Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Movie Mix

Mel Gibson Is Wrong about Who the Violent Americans Are

By Roberto Lovato, New America Media. Posted December 16, 2006.


The new movie Apocalypto should have left the Maya alone and instead looked for apocalyptic violence in the off-screen history of the Catholic-mestizo families of the Americas.
Advertisement

After watching Mel Gibson’s controversial film Apocalypto, I left the theater pondering the history of racism, pillage and apocalyptic war through my own blood and family history. Gibson, I concluded, would have been more accurate, his film more resonant, had he used another group of people, another culture – certainly not the Maya -- to depict his vision of the Apocalyse.

Like many Central Americans born and categorized as mestizos (mixed Indian and Spanish blood), I watched Apocalypto as someone who consciously revered the Maya and other indigenous groups while subconsciously prohibiting himself any real identification with them.

As a boy, my parents gave me a leather case with a picture of an Indian from the region now known as El Salvador (the Savior). But I heard my father call people he considered ugly “cara de indio” (Indian face). For many of us--mestizo and non-mestizo alike--it’s always been easier to identify with the Christian culture depicted in Gibson’s film The Passion of the Christ than with the Maya culture in Apocalypto.

The fundamental problem with Apocalypto’s depiction of Maya culture is that, in a procrustean manner, it imposes violence and an apocalyptic world view on the wrong people. In fact, UC Riverside archaeologist Zachary X. Hruby wrote recently in the San Francisco Chronicle: “There exists no archaeological, historic or ethnohistoric data to suggest that any such mass sacrifices -- numbering in the thousands, or even hundreds -- took place in the Maya world.”

Instead, Gibson should have looked for apocalyptic war and culture in the off-screen history of our Catholic, mestizo, and indigenous families in the Americas.

He could have done his homework about how Salvadoran culture sanctions my father’s use of “cara de indio” as a way to call someone ‘ugly.’ I never understood the deeper reasons for such racist remarks until my father told me what happened when he was a ten-year-old boy who climbed trees in 1932. That year, my father saw military men kill hundreds of Indians in what historians call “La Matanza” or the Killing. More than 30,000 mostly Indian peasants in El Salvador were slaughtered on the order of General Maximiliano Hernandez Martinez, a theosophist military dictator who used radio broadcasts to justify his actions by sowing apocalyptic fear. Most of the killing my father witnessed took place not far from where the fictional killing fields of Apocalypto take place. Until I asked him about it, my father remained quiet about La Matanza for more than 65 years. The fear of Indians and apocalyptic war he learned while climbing trees as a boy stayed with him and spilled onto his kids through what some psychologists call “intergenerational trauma.”

It saddens me that the first big screen depiction of the inspired and inspiring culture of the Maya is this fatally inaccurate and very controversial film. Like the traumatized boy who became my father, millions among the current generations of Mayan, Guatemalan, Salvadoran and other Central American youth growing up in the United States and other countries are the children of apocalyptic war survivors. Most have experienced the numbing cultural effects of war; either firsthand or as the children of those who have witnessed the savagery of wars like the one in Guatemala, where apocalyptic dictator and born-again Pentecostal President Efrain Rios Montt, who famously said, “the true Christian has a Bible in one hand and a machine gun in the other,” ordered the killing and disappearance of more than 100,000, mostly Mayas. I saw how Montt used television and other media to beam the colorful biblical imagery of his apocalyptic vision as a way to cover over the massacre of innocents. He compared the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse to the four contemporary evils of hunger, misery, ignorance and subversion


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: mel gibson, maya, apocalypto

Roberto Lovato lives in New York and works for New America Media.



Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
No proof of Maya cruelty?
Posted by: Swatopluk on Dec 16, 2006 2:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I guess Mel overdid it again and was more inspired by the Aztecs than the Maya. But have you looked at the actual Maya mural paintings? There are extremly nasty ones that show that the Maya were not the peaceful people they were thought to be in the past.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: No proof of Maya cruelty? Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: No proof of Maya cruelty? Posted by: rhinojos
» Hell in Mayan culture Posted by: vangogh69
Ironic
Posted by: Intraspecto on Dec 16, 2006 2:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ironic that a man who so greatly supports the most reviled religious institution in history (one that holds enormous numbers of child-molesters in its ranks, has killed more people than all modern war combined, and makes no sense in terms of following "Christianity") has made a violent blood thirsty movie about a violent and blood thirsty culture that his voilent and blood thirsty religion destroyed....

While they were certainly NOT peaceful, it is funny to see a Catholic try to "redeem the faith" by making the victim of Catholic greed and ambition look like the evil party in question.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ironic Posted by: mythbuster
» RE: Ironic Posted by: VHunter
This must be a moviemaking fundamental they teach in cinema school.
Posted by: Merchant_Of_Menace on Dec 16, 2006 2:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems that, whenever I go to the cinema, most of the time I just see somebody confusing religious fervor with nationalism.

Maybe this is what has been going on in American society? A hardline evangelical bloc advocating a return to the days of a church-state, where patriotism is obedience to a diety (or multiple dieties, depending on which religious fundies are in power).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Encultured entertainment
Posted by: peachmcd on Dec 16, 2006 6:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One interesting pattern I've noticed in film reviews (even in otherwise 'independent' or 'progressive' press) goes like this:

On one hand, critics give high marks to movies with an essentially right-wing ideology at their base while carefully distancing themselves from the ideology(Independence Day, Apocalypto...). On the other hand, they'll applaud the ideals behind movies with an essentially left-wing ideology at base and then shred the movie itself (Fahrenheit 9/11, Syriana).

I've noticed this pattern for years now. You can win bets on it. What it means is less clear. I doubt there's a critical cabal that decrees such things. My hypothesis is that Americans have been so deeply enculturated with the values of violence, domination (sexual and political), revenge, and avarice that we can't help but respond viscerally to vicarious enjoyment of them on the big screen. Meanwhile, we respond with boredom and discomfort to films that reject those 'American' values, consciously critique them, or portray a different vision.

What think ye all?

Peach in Durham NC

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ncultured entertainment Posted by: xenacat
» RE: ncultured entertainment Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» RE: ncultured entertainment Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: ncultured entertainment Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: ncultured entertainment Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: cultured entertainment Posted by: Iconoclast421
"cara de indio"
Posted by: axandrade on Dec 16, 2006 7:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What you describe as cara de indio is something that I have seen throughout Latin America as it struggles with its Indian heritage after 500 years of Colonization by white people. These white people put themselves at the top of every Latin American society and created a racialized social structure where white was simply better. Not only that, but it wasn't just an indigenous racism like in the United States where white was better. In Latin America, white AND foreign (European and later to some extent from the US) became the paramount of humanity. So the kind of society that formed is very conflicted, you have a lighter skinned elite with a huge inferiority complex that wishes it were part of the global elite, but knows it can never achieve it. To compensate, it tries to differentiate itself from the rest, darker people, through things like cara de indio. That effect trickles down through the innumerable shades of brown, each trying to justify its brownness by putting down those that are darker. I am speaking of the culturally western Latin Americans, I would make an exception for the proud indigenous people that have chosen to maintain their own culture, despite being put at the bottom of the white scale. I feel like this vision of Latin America explains a lot of its failures.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "cara de indio" Posted by: Betsyny
» RE: "cara de indio" Posted by: rhinojos
Author is accurate. Mexicans are very violent.
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Dec 16, 2006 7:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author is accurate and correct. The mestizos, the majority of the citizens of Mexico, are a very violent people. Some examples of LEGAL 'entertainment' in Mexico are very bloody bullfights, dog fights, and cock fights. They also have an extreme amount of violence related to drug cartels and both the federal and state police forces are known to be be abusive of citizens and criminals alike. There also is an undercurrent of racism in Mexico towards black people (the issued a national stamp with a characticuture of a 'negro' on it a couple years ago and a favourite character in the "La Lotteria" game is "El Negrito"- a black livered midget.) Of course, Mexico is a country in which a woman "has her place" in the home with many children and spousal abuse is not uncommon. Worse is the rampant killings of women and girls in border towns that the police won't/can't solve. Thousands have gone missing or been found dead and/or tortured. They don't know if its drug gangs, santeria cults (again), serial killer(s), or just guys out 'looking for fun'. Lastly Mexico condones forced prostitution in the legal brothels, including acts of amazing perversions. America has many problems of its own (violence, racism, environmental) why we need need to import a people with even worse problems?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Who are you, you America hater? Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: albrechtkrausse is WRONG Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» Sure I can debate you! Posted by: Blaugaia
» RE: ebuttal to albrechtkrausse Posted by: Blaugaia
» RE: ebuttal to albrechtkrausse Posted by: wereallfukked
Good article
Posted by: helenwheels on Dec 16, 2006 7:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And a glimpse into some South American history I know nothing about. The comments here are also very interesting. The violence crammed down the U.S. gullet on a daily basis is staggering, indeed. Thanks for the insight, author & commenters!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Good article Posted by: JERSEYDAN
Its the old bait and switch, still alive and kicking!
Posted by: philobat on Dec 16, 2006 7:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whether or not the Maya were peaceful or savage, the fact remains the same. WHO CARES! They are long gone and the sad fact that a bloody gore fest like Apocalypto has to be shoved in our faces is, in this day and age, totally disgusting.

Hitler gets the shaft to this day for being one of the bloodiest, savage and most insane rulers (which he was), but lest we forget, Stalin and Lenin who killed many many more millions in their torterous Gulags.

The fact is humans are vile cruel, greedy, blame shifting, religion touting boobs who just cannot seem to accept one another for who we are.

I say Kill religion and end all this bloodshed once and for all. Its just all so stupid and all Mel Gibson did was show us that we haven't learned a damn thing yet, at least not as far as the governing body of society goes.

I would rather have dinner and a conversation with Adolf Hitler over George Bush, just to find out what he said to the Pope to get the Vatican to sanction his T-4 experiments (the sanctioned deaths that began the Holocaust). And it would not surprise me if it was revealed to me that it was the Vatican's idea all along.

All this finger pointing is boring, as is racisim and bigotry...So has anyone one seen Happy Feet?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Dingo, you are so darned cute! Posted by: philobat
» Conspiracy Theories Abound! Posted by: VHunter
Religions are the root of evil
Posted by: justAnEgg on Dec 16, 2006 7:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a newcomer to America, I'm astonished how many young people enjoy horror movies, for instance. Brutal violence is deeply in American culture, eroding the society ostensibly built on christian love. Violence is commercialized, self-perpetuating but I don't know what's the hen and what's the egg between christianity and commercialization of violence, since religions had been peddled for ages. I think secularization of the society is the only solution to the problem. My example might be a good illustration: I'm an atheist, and I didn't want to see either The Passion" or "Apocalypto", knowing that they're both primarily about violence. (When a friend asked me if I saw "The Passion", I replied that I don't watch horror movies.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» American culture is violent Posted by: vangogh69
» That's absolute BS Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: That's absolute BS? Posted by: justAnEgg
» RE: That's absolute BS? Posted by: ISlamIslam
» Hello Egg! Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: Hello Egg! Posted by: justAnEgg
greenguy
Posted by: ossie on Dec 16, 2006 8:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hear of Violent acts,all the time.I live in S,CA.not far from L.A>Some Violence acts,are so unprovekd,so Stupid and incrediable.I have come to the conclusion that these people are or may be inbred two times over?If inbreeding affects the body,why not the mined??Go easy on me I'm just asking.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» greenguy Posted by: ossie
» INBREEDING and violence... Posted by: Cathyc
» RE: greenguy Posted by: Basenjis
izquerdista, your posting was right on.
Posted by: symcokid on Dec 16, 2006 10:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bravo isquerdista, you told it like it was and is, truer words were never spoken. The USofA has all the answers, that's why they have their nose stuck in the affairs of practically every country on the planet. As an example, just look at how they have disrupted everything in Iraq and elsewhere, they are the prime reason for most of the turmoil throughout the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You said it! Posted by: werewolf
» Humans to blame Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Humans to blame: YogiBear Posted by: Basenjis
Sounds like a good idea for a movie/documentary
Posted by: CardiacRN on Dec 16, 2006 10:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The authors idea sounds like something that should be explored. I think it would be safe to bet that most people in North America have heard little or nothing about this.

On the other hand, who is he to tell someone else what movie he should make? If you want to make a movie start doing the work, don't sit back and piss and moan about how someone else should do it for you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» BOYCOTT.... Posted by: Cathyc
A tiny mistake
Posted by: earthlingtn on Dec 16, 2006 10:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a good story, but since the issue is historical accuracy the author should not exaggerate by saying that the Puritans came to America with "20-ton cannons crammed into their ships." Even a century later, the very largest British cannons -- even in the big European land wars -- were still only 4 tons.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

AZETECS, NOT MAYANS!!
Posted by: AlohaTerry on Dec 16, 2006 11:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If Mel Gibson had done the least amount of Homework, he could have easily transformed the Azetecs as the race maurading their neighboring Provinces for Slaves/ Human Sacrafice...the Mayans, though not without some Human Sacrafice during the Decline of their Dominance, were vastly intelligent, and for the most part Peaceful and Agrarian.
That being said, even the Cruelty of the Azetecs pales in comparison with the Spanish Conquistadors, the Class Slavery imposed on the Indigenous Peoples, and the Imperialism, Colonialism, and General Dysfunction of the Whites (including America, which has a LOOOOONG History of Mass Murder in the interests of "Progress" (AKA Corporate GREED!)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Europe could have expected Posted by: JERSEYDAN
Mel Gibson
Posted by: Gregor on Dec 16, 2006 12:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mel Gibson's father was a sadistic, anti-semitic individual who beat the crap out of his son and imposed this Catholic imprisonment mentality on him. Instead of looking inward, Mel chooses to send a message of greed, anit-semitism, violence and apocalypse on everyone. Yet everyone still supports Mel Gibson because our culture is a lot like individual Mel Gibson's upbringing. So he is only a symbol and makes movies our culture gobbles up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's only a movie
Posted by: sausage on Dec 16, 2006 2:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And it's fiction.
That being said, however, Mel Gibson engaged Maya archeologist Richard Hansen, known for his work Guatemala's Mirado Basin, as technical advisor for the film.

The current issue of Archaeology Magazine has a short interview with Hansen concerning the filming of Apocalypto.

I'll reproduce a question followed by Hansen's answer, pertinent to Mr. Lovato's above op-ed piece.

"Were the Maya as violent as they are depicted in the movie?
[Hansen] "We know warfare was going on. The Postcalssic center of Tulum is a walled city; these sites had to be in defensive positions. There was tremendous Aztec influence by this time. The Aztecs were clearly ruthless in their conquest and pursuit of sacrificial victims, a practice that spilled over into some of the Maya areas."
(page 16, Archaeology Januarey/February 2007)

Say what you will about Mel Gibson's politics, religion and drunken anti-Semitic outbursts, he is on the board of the Foucation for Anthropological Research and Environmental Studies and is promoting sustainable development for the local people of the Mirado Basin.

Movie violence aside, one of the themes of the film is environmental degradation and how human societies, many times, fall back on superstition and ritual dogma in the face of impending collapse. Overall I enjoyed the film however, the last five or less minutes were highly anachronistic and somewhat spoilt everthing that had come before.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's only a movie Posted by: sausage
» RE: It's only a movie Posted by: sausage
» Weren't the Mayas already gone Posted by: JERSEYDAN
Is this really about Apocalypto?
Posted by: mark on Dec 16, 2006 4:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Gibson the extreme right-wing Catholic, anti-Semite fails in Apocalypto and in all his movies to critique the very religion that has dominated apocalyptic politics for centuries."

Maybe that's not what he was trying to do.

I think the writer started out with a strong desire to criticize Mel, and then built his story around that desire. Not saying any of his facts are wrong, but his prejudices are showing.


oh aaand, movies are movies, and are NEVER beholden to historical reality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The film is an allegory; don't take it too seriously.
Posted by: nigredo on Dec 16, 2006 5:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author of this well written piece seems to ignore that one can just as easily interpret the film as an alegory. Evidence sugests (ie. the quotation at the begining of the movie) that Mr. Gibson was more interested in crafting a tale about how and why even the most complex societies crumble. Much of the film's depictions of the Maya focused on the decadence of Mayan city, the inequity and aparent disregard for the environment (remember how shocked the captives were upon seeing the mass deforestation).
If one focuses too much on the aspects of the film that could be construed as racially offensive he/she looses sight of the film's overall message.
Yes much more violence, bloodshed and oppresion ensued after the arival of Europeans, but the subject of the film was how great societies loose their way, get corrupted from within and then eventually fall vulnerable to outside forces.
Mr. Gibson could have made a study of the Romans, the Babylonians, and countless other empires that have faded into history, but he chose a society in continental Americas to prove a point; that what can occur on the other side of the Atlantic can also occur here. Mr. Gibson has intimated such a message by comparing ( I believe incorrectly) the alleged human sacrifice rituals of the Maya to the wars in Iraq.
Lastly, one cannot be overly critical of Mr. Gibson's depictions of the Maya because almost all films that depict other cultures tend to fall into one of two categories: the over-romanticization of indigenous people and gross objectification. In looking at the film we should focus on the humanization of the protagonist, Jaguar Paw and his drive to return to his family because that is a common factor amongst all humans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

PROFIT PROFIT!!!!
Posted by: abarbarag on Dec 16, 2006 10:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
PROFIT PROFIT!!!!!!!!!!!! do you really think this Gibson would take a serious look into the mayan culture ? he already proved violence and blood to be profitable with "The passion..." the saddest of all this is that so much richness of the mayan culture is forever buried with such a movie, with all moviegoers from the US getting out of the cineplex not wanting to know a thing about the maya, and when they travel to the mayan riviera beaches with only sand and sun in mind, all the mayan culture forgotten: their own numeric system, accurate astronomers and architects.....money is the supreme ruler and that´s what Apocalypto runs for

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: PROFIT PROFIT!!!! Posted by: twocreeks
Latin America rises
Posted by: rtdrury on Dec 17, 2006 10:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems that with Apocalypto, Gibson is reacting to and trying to incite Christian fundamentalism in the U.S. against the rise of leftist and indigenous Latin America. Exploiting a mass emotion is Hollywood's basic business. The question is how much better off will we be when we achieve mass self-determination such that everyone can recognize such exploits for what they are. Maybe we can look to Latin America for clues.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh no I can be more violent than you, Oh no I can No I...
Posted by: liberal is good on Dec 17, 2006 11:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: mark on Dec 16, 2006 4:06 PM
"Gibson the extreme right-wing Catholic, anti-Semite fails in Apocalypto and in all his movies to critique the very religion that has dominated apocalyptic politics for centuries."


Violence and propaganda, and brainwashing, yup that's a mix.

You are surprised that Gibson is still blaming everyone but the Christians for the violence anywhere in history? He is a small, delusional man with too much time on his hands too much money. And if current day Americans are as ignorant and easily lead by him as they are politically, well we are in big trouble.
Ignorance is the only thing that allows the rewriting of history, fiction as fact, George Orwell and Aldous Huxley worlds come to life.

Gibson is part of the culture that wishes to rewrite history.
At the least redirect your vision so the truth can not be revealed.

the type of violence he depicts in his movie even if true to that level, is still nothing compared to Christian violence against the Maya, or through out history, can we say Inquisition? The sacrifices that we know of were of a religious nature. To appease the Gods if you will, grow the harvest.
What do we have with the Spanish who arrive and their violence?
It is for self aggrandizement, wealth, gold, conquering and destroying
an indigenous culture.

The quote from President Efrain Rios Montt is so true that “the true Christian has a a Bible in one hand and a machine gun in the other”. Of course this is nothing to be proud of, more to the point it is a frightening truth and the cause of so much killing and hatred, like “in the name of God.” That is not the privilege for christians only it is for all the big religions, Judaism, and Islam... all have and do Kill in the name of God and to them it is all the justification needed.
But if they followed one quote, in their daily lives all would change,

“What you do to the least of them you do to me”.No matter what master (in this case Jesus) said this it is a lesson for life that all should follow and for Christian’s how convenient that for thousands of years they have ignored this.... a statement from Jesus, whom they say is the be all and end all, and must be followed... unless there’s some land or gold, you might want then we can negotiate.

Gibson could never do an honest, movie of the history of Christians and indigenous people, then he would have to own up to the truth and he and people like him don’t do that. Reality would flood into their fantasy the truth would have to be faced and that will not happen, for they must be right and that comes at big cost to humanity.

His type of Christianity and violence are one in the same, It is their sad history, Christianity and God, that’s not what these people are about

I have to say after reading some of the blogs here, the argument seems to be who was more violent and how to justify that. Because the Maya or Aztecs were a violent people, what the Christians did throughout history is ok? Or because some Muslim extremists have defiled Allah with death and destruction it’s ok for us to get that low.
OR VISA VERSA ..... NO, NO, NO

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So Gibson didn't make the movie you wanted?
Posted by: geoff_canuck on Dec 17, 2006 12:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Go make your own movie about the subject of colonial oppression. Or watch one of the many such films already out there. This sort of attack directed at Gibson makes the left look even more rabid than Mel's worst drunken rants. As a secular humanist/atheist/progressive/socialist, I enjoyed this well-crafted work of fiction, with its cautionary environmental message. And by the way, the intentional irony in its closing scene suggests that Gibson is not holding up the Maya as the epitome of violence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Into the Looking Glass!!! Mel Gibson's Fantasy World
Posted by: Sinemeh on Dec 17, 2006 1:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I believe the article by Mr. Lovato was primarily accurate in the objective he attempted to achieve, yet he only needed to summarize his point by one simple psychological phrase: PROJECTION. Meaning, Mel Gibson, and this movie is simply following as Friedrich Nietzsche once wrote:

"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
— Beyond Good and Evil

By placing this movie in its proper historical context; indeed, there has been an unrelenting campain by occultists (Demon invoking, and worshipers) working within the Vatican, such as: the Jesuits, Teutonic Knights, and other Chilvary Orders of the European Royal dynasties, other occultists such as the Skull and Bones, Scroll and Keys societies of Yale, and Scottish Rite Masons, etc. (too many to name) to discredit the cultures of indigenous peoples around the earth for centuries, and this movie is simply follows in this pattern. In fact, these occult societies, with their finance controls the Entertainment industry as a means of mind conditioning, and control of populations. In essence, this film simply is another in the line of pychological projections, of "Western Civilization;" i.e. The Shadow of Jungian psychology, and is no different than the glorification of the terriorist organization, the Ku Klux Clan in the movie A Birth of a Nation which initiated the "Hollywood" era.

Meaning, I by the way live in Guatemala, speak some of one of the indigenous languages related to the Mayan tongue called Quiche, and; likewise, reject the theories of so-called archeologists from most universities, and magazines like the National Geographic who are normally not initiates of the cultures they PROJECT themselves to be experts on. Actually, the so-called "science" of Archeology is deeply rooted in the white supremacy values, norms, and conditions to justify the Colonial invasions of Europeans into the territories of "non-white" peoples worldwide such as in the theories promoted by Gottigen University in Germany; for instance (Read: Black Athena by Martin Bernal).

What should be recognized is the Occultists behind people like Mel Gibson who allow for movies such as his to be financed, and internationally distributed must continue on their centuries long discrediting campaigns because the spiritual systems of the indigenous peoples contain powers which would render the occultists satanic rituals impotent, and; thereby, spiritually empower people from becomming the mind conditioned operative slaves which is the true agenda of these occultists.

Do not waste your time worrying about whether, or not the Mayans practiced Human Sacrifice, or, indeed, whether it was; actually, Capital Punishment, as is any's societies right when its laws are violated. First, learn about the Mayan people's Medicine, their Mathematics, their Social Organization, their Archetecture, their Astrology/Astronomy, their Social Institutions, their Agriculture techniques, their Spiritual/Physics, their Aesthetics, and their Cosmology, and then whatever else not understood would be placed within its proper context, and from a Mayan perspective. Otherwise, you are simply being deceived by people who are well practiced in mass mind control. Maltyox showay.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» WHITE MAN'S SUPREMACY.... Posted by: Cathyc
It's odd
Posted by: vangogh69 on Dec 17, 2006 2:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That Gibson felt the need to go back and tell a fictionalized story about a society he knows so little about. And to make it such a grand-guignol spectacle? It seems to me like his allegory (which, we must acknowledge, is commendable in that he seems to be directing this warning at the USA, however ostensibly) might have more than a wift of that "savage rogue" stereotype: "See, they were like beasts anyway and their downfall was a good thing...and certainly, their brutal society deserved to die." (I.E. Later-day/Present-day imperialism/occupation/genocide/etc. is justified because the victims are uncivilized/inhumane/non-human/beasts anyway. In the words of Jefferson: "They will kill one of our men, but we shall kill them [natives] all." [sic.]Also, Gibson would do well to read something by Edward Said and see how is depictions can be interpreted as ostensible justifications of present-day imperialism (though I'm giving him WAY too much credit here) and/or genocide (see how greedy those Jews were in the temple in The Passion).)

Considering that current world history contains many stories of mass murder, enslavement, and warfare, why go back hundreds of years? Surely, Austrailia is ripe with stories as is the USA. Maybe he could turn his attention to the Puritans who fled persecution in England only to come here and terrorize natives and later, blacks?

The Passion was I believe the world's first big, bloody, and great Christian/Catholic horror film. It's a "great" piece of sadism and whatever else people want to make out of it, the film is about blood, torture, punishment. I found it odd, at the time, that so many Christians flocked to it in all earnestness (even taking their kids!) when these same folks flipped out at Janet Jackson's exposed breast during the Superbowl. But then, to mis-quote Lenny Bruce: "A naked woman is only acceptable to the viewing public if her body's been mutilated." Anyway, Gibson is a horror-film director and perhaps one day, cineophiles will appreciate (or ridicule) his work as such.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Planet Is Violent
Posted by: hole11 on Dec 17, 2006 5:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The sun eats the moon and night destroys the day. Even a tree could maim or take someones eye out. Killer bees. Malaria in mosquitos. Man isn't the most violent out there. Everything has it. Part of our nature. Religon, governments, tribes or alpha males makes very litte different.

This is a man's movie about man deciding his own destiny. Gibson told a story of how things might of been for an Aztec like culture that grew to dominate a smarter culture. Could happen anywhere at anytime.

If Gibson is truly anti-semitic he would of done a move about the crusades, Inquisition, English expelling the jews before Cromwell, or how the germans felt they were betrayed by them at Versailles.

If anything this film is anti-capital punishment as the aztec culture dominated through a planned killing of outsiders. What was missing was their sport that had death involved with it. Otherwise this movie was good escapism but I personally don't like chase films.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Catholic, to boot
Posted by: twocreeks on Dec 17, 2006 6:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am what is called "Native American", (baptized Catholic at a mission), carry my NA card and all. Many non-native people hilariously are seemingly fulfilled on informing me that I am (with no knowledge of me personally) (but perhaps through some kind of DNA effect) that I must necessarily be very spiritual. Everyone seems to have an image of us, as a group, as a political image, as essential parts of the non-native mythological system, etc.