits. As I've done with Apocalypto.
Writerfella here --
You've done no such thing, Rob, simply because you relied totally on the words and judgments of others while committing NONE of your own time or efforts on which to found your opinions. That qualifies you for Chapter 11 intellectual bankruptcy...
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
Wrong again, Russ. When the film came out, I spent a lot of time and effort reading up on the Maya so I could judge it fairly. I spent much more time and effort than you did, I'll bet.
I judged the film on its merits as described by numerous critics and historical experts. If I had seen the film myself, I would've relied on the same critics and historical experts, just as I do with the films I do see. Why? For starters, because my opinion is only one opinion. If five or 10 or 20 people agree on something, their opinions are worth considering.
More important, because in matters of historical accuracy, I don't claim to be an expert--unlike you. I don't tout my opinions and "research" and fantasies as evidence that Gibson has produced an accurate movie. Instead, I go with the people who have actually studied the Maya. I think about their claims, weigh them, and judge them--again, unlike you.
There's never been a case where the critics of a Native movie got it wrong and I had to contradict them after seeing the movie. Why? Again, because I rely on a wide range of critics and evaluate their opinions carefully. Of course, it doesn't take a PhD to see a movie is full of stereotypes, though apparently it's a tough task for you. Any halfway decent critic could see Apocalypto's flaws and every halfway decent critic reported them.
In short, this is why I've criticized Apocalypto while you've swallowed its lies uncritically. When you've criticized as many stereotypical Native works as I have, then you can tell us about your critical acumen. Until then, I suggest you don't bother. You only look silly trying to pass off your fawning support of Gibson as "independent thinking."
Writerfella here --
But, Rob, you yourself made quite a case for not bothering to see the film at all. It's recorded as such in your own blogs. Are you now claiming to have seen the film in denial of your own original statements? writerfella then must say, Rob, you are a liar...
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
No, I still haven't seen Apocalypto. I don't go to any films that are ultra-violent because 1) I don't like blood and gore, and 2) the blood and gore are almost always gratuitous. As in Apocalypto's case.
In other cases, I don't have time to see a Native film when it first comes out. Should I avoid reporting on a film like this and leave my readers wanting? No, I don't think so.
Writerfella here --
Ooh, then that means you didn't see GOODFELLAS, any of THE GODFATHER TRILOGY, RESERVOIR DOGS or anything Tarantinoesque in origin nor anything by Robert Rodriguez or even Guillermo del Toro (PAN'S LABYRINTH). And that you avoided PASSION OF THE CHRIST and WINDTALKERS and FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS and LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA, and that you never saw SIN CITY or THE DEPARTED. And you certainly never will see 300, which just this weekend became the blockbuster breakout of 2007 with over a $70 million domestic boxoffice Great! That means any of us can tell you how such films end and you won't hold it against us!
Okay -- the Spartans all died...
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
You forgot Saving Private Ryan. ;-)
You're almost correct. My pal Victor forced me to watch Tarantino's Kill Bill Vol. 1.
Luckily, there are so many good movies to see that I'll never run out of viewing material. My Netflix queue is growing rather than shrinking.
I doubt the blood and gore was gratuitous in movies such as Goodfellas, The Godfather trilogy, or Clint Eastwood's latest movies. I believe the critics when they say these films are superior.
By the way, the conscientious critic doesn't reveal a film's ending whether he's seen it or not.
Go to websites such as
http://www.slate.com/id/2161450/?nav=navoa
http://dcboards.warnerbros.com/web/thread.jspa?threadID=2000108532
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/Stopmovie300
to read about the racist subtext of 300.
I think it's amusing that everyone's talking about 300's Spartans fighting for freedom. People are thinking of Athens, obviously, not Sparta. Ruled by two hereditary kings, Sparta was more of a totalitarian state than a democracy. The 300 were fighting to serve one master rather than another.
Post a Comment