I liked the movie and before writing a review I read only negative comments on IMDb to see why people hated the film.Most of them claim that the movie is historically incorrect,based on false facts.Here are two arguments of the haters of the movie:
1.The Mayans didn't make human sacrifices and didn't rip off the hearts of the victims.That is something the Aztecs did.
2.The Spaniards arrived 500 years later.
OK, I didn't know if that was true so I decided to take 20-30 min. of my time and do some research on the internet.And guess what!!It turns out that Mel Gibson did his homework right and those who write the hate it reviews didn't!The Mayans DID make human sacrifices, they DID rip off the hearts of their victims, they were no better than the Aztecs. They began with human sacrificing about 300 A.D.This is a fact known since 1973(the year scientists managed to encrypt the Mayan hieroglyphs).Besides:who sais that the bad guys in the film are too Mayans?!!They may be Aztecs or Toltecs!The Aztecs were at that time at the peak of their civilization, their territories went deep into the south.
"The Spaniards arrived 500 years later" You really don't know when the movie takes place until the end when the conquistadors show up.Then we see, aha: the year is 1511 + something.Is this possible?Why not?The end of the great Mayan civilization was about 900 A.D. After that we have the post classic period until 1511 (the year of the arrival of Cortes).Gibson doesn't claim that the occurrence's in the film take place in the early Mayan history.To all the haters of the film who have a problem with not presenting the great achievements of that culture(mathematics, astrology an so on):That was BEFORE the happenings in the movie!And besides, that was not the story of the movie.Not showing the greatness of the culture doesn't mean that Gibson denies it! "The Mayans were presented as savages" - that is because they were(check out their rituals), or what is your definition of a savage?There is another moment in the film:the bad guy threatens Jaguar Paw he would skin him alive and then wear his skin.I first thought, well that was original of Gibson, but then I found out on the internet that skinning your enemies and wearing their skin was an ACTUAL RITUAL of the Mayans.Yes they were savages, and I don't care how many Mexicans(who think they are the legacy of the Mayans, which they are not) feel offended by this movie.
Another point is the gore in the film.After reading some reviews I noticed that people who liked "The passion of the Christ" have a problem with the gore in this movie...Excuse me!?!!So you don't have problems watching the Romans beat the crap out of Jesus but mind some Mayan heads being cut off!
My recommendation to all who want to write a negative review: make some research before doing so!That is the only way to find out how much truth there is in this film!I, for example found also out that they were using exact the same type of weapons at that time, like knifes made of obsidian. I would also recommend to see this film along with another great film:The Mission(1986).If you liked "Apocalypto" and want to see a true story about what happened next, you should see "The Mission".If you saw "Apocalypto" and hated it, "The Mission" will make you fell better. Yes, I agree that Mr. Gibson is a Christian fanatic, but unlike many others I wouldn't interpret the ending as pro-Christian.Why?Because there was a priest on a boat?
The film is not perfect though.Mr. Gibson, if you want to make a realistic movie, you have to stick to this idea the whole way:No human is faster than a puma!There were hundreds of beheaded bodies in that pit, that was too much to be believed!The little girl having the plague(!!!where did that come from?) and making prophecies was also unbelievable.But this is still a movie! And in my opinion it deserves 7 stars for being good but not special.
1.The Mayans didn't make human sacrifices and didn't rip off the hearts of the victims.That is something the Aztecs did.
2.The Spaniards arrived 500 years later.
OK, I didn't know if that was true so I decided to take 20-30 min. of my time and do some research on the internet.And guess what!!It turns out that Mel Gibson did his homework right and those who write the hate it reviews didn't!The Mayans DID make human sacrifices, they DID rip off the hearts of their victims, they were no better than the Aztecs. They began with human sacrificing about 300 A.D.This is a fact known since 1973(the year scientists managed to encrypt the Mayan hieroglyphs).Besides:who sais that the bad guys in the film are too Mayans?!!They may be Aztecs or Toltecs!The Aztecs were at that time at the peak of their civilization, their territories went deep into the south.
"The Spaniards arrived 500 years later" You really don't know when the movie takes place until the end when the conquistadors show up.Then we see, aha: the year is 1511 + something.Is this possible?Why not?The end of the great Mayan civilization was about 900 A.D. After that we have the post classic period until 1511 (the year of the arrival of Cortes).Gibson doesn't claim that the occurrence's in the film take place in the early Mayan history.To all the haters of the film who have a problem with not presenting the great achievements of that culture(mathematics, astrology an so on):That was BEFORE the happenings in the movie!And besides, that was not the story of the movie.Not showing the greatness of the culture doesn't mean that Gibson denies it! "The Mayans were presented as savages" - that is because they were(check out their rituals), or what is your definition of a savage?There is another moment in the film:the bad guy threatens Jaguar Paw he would skin him alive and then wear his skin.I first thought, well that was original of Gibson, but then I found out on the internet that skinning your enemies and wearing their skin was an ACTUAL RITUAL of the Mayans.Yes they were savages, and I don't care how many Mexicans(who think they are the legacy of the Mayans, which they are not) feel offended by this movie.
Another point is the gore in the film.After reading some reviews I noticed that people who liked "The passion of the Christ" have a problem with the gore in this movie...Excuse me!?!!So you don't have problems watching the Romans beat the crap out of Jesus but mind some Mayan heads being cut off!
My recommendation to all who want to write a negative review: make some research before doing so!That is the only way to find out how much truth there is in this film!I, for example found also out that they were using exact the same type of weapons at that time, like knifes made of obsidian. I would also recommend to see this film along with another great film:The Mission(1986).If you liked "Apocalypto" and want to see a true story about what happened next, you should see "The Mission".If you saw "Apocalypto" and hated it, "The Mission" will make you fell better. Yes, I agree that Mr. Gibson is a Christian fanatic, but unlike many others I wouldn't interpret the ending as pro-Christian.Why?Because there was a priest on a boat?
The film is not perfect though.Mr. Gibson, if you want to make a realistic movie, you have to stick to this idea the whole way:No human is faster than a puma!There were hundreds of beheaded bodies in that pit, that was too much to be believed!The little girl having the plague(!!!where did that come from?) and making prophecies was also unbelievable.But this is still a movie! And in my opinion it deserves 7 stars for being good but not special.