Posted on 12/11/2006 11:05:40 PM PST by beaversmom
Mel Gibson’s “Apocalypto” is an audacious, unforgettable triumph and, undoubtedly, one of the richest, most electrifying cinematic experiences of the year. In that context it’s unfortunate that the filmmaker has coupled his brilliance as a writer-director with a display of unalloyed idiocy as a commentator on his own work.
The stupidity began in September when he spoke to an audience in Austin, Texas after an early screening of his still unfinished film. At the time, he succeeded in getting advance attention for his work by drawing parallels between the fantastically brutal and dysfunctional Mayan civilization he portrays on screen and the current political situation in the United States. “The precursors to a civilization that’s going under are the same, time and time again,” he explained. “What’s human sacrifice if not sending guys off to Iraq for no reason?”
His comments came across like an unexpected punch-in-the-nose to many of the conservatives across the country who had rallied to his defense during the furious dispute over “The Passion of the Christ,” and even pleaded for forgiveness and reconciliation in his behalf in the wake of his toxic combination of drunk driving and anti-Semitic drivel.
Nevertheless, with his film finished, ready for its Friday (December 8) release, and overwhelming audiences everywhere with its eye-popping visual splendor and relentless narrative energy, the Gibsonian interpretation of his own work has gotten, if anything, even more inane.
The official press kit from Touchstone Pictures (a division the Disney Company) quotes Gibson as saying: “Throughout history, precursors to the fall of a civilization have always been the same, and one of the things that just kept coming up as we were writing is that many of the things that happened right before the fall of the Mayan civilization are occurring in our society now. It was important for me to make that parallel because you see these cycles repeating themselves over and over again. People think that modern man is so enlightened, but we’re susceptible to the same forces – and we are also capable of the same heroism and transcendence.”
The press kit also quotes Farhad Safinia, who co-wrote the screenplay with Gibson, making similar observations: “We discovered that what archeologists and anthropologists believe is that the daunting problems faced by the Maya are extraordinarily similar to those faced today by our own civilization, especially when it comes to widespread environmental degradation, excessive consumption and political corruption.”
On the one hand, these fatuous remarks distort the situation in the United States today--far from “widespread environmental degradation,” for instance, the quality of our air and water has improved dramatically over the last thirty years, at the same time that reforestation has substantially enlarged the acreage of our already impressive woodlands.
Even more startling is the vast, unbridgeable gap between the politically correct comments by Gibson and his collaborator and the raw integrity of the film they actually made. Their observations about the “extraordinary similarity” between Mayan decadence and degeneracy and the realities of American life in the 21st century receive no support whatever from the thrilling adventure story that unfolds in the nearly two-and-a-half hours of the final version of “Apocalypto.” In fact, their interpretation of the project bears so little connection to the film itself that you wonder not only whether they truly made the movie, but whether they’ve ever actually seen it. Nothing—not one scene, one character, one set, or one passing detail in the film – in any way echoes contemporary America, even as seen by this society’s most embittered critics. The movie contains no sequences emphasizing “environmental degradation” (unless you count a heart-pounding chase through a corn field where the stalks look somewhat withered) or “political corruption.” (The spectacle of enslaving primitive tribesmen, binding them with ropes and sticks, marching them to your capital and then slashing open their chests to rip their hearts out in human sacrifice can’t rightly be described as “political corruption”—nor does this pagan savagery connect in any way with current controversies in our society. No matter how much Mr. Gibson may disapprove of the Iraq war, it’s a stretch to suggest that sacrificial victims captured very much against their will, and after their spirited struggle (and after their village has been utterly destroyed) bear any relationship to the volunteers who chose to fight in the Middle East.
The cruel, sadistic, masochistic, deeply demented culture of the Mayas, with its self-destructive emphasis on mutilation and mysticism, slavery and superstition, emerges with conviction and flair on the screen but will cause no one to think, “Oh, wow, that really reminds me of New York and LA!”
So why would a brilliant artist like Mel Gibson insist on ludicrously describing his masterpiece as a commentary on today’s social, cultural, political problems, when no sane viewer of his picture would note or even suspect those messages?
Perhaps Gibson is so eager to transcend the humiliation of his drunk driving incident, and to bury the lingering suspicions that “The Passion” (despite its huge commercial success) was a right-wing, hate-filled screed, that he’s saying stupid things that he believes will endear him to the “progressive” Hollywood establishment.
Clearly, the film (with dialogue in the ancient Yucatec language, with subtitles) represents a major risk and he needs great reviews to get the attention required for decent box office performance. By cooking up some preposterous lefty interpretation of Mayan collapse (is the big chieftain with the body scarring and the elaborate tattoos and the distended ears and the carved piece of jade in place of his nose supposed to represent George W. Bush?) Gibson may be trying to position his adrenalin-soaked, breathlessly paced chase picture as an “important, daring” message movie that indicts the U.S.
Even if there’s no basis whatever in the substance of the film for Mel’s alarmist, we’re-all-guilty-and-doomed commentary about US society, the attempt to fabricate a political subtext for a visceral, straight-ahead action-adventure may prove an effective strategy. The positioning of a relentlessly fast-moving thriller set in Mexico’s Yucatan Peninsula more than five hundred years ago as some searing, timely indictment of “over consumption” and “political corruption” in Bush-era USA, may force some high brow critics to take “Apocalypto” more seriously than they would without the pretentious preaching surround it’s release. There’s another advantage concerning the movie’s distribution overseas: Gibson’s comments will help to produce the warm reception in France that’s all-but-guaranteed for any work plausibly classified as anti-American.
Mel is drinking and cursing his way to the bank. He can make an excellent movie, but he is not a happy man.
Mel is not a good speaker.
Thoughts?
"Yes, abortion is equal. Just as cannibalism, homosexuality, and human sacrifices...."
Yes, I think Mel is on to something. The high rate of divorce, kids abandond to day care to fend for themselves as in "Lord of the Flies" so Mommy can work and have a new car. Infanticide and destruction of human life so that some actor who breaks his neck can hope to live for eternity. Sends the kids a strong message .... the strong survive, the weak will die.
Yes, Mel is on to something here.
I think you are dead on. My brother has same tendencies.
Loved the bottle for way too many tears. Talk politics, he goes balistic.
As a diversion, while our Saudi "allies" escape unscathed.
Terrorism Financing: Roots and Trends of Saudi terrorism financing
When the Jews return to Zion. And a comet rips the sky And the Holy Roman Empire rises, Then You and I must die. From the eternal sea he rises, Creating armies on either shore, Turning man against his brother. 'Til man exists no more
You must go and find, Bugenhagen.
Interesting typo.
As for the Mayan city, I was wondering if Mel was trying to make an allegory about industrialization and capitalism, pillaging the earth and exploiting the little man. I haven't been to very many movies in the last couple of years, and I was just looking for some entertainment.
What is conspicuously lacking in all of these analogies with the fall af the Mayan civilization is the arrival of the Spaniards.
When some fleet of ships carrying beings of very obviously advanced and unimaginable technology lands on our shores, then we can compare notes.
That was my thought exactly.
I am the wife.
Hard to believe that someone that served in WWII could be a Holocaust denier. Wonder if it made it over to Iran?
When we started offering a muslim the position of President of the United States.
We just got one in Congress.
Simplest theory that I can come up with is that Gibson is mouthing this crap line in penance to the media and Hollyweird liberal establishment.
....which is ironic since, IMHO, the Mayans and Hollywood probably have more similarities than any other segment of society.
Let's not forget the human sacrifice on the other end, i.e. euthanasia.
I'm waiting to see if some good conservative historian somewhere will discover that a contributing factor towards the downfall of the Roman and Mayan empires was the hyperbole of their pundits ABOUT the impending downfall of their respective empires...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.