Wednesday, December 06, 2006


Fuck you, Mel Gibson.

Just came from a screening of Apocalypto, the Gibson opus about the decay of a multi-goded society named the Mayans. If only they let Christ into their hearts, they might not have been such heathens.

What merit did this film have? Was it shot well? Slow motion and forest. Oh, and gore. Not a single discernable, or memorable shot throughout the film. That of course did not stop a pretentious fuck leaving the film to compliment the way it was shot, because most people cannot dispute that. They can only nod along, not wanting to sound like the fool who does not understand cinematography.

Was it accurate? I’m not a Mayan expert, but some appreciated its accuracy in terms of the total decay of the society from the inside out, a commentary on the fact that the society was not conquered by Spaniards, but by themselves. The only problem with that is the same person who appreciated it’s “accuracy” also commented on the fact that the conquistadors who appear at the end of the film, signaling that the terror is over, came around 200 years early. Much love for the accuracy.

I gots no love for a film that has a string Gibson motive permeating it. I got the sense that I was supposed to feel sorrow for the heathens, but at the same time, there is a culture falling apart from the inside on display, complete with Mel’s characteristic flare for snuff. Based on his crazy Christianity, the only conclusion I can make is that he believes that the culture was flawed completely and us Europeans killing them and bringing disease and our one god saved them. Crazy bastard.

Did it have good pacing? The entire third act was a goddamn chase scene. Complete with live birth, impalings, more chasing, a Fugitive-esque drop down a waterfall, and finally, Christians. Goody. My kind of snuff.

That flick made me damn angry.

I’m out.