I guess the violence angle will be the new talking point after "Who wants to see a movie about a bunch of Mayans" didn't work.
Strange as it may seem, there are people who simply don't think that the glorification of violence, particularly human sacrifice, is particularly healthy.
The first amendment allows Mel Gibson to produce whatever type of movie he desires. It also allows me to point out how reprehensible I think "Apocolypto" is.
A few excerpts from a Time Magazine early article...
Gibson and his rookie cowriter on Apocalypto, Farhad Safinia, were captivated by the ancient Maya, one of the hemisphere's first great civilizations, which reached its zenith about A.D. 600 in southern Mexico and northern Guatemala. The two began poring over Maya myths of creation and destruction, including the Popol Vuh, and research suggesting that ecological abuse and war-mongering were major contributors to the Maya's sudden collapse, some 500 years before Europeans arrived in the Americas.
Those apocalyptic strains haunt Apocalypto, which takes place in an opulent but decaying Maya kingdom, whose leaders insist that if the gods are not appeased by more temples and human sacrifices, the crops will die. But the writers hope that the larger themes of decline will be a wake-up call. "The parallels between the environmental imbalance and corruption of values that doomed the Maya and what's happening to our own civilization are eerie," says Safinia.
...
Gibson, who insists ideology matters less to him than stories of "penitential hardship" like his Oscar-winning Braveheart, puts it more bluntly: "The fearmongering we depict in this film reminds me a little of President Bush and his guys."
LOL! If you can't get them in the movie with sex, try violence.