--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > I'll have more to say this evening about Barry's > > hysterical meltdown, but in the meantime, here's a > > post I made back in 2007 after Barry had brought > > this up again. The Maya expert in the Salon > > article I quoted was, um, not exactly the only > > knowledgeable person to have been upset by the > > movie: > > Please note that the only hysterical person here is > the Judester herself, which she will hopefully > demonstrate for us all later tonight. :-) > > Please also note that she has said NOT A WORD about > the real issues at play here. > > That is, it's NOT ABOUT whether the movie was > historically inaccurate. No one has suggested > that it was. Any attempt to get people to focus > on that is a diversion from the real issues. > > What those issues are -- the ones that Judy will > continue to avoid dealing with -- revolve around: > > 1. Why did she feel competent to comment on a film she > had never seen, and obviously has *still* never seen? > > 2. Why did she choose to characterize Mel Gibson as a > "Christian bigot" (again, based on a film she'd never > seen), when the article she was originally taking as > gospel did not mention a word about Christianity? > > Please note also that not a single one of the "sources" > she cites below say anything about Christian supremicist > themes in the movie, either. > > JUDY MADE THAT UP. > ABOUT A MOVIE SHE HAD NEVER SEEN. > SHE'S STILL SAYING IT, SIX YEARS LATER. > ABOUT A MOVIE SHE'S *STILL* NEVER SEEN. > RATHER THAN ADMITTING THIS, > SHE'S GOING TO DOUBLE DOWN. > SHE'S A NUTCASE. > > :-) >
So, it's all about Judy. > > > A few selections from articles discussing > > the historical inaccuracies in "Apocalypto" > > > > From the San Diego Union-Tribune, 12/6/06: > > > > 'Apocalypto' a pack of inaccuracies > > > > Maya experts say Gibson's violent film wrong historically > > > > By Mark McGuire > > NEW YORK TIMES NEWS SERVICE > > > > December 12, 2006 > > > > Mel Gibson's historical drama "Apocalypto" certainly has a veneer of > > authenticity. If you have to scramble to remember your fifth-grade > > lessons on Maya culture, you'd certainly believe you're watching an > > accurate, detail-rich depiction of Mesoamerican life. > > > > "A lot of people will think this is how it was," said Walter Little, > > an anthropologist and expert on Maya language and culture at the > > State University of New York at Albany. "Unfortunately." > > > > Little and two other Mesoamerican scholars at the Albany campus > > recently screened the big-budget, subtitled epic, which opened Friday > > and was last weekend's No. 1 movie, grossing $14.2 million. > > > > All three said they were disappointed by the plot and taken aback by > > the graphic violence, which to these eyes suggested "Braveheart" as > > directed by Quentin Tarantino in a particularly vile mood. > > > > But even if they could sponge away the blood, these experts found the > > devil or at least a set of thumbs-down reviews in the details. > > > > "This was not a film about the Mayas," said Robert Carmack, a retired > > anthropology professor from SUNY Albany's lauded Mesoamerican > > program. "It's a big mistake almost a tragedy that they present > > this as a Maya film." > > > > In any genre film, experts and geeks alike will pore over the > > minutiae. In their estimation, a movie rises or falls on the little > > things. > > > > Seafaring experts debate the minor gaffes of "Titanic," while experts > > on ancient Rome talk about minor historical imperfections > > in "Gladiator." > > > > Most moviegoers won't catch these mistakes or willful fact- > > doctorings. Does it matter to the average ticket holder that Gibson > > apparently fudged some facts? Not really, especially if you're just > > looking for a period adventure featuring, by my unofficial count, 12 > > wildly different modes of killing. > > > > There are no guns, but lots of lethal weapons. To those in the know, > > however, the flaws stick out like Roseanne Barr in a Broadway musical. > > > > Take the film's depiction of a major Maya city that serves as the > > setting for much of the film's third act. Many of the architectural > > details are correct, but they're cobbled together from different > > locations (including ancient cities in Guatemala and the Yucatan) and > > different eras, the experts said. > > > > So what, you say? Try picturing 16th-century explorer Giovanni da > > Verrazano navigating the east coast of the New World, and then ending > > his journey by traversing the New York City suspension bridge that > > bears his name. > > > > You get the idea. > > > > The experts said they thought, during much of the movie, it was set > > sometime between A.D. 300 and 900 until a closing scene places it > > closer to the early 1500s. > > > > "It was a postmodern collage," Little said. "It was a hodgepodge." > > > > Carmack grew more and more steamed in his post-screening analysis. In > > particular, he seethed over the portrayals of human sacrifices and > > other spectacles, which he said more closely resembled practices used > > by the Aztecs or even the ancient Romans. > > > > The sadism that permeates the movie was simply not part of the > > culture, the experts said. Yes, the Mayas practiced human sacrifice, > > but in ways that were highly ritualized and usually involved a single > > victim. Not pretty, to be sure, but a far cry from the slaughterhouse > > of mass sacrifice depicted in "Apocalypto" a virtual conga line of > > the soon-to-be headless, followed by desecration of their bodies. > > > > The body count was high, and the treatment of the dead cavalier, all > > three anthropologists said. > > > > The Mayas, an agricultural society, also would not have had an open > > field of rotting corpses situated near their crops. > > > > Modern-day descendants of the Mayas "would be totally disgusted by > > this film," Carmack said. "It was all invented. The ritual was a > > disgusting perversion of human sacrifices among the Mayas." > > > > Edgar Martin del Campo, a newly arrived faculty member who begins > > teaching at SUNY Albany in January, talked about religious glitches > > and other flaws. Examples: Mayas would not have been awed by an > > eclipse as they were in the film they were, in fact, early > > astronomers. Villagers would not have been dumbstruck by a city; most > > lived in or around metropolises. The costumes were contrived. > > > > Give the film this, the scholars said: Gibson was brave enough to > > make the movie in the Yucatec language. But just as the use of > > Yucatec isn't exactly a guarantee of boffo box office, the historical > > inaccuracies of Gibson's latest will zoom right by the average > > viewer. The gore will not. > > > > Gibson's last subtitled period piece, 2004's "The Passion of the > > Christ," was an international hit. Even so, that graphic drama drew > > criticism similar to that already levied against "Apocalypto," > > angering many scholars and Jewish leaders for its depiction of > > Christ's final hours. > > > > "The Passion" was a cultural phenomenon that sparked mainstream > > debate over the Gospels and the history of anti-Semitism, among other > > topics. It's doubtful the history behind "Apocalypto" will prompt > > widespread research by moviegoers most of whom will be in search of > > nothing more than two hours of action. Regardless, the experts will > > be howling. It will be up to you whether to listen. > > > > "The problem is when you misrepresent (a subject to) somebody, they > > don't always seek out the correct version of things," Little > > said. "They're going to accept that as reality. So why would they go > > search out what it really is?" > > > > http://tinyurl.com/2u3vas > > > > > > Excerpt from an article in National Geographic News, > > an interview with Zachary Hruby, a Maya expert at the] > > University of California, Riverside (the full article > > details many more historical inaccuracies): > > > > Hruby: By the time the Spaniards arrived, the social problems > > associated with the Classic period collapse, as portrayed in > > Apocalypto, did not exist. > > > > NG: In terms of historical accuracy, the arrival of the Spaniards is > > a problem in itself, right? > > > > Hruby: The movie ends with the Spaniards coming [which didn't happen > > in Mexico until long after the Classic Maya collapse]. So basically > > we're looking at a 400-year difference in architectural style and > > history. > > > > The movie is mixing two vastly different time periods. This Classic > > form of kingship ended around 900 A.D. > > > > http://tinyurl.com/ylo7ql > > > > From an article at Archeology Online, a publication > > of the Archaeological Institute of America, by Tracy > > Ardren, an assistant professor of anthropology at the > > University of Miami: > > > > But I find the visual appeal of the film one of the most disturbing > > aspects of "Apocalypto." The jungles of Veracruz and Costa Rica have > > never looked better, the masked priests on the temple jump right off > > a Classic Maya vase, and the people are gorgeous. The fact that this > > film was made in Mexico and filmed in the Yucatec Maya language > > coupled with its visual appeal makes it all the more dangerous. It > > looks authentic; viewers will be captivated by the crazy, exotic mess > > of the city and the howler monkeys in the jungle. And who really > > cares that the Maya were not living in cities when the Spanish > > arrived? Yes, Gibson includes the arrival of clearly Christian > > missionaries (these guys are too clean to be conquistadors) in the > > last five minutes of the story (in the real world the Spanish arrived > > 300 years after the last Maya city was abandoned). It is one of the > > few calm moments in an otherwise aggressively paced film. The > > message? The end is near and the savior has come. Gibson's efforts at > > authenticity of location and language might, for some viewers, mask > > his blatantly colonial message that the Maya needed saving because > > they were rotten at the core. Using the decline of Classic urbanism > > as his backdrop, Gibson communicates that there was absolutely > > nothing redeemable about Maya culture, especially elite culture which > > is depicted as a disgusting feast of blood and excess. > > > > Before anyone thinks I have forgotten my Metamucil this morning, I am > > not a compulsively politically correct type who sees the Maya as the > > epitome of goodness and light. I know the Maya practiced brutal > > violence upon one another, and I have studied child sacrifice during > > the Classic period. But in "Apocalypto," no mention is made of the > > achievements in science and art, the profound spirituality and > > connection to agricultural cycles, or the engineering feats of Maya > > cities. Instead, Gibson replays, in glorious big-budget technicolor, > > an offensive and racist notion that Maya people were brutal to one > > another long before the arrival of Europeans and thus they deserve, > > in fact they needed, rescue. This same idea was used for 500 years to > > justify the subjugation of Maya people and it has been thoroughly > > deconstructed and rejected by Maya intellectuals and community > > leaders throughout the Maya area today. In fact, Maya intellectuals > > have demonstrated convincingly that such ideas were manipulated by > > the Guatemalan army to justify the genocidal civil war of the 1970- > > 1990s. To see this same trope about who indigenous people were (and > > are today?) used as the basis for entertainment (and I use the term > > loosely) is truly embarrassing. How can we continue to produce such > > one-sided and clearly exploitative messages about the indigenous > > people of the New World? > > > > I loved Gibson's film "Braveheart," I really did. But there is > > something very different about portraying a group of people, who are > > now recovering from 500 years of colonization, as violent and brutal. > > These are people who are living with the very real effects of > > persistent racism that at its heart sees them as less than human. To > > think that a movie about the 1,000 ways a Maya can kill a Maya--when > > only 10 years ago Maya people were systematically being exterminated > > in Guatemala just for being Maya--is in any way okay, entertaining, > > or helpful is the epitome of a Western fantasy of supremacy that I > > find sad and ultimately pornographic. It is surely no surprise > > that "Apolcalypto" has very little to do with Maya culture and > > instead is Gibson's comment on the excesses he perceives in modern > > Western society. I just wish he had been honest enough to say this. > > Instead he has created a beautiful and disturbing portrait that > > satisfies his need for comment but does violence to one of the most > > impressive of Native American cultures. > > > > http://tinyurl.com/ya5kd7 > > > > A comment on a review: > > > > Ignacio Ochoa's [director of the Nahual Foundation that promotes > > Mayan culture] comment that "Gibson replays... an offensive and > > racist notion that Maya people were brutal to one another long before > > the arrival of Europeans and thus they deserved, in fact, needed, > > rescue" articulates what I was feeling, especially towards the end of > > this film. When the Berkeley crowd started booing at the end of the > > film as the Spanish-Christian missionaries arrive, I'm sure it was in > > response to this sense. > > > > > > From India Times via Yahoo News: > > > > Washington, Jan. 11 (ANI): A Guatemalan official has reportedly > > blasted Hollywood filmmaker Mel Gibson for the insulting depiction of > > the Mayan civilisation in his new film 'Apocalypto'. > > > > Guatemala's presidential commissioner on racism, Ricardo Cajas, feels > > that Gibson's movie has caused a drastic setback to the image of the > > Mayan people in Apocalypto. > > > > He says that that the movie seems to be an attempt at imposing the > > Western viewpoint about other civilisations of the world. > > > > "It's a case of Western civilisation imposing its view about other > > civilisations," Contactmusic quoted him as saying. > > > > "It shows the Mayans as a barbarous, murderous people that can only > > be saved by the arrival of the Spanish," he added.... > > > > http://tinyurl.com/2uqhys > > >
