This is to all of you people that have reviewed Mel Gibson’s new film Apocalypto (with sadly few exceptions).
No
matter giving the film positive or negative reviews, you called it
“over-the-top violent”, “ultra-violent”, “hard to sit through”,
“the most violent film [you] have ever seen”, “bloodthirsty”, “a waste
of Smucker’s raspberry sauce”, “gruesome”, even “The Hills Have Eyes
in the jungle”, “a big load of sado”, or “sadistic”.
Boy, I wish there would be a chance to watch that film together with only one of
you, and you explain your review to me. That would be a sight.
I
went to see Apocalypto, and I was really kind of anxious right before it
got started, preparing myself for all the shocking violence. So it began, the
first act passed, the village raid took off, and I waited for the blood, the
gore, for the “incredible brutality”. Then the raid came to an end, and I
found myself scratching my head. Actually, I can’t remember one single drop of
blood being spilled, until Jaguar Paw’s father gets his throat cut. Which you
don’t really see; it’s a way less graphic scene compared to a similar event
in Braveheart.
On
it went, with the journey to the great Maya city. No violence here. And then –
finally – the sacrificial scene. I grabbed the arm of my seat. Prepared myself.
For … nothing. All you see is a heart in the hand of the priest. That’s it.
I can’t imagine a way to show this proceeding less bloody than Gibson did here.
Hell, a similar scene in Indy Jones and the Temple of Doom is a lot more
gruesome than this. Speaking of which, you bet that Spielberg or Ridley
Scott would have shown much less mercy with the audience if they would have
tackled that subject matter (which they wouldn’t, because they don’t have
the guts – no disrespect to their remarkable abilities as filmmakers). Oh,
right, and heads are chopped off. On screen? Not really.
This
was pretty much the point from which on I hardly could enjoy the film anymore
because I couldn’t stop shaking my head about all that crazy stuff you wrote
about this film. And the final chase sequences didn’t change that at all.
There are one, two moments that made me think “Ouch, that must have hurt”,
but nothing shocking or spectacularly gruesome in any sense.
So,
what is going here? How can you write such things? I guess it all comes down to
four possibilities:
1.
You have never seen a film before.
2.
I have seen a completely different film.
3.
You people completely lost your minds.
4.
You’re just f****** liars.
The
first two being extremely unlikely, we’re left with the latter two, and either
one strikes me as right out frightening.
Let’s
assume that most of you are in an acceptable state of mental health, as
difficult as it may be. So you lie. A fact that in most cases is hard to deny (unless
you want to go back to possibilities 1 to 3). You’re trying to ride on this
wave The Passion of the Christ set loose, taking that last impression
Gibson made on his audience, and hope that people will believe your claims in
respect to his last film. Very clever.
Now
the question is, why?
You
don’t like Gibson? Angry at him for what he did in the past? Don’t think he
should still be working, or – Heaven forbid – be successful?
Whatever
Mel Gibson has said, whatever kind of man he is, I don’t want to change your
view of him – I really couldn’t care less – but what you did with your
reactions is not only far beyond anything the word “pathetic” can describe,
but indeed far worse than anything Gibson has ever done in his life, and if
there are people who have a right to judge this man, you certainly don’t
belong to them.
It
is not my intention to defend the man Mel Gibson, and it’s not about whether
people like his film or not. The important thing is that people don’t let
themselves be scared off by your scandalous reports, that they go and get their
own opinion, and open their eyes to this incredible injustice that is happening
here.
The
film is violent. It’s (partly) an action film. And if people want to
see men hugging each other to death, they will certainly look elsewhere. But In
terms of violence, Apocalypto doesn’t even come close to the portrayal
in The Passion of the Christ, and is also far away from Braveheart.
And everybody who as seen one or two action films before won’t find anything
overly brutal or shocking here. Did you really believe people will stay away
from the film and never find that out for themselves?
Here’s
kudos to those of you who went the whole way and completely trashed the film; at
least you’re not hiding behind an otherwise good review in case there’s
indeed someone who watches the film and realizes what crap you wrote. Think
someone ever gonna read your reviews again?
So in the end, Apocalypto indeed transcends whatever goal it is trying to achieve as a film, by revealing the true and ugly characters of many people who live under the misconception that what they have to say is of any importance.
Call
me Michael.