Apocalypto

Gibson has balls. To have the nerve to make a movie that ends up basically as one big chase through the ancient history of the Maya civilization, you have to have them. Although a bit more editing might have been an improvement, I am basically pleased with Apocalypto. And not forgetting Horner’s excellent music, too. (12/07/2007)

It’s a pity the content is so rudimentary, because Mel Gibson proves that he doesn't care about Hollywood's standards and does whatever he wants. The concept of Apocalypto is already interesting in itself since there hasn't been a film about an ancient civilization like this before – if at all – so you must await with anticipation to see what will unfold. It's quite typical of Gibson, with lots of blood, a structured plot full of action and dynamics, plus a subtle hint of some kind of mythology that serves more for visual enjoyment. The enormous temples in the city are truly impressive. The presence of the digital camera was also somewhat debatable and unnecessary, but overall the level of entertainment is decent. It's a shame that it lacks the emotional depth that Braveheart, for exmaple, had. (07/14/2007)

A distinctive work by a distinctive artist. What I like about Mel Gibson is that despite the journalistic statements about "sadist Gibson", he still goes about his business, ignores all critics and keeps his creative freedom. He doesn’t spare violence here either, but unlike The Passion of the Christ, it is kept within tolerable limits (like the battle scenes in Braveheart). For example, the scene of the double sacrificial heart-cutting is quite subtly depicted, and its media criticism is completely out of place. If I am telling a story from the time of the late Mayan empire, it would be strange to omit this quite common practice. Aside from Gibson's light allusions to the manipulation of crowds and the depiction of the decadence of society, a concomitant phenomenon of the decline of great empires, looking for some kind of insight here is completely pointless. The whole film is constructed as a kind of ancient narrative of hunters somewhere by the fire, who, with typical male vanity, show off where they killed who, who they escaped from or who they saved. In this respect, the film is absolutely great and I don't really care about the lack of an idea. Moreover, Gibson's direction is imaginative, the make-up and adornments of the protagonists and the visuals of the Mayan metropolis scene are a triumph of cinematic art design. Mel did not disappoint again and continues to be for me a breath of fresh air in the stale Hollywood production :o) (02/06/2007)

It was pretty nice to hear a language other than English in a big American film, otherwise, Apocalypto was a disappointment. A lifeless and simple story stretched to an unnecessary length. Only the urban scene was interesting, at times it felt as if Cameron had found inspiration here for the Na’avi. I don’t think Gibson should feel very confident in his directorial qualities, I didn’t see even a hint of genius in Apocalypto. (08/05/2010)

Apocalypto can be seen as either an über-brutal adventure ride or an ideological banquet. The latter is heavily favored by Gibson's pro-Christian bigotry (ingeniously hidden here), the consistent depiction of the decline of the Mayan empire, which refers to the cause mainly in terms of social differences, and the finale with the arrival of the ships that so unwittingly save the protagonist, and it's hard not to notice the Christian symbolism in this scene. So it's not hard to see that Mel Gibson is currently a radical left-wing Catholic and for a long time that's the only thing to take away from the film. Fortunately, I'm reviewing this from a first-person perspective and thus, except for the unwatchable digital camera for me, I was supremely satisfied. Still, if Apocalypto is telling us between the lines that the Conquistador massacres were the best thing that could have happened to South and Central America, then still, points for courage -) (10/23/2010)