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.