Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Mel Gibson Advises His Critics To Do Their Homework

Mel Gibson said, in this Yahoo! report, that people who criticise his movie Apacalypto as being racist should do their homework; he did.

The Yahoo! article went on to say, "Mayan critics of "Apocalypto" say scenes of scary-looking Indians with bone piercings and scarred faces hurling spears and sacrificing humans promote stereotypes about their culture."

So, first, he's being a total gonad for telling the Mayan people to do homework on themselves to learn that they really are only a bunch of savages. I'm sure they are well versed in all aspects of their own culture, moreso than you are.

Secondly, let's talk about those critics of your "film" who are not Mayan, like, say, me. I will tell you, bucko, I've done my homework. Not on the Mayans, necessarily, but on historiography. And this Yahoo! report has finally helped me put my finger my major problem with this movie and with the historical accuracy flag you keep waving in everyone's faces. Here is the quote:

"He produced and co-wrote the movie, which revolves around one man's quest to save himself from human sacrifice in the ancient civilization." [italics mine]

This major element of the plot begs the question, if you were a Mayan guy living in this time and were up for human sacrifice, wouldn't you go forward with the sacrifice because it was your duty? I mean, it's part of your culture, right? So, we can presume, the possibility of being sacrificed was a very likely eventuality in the minds of the Mayans of that time, no? It reminds me of the story of Socrates' execution. He had the opportunity to flee Athens and escape death, but he refused. He was a part of Athens and had always abided by her laws. To flee to save his own life would break the law of Athens and cheapen all that he ever stood for. So he drank that poison and died, much like, I presume, many Mayans did in their time as they faithfully adhered to their own religious beliefs and faiths. They accepted it as their lot in life and did not abandon their beliefs to save their own lives or the lives of their hottie Mayan wives.

So, why would this Mayan guy flee his sacrifice? Maybe he's a coward. Or maybe he's just a character in a movie about ancient times who has the anachronistic values of a modern, North American Catholic action hero. If he is the former, then why write about him at all? Cowards typically do not belong as protagonists in "historically accurate films." If he is the latter, then you cannot call this movie historically accurate, dumbass. It's cheating to plaster ancient characters with the morals and values of 21st century inhabitants. So fooey on you and your historical accuracy. It is a sham.

7 comments:

  1. Oh, Terry, I'm glad you think so! If anyone could call bullshit on me on this stuff you could. Now, I'm totally confident in my own rightness.

    Thank you!
    xoxox

    ReplyDelete
  2. Stupid Mel Gibson! You know, just because the Mayans engaged in human sacrifice doesn't mean his entire fucking movie is historically accurate. Does he really think people still take him and his "art" seriously?!

    ReplyDelete
  3. You're just saying that because he's not Jewish!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I knew if'n y'all digged deep enough you'd find what was really cheezin' you off re: the movie.

    I THINK I read somewhere that he was a member of a different tribe who was captured after a war. BUT, it implies that he was still Myan which means that HIS tribe practiced human sacrifice too, no? Hmmm... we're back at square 1. Meanwhile, this mushy-gushy, romantic notion of 1 man running for his life so he could be w/his wife n' child doesn't necess. stand up to historical accuracy, either if the entire culture of the realm believed in it.

    There is historical evidence that in one day over 20,000 people were sacrificed in an absolute frenzy of heart-rippin-out in one ancient Myan ritual. A few priests and soldiers could NOT force 20k people to willingly go to their death IF they didn't want to do it, so clearly a willingness (or resignation) to being killed this way was normal.

    I hear tell that his next historically accurate pix will be about a Viking who likes to weave daisy chains and raise orchids and must run through the fjords escaping certain death!

    After all, he did his homework.

    MEGAN: is this, perhaps, why your students have no idea what being stoned would be like??

    ReplyDelete
  5. Megan: I know!

    Grant Miller: You can read me like a book.

    BO: Now, that Viking movie I'd see.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I always had a similar problem with Star Trek TOS and TNG. They always harkened back to the 20th century for examples of literature, music, art, pop culture, etc.

    I always wanted them to make up their own post-2oth century history and play around with it more.

    ReplyDelete