| Author |
 Topic  |
|
w22dheartlivie 
"Kitty Lover"
|
 Posted - 01/20/2007 : 14:47:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
Well, I suppose I'm about to reveal my true shallowness. I want to see Apocalypto. Not because of or in spite of Mel Gibson. Not because of an interest is how the history is or isn't skewed. And not because it's a foray into an area not yet explored in film. Unless you count the real reason I want to see it. Which is to see more of Rudy Youngblood.
Well... can't fault that, now can I? I cannot count how many movies have I watched (good, bad or indifferent) just because I wanted to drool over one star or another.
quote:
(I'm old, I afford to be shallow sometimes...)
I'm older than you, girl. That's not shallow, that's just being honest.
(When we stop looking, we'll be [hopefully] dead.)
That's good to hear. I just have a weakness for lean muscular men with long long dark hair and great tans..... |
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 10:15:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
Unless you count the real reason I want to see it. Which is to see more of Rudy Youngblood. I just have a weakness for lean muscular men with long long dark hair and great tans.....
Mmmmm.  I didn't think he looked any good in the film, but he's really nice in a couple of his I.M.D.B. photos. |
|
|
|
w22dheartlivie
"Kitty Lover"
|
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 10:57:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
Unless you count the real reason I want to see it. Which is to see more of Rudy Youngblood. I just have a weakness for lean muscular men with long long dark hair and great tans.....
Mmmmm. I didn't think he looked any good in the film, but he's really nice in a couple of his I.M.D.B. photos.
Indeed. And let's face it, I'll admit that it's not just the attributes I listed above, I specifically have a weakness for hot looking men with Native American blood. There are other great photos of him floating on the web, some of which are from his tribal dancing. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 10:59:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
I specifically have a weakness for hot looking men with Native American blood.
Yeah, that is pretty much my ideal too. So long as they have long hair. |
|
|
|
w22dheartlivie
"Kitty Lover"
|
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 11:07:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
I specifically have a weakness for hot looking men with Native American blood.
Yeah, that is pretty much my ideal too. So long as they have long hair.
Yeah, they have to have long hair. My ex was 6'4", 180 pounds, an 8 pack, 1/4 Cherokee with waist length hair and a beautiful smile. That's probably why he's my ex... that and the first time I laid eyes on him, he was walking away from me. That's never a good sign. |
Edited by - w22dheartlivie on 01/22/2007 11:10:03 |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 11:29:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
My ex was 6'4", 180 pounds, an 8 pack, 1/4 Cherokee with waist length hair and a beautiful smile.
Lucky you! |
|
|
|
Conan The Westy
"Father, Faithful Friend, Fwiffer"
|
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 12:00:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
My ex was 6'4", 180 pounds, an 8 pack...
I'm getting a barrel, does that count? |
Edited by - Conan The Westy on 01/22/2007 12:00:40 |
|
|
|
w22dheartlivie
"Kitty Lover"
|
Posted - 01/23/2007 : 09:23:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Conan The Westy
quote:
Originally posted by wildhartlivie
My ex was 6'4", 180 pounds, an 8 pack...
I'm getting a barrel, does that count?
I know I was a very very lucky girl for about 3 1/2 years! |
|
|
|
Sean 
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 10/29/2007 : 03:25:30
|
OK, I finally got to see this (when it became free). 
quote:
Originally posted by dem8nic
Gibson sat down with his co-writer and thought of all the ways he could kill his characters and you can almost see him childishly rubbing his hands with glee. I have no problem with violent movies, in fact I really enjoy a good horror, even involving sadistic killing ("Audition" springs to mind) but in this instance the sadism didn't reflect anything necessary in the story, only the overt workings of the director's mind and that was what troubled me.
That's the way I saw it. It was pretending to be one thing, but was something else. At least in Predator, Halloween, Commando, Lethal Weapon etc we know what we're going to be getting:- minor characters (good or bad, it doesn't matter) will be picked off one-by-one in spectacular bloody fashion for our entertainment, culminating in the inevitable confrontation between the hero and the uber-villain (and guess who wins?) Apocalypto was nothing more than a generic action/slasher/gore-fest while pretending to be an 'art movie'.
A few other things 'wrong' with it:-
a) Good guys did not seem plausible, they were far too 'westernised'. E.g., they played frat-house jokes on one of their friends by conning him into eating raw tapir testicle. Then they conned him into smearing some kind of chilli oil on his dick before banging his wife, but fortunately for her she realised there was a problem when she sucked his cock (remember she ran out of the house and gargled water?) Did Mayan women suck dick? Come on Mel, where's the Mayan-fellatio-frieze/painting? I've never seen one. If Mel was trying to make this feel like 16th Century Yucatan, introducing blow jobs and general frat-house toilet humour probably wasn't the way to do it. 
b) Bad guys were totally stereotyped, as many have mentioned above.
c) The last hour was utterly predictable and boring. We'd been presented with 'the girl' in the pit often enough to know that either the hero was gonna save her, or she was gonna starve to death. So guess what was gonna happen... This of course meant that when the unarmed hero escaped into the cornfield with a spear hole right through his guts with ten baddies chasing him that he was somehow going to overcome utterly insurmountable odds and pick them off. The rest of the movie from here could've been watched at 10x fast-forward. Anyway, some implausibility while he was running:-
i) The spearhole through his guts (who cares? he's tough!)
ii) Outrunning a jaguar for two minutes. Come on, that cat would've had him in half a second if it had wanted. (Oh yeah, he somehow magically climbed down the tree past the jaguar in the first place).
iii) Avoiding infection through intestinal spearhole while immersed in tropical mud.
iv) Only one death over that waterfall (needed to keep 'em alive to kill 'em later of course).
v) and while this was happening his wife managed to avoid dehydration over a few days in the pit.
d) A rather fortunate solar eclipse lasted about two minutes instead of the normal two and a half hours. Two minutes is about right for totality, but the whole thing (beginning to end of partiality) was over in two minutes.
e) A golden opportunity to show some norks was lost. I'm pretty sure Mayan women didn't always cover their chests. But did we get a glimpse? Nope. 
So yet again I'm being told that not only is extreme violence acceptable, it's also righteous, and not only is it righteous, it's entertaining. And at the same time, breasts are disgusting and exposing them is immoral. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, Hollywood has been ramming this twisted, schizoid, perverted morals system down our throats for decades. I don't mind extreme violence in movies (I love zombie flicks etc), but at least they're honest about the movie and what it's supposed to be - entertainment (generally tongue-in-cheek) through extreme violence. But I get the feeling that although Mel loves extreme violence, he's actually ashamed of it, and wants to be seen as an artist, hence he covers his gore-fests in smokescreens such as ancient period settings and the use of ancient languages with subtitles.
On a positive note, it looked good, and the sacrifice episode seemed realistic.
I gave this one 6/10, it was an acceptable action splatterfest, but lacked the humour of Predator, Die Hard, Commando etc. |
|
|
|
MisterBadIdea 
"PLZ GET MILK, KTHXBYE"
|
Posted - 10/29/2007 : 03:54:54
|
Apocalypto is a masterpiece of genre filmmaking. I strongly dispute the idea that "it was nothing more than a generic action/slasher/gore-fest while pretending to be an 'art movie'." I don't see how it pretended to be an art movie at all; in fact, I had expected something very different and was shocked in the theater to find it very unpretentious. I think it's pretty clear that Mel Gibson loves his splatter movies.
quote:
Good guys did not seem plausible, they were far too 'westernised'. E.g., they played frat-house jokes on one of their friends by conning him into eating raw tapir testicle. Then they conned him into smearing some kind of chilli oil on his dick before banging his wife, but fortunately for her she realised there was a problem when she sucked his cock (remember she ran out of the house and gargled water?) Did Mayan women suck dick? Come on Mel, where's the Mayan-fellatio-frieze/painting? I've never seen one. If Mel was trying to make this feel like 16th Century Yucatan, introducing blow jobs and general frat-house toilet humour probably wasn't the way to do it.
I will defend Mel Gibson from this charge to the death. I'm sick of movie Indians and Native Americans and so-called savage races where the natives only speak in spiritual homilies and other bullshit like that. That Mel Gibson dispenses with it is a plus in my view, and it does far better to paint the protagonists as regular Joes. Seriously, do you know really anything about how Mayan cultures acted in the 16th century? Is it that hard to believe that they ever conceived of fellatio? Is that a Western invention?
quote:
A golden opportunity to show some norks was lost. I'm pretty sure Mayan women didn't always cover their chests. But did we get a glimpse? Nope.
You, sir, were not paying attention. I remember plenty, although they didn't really try to draw attention to it.
I don't see the pretension. This movie doesn't really pretend to be more than an action movie; it revels in its B-movie plot machinations. I think far better targets of such criticism are shitfests like Gladiator or Troy, high-minded yet equally stupid action movies which are deadeningly serious and emphasize a feeling of historical accuracy (while being pretty damn far from historically accurate). Those are the genuinely pretentious movies; Apocalypto does not pretend for historical accuracy nor does it provide it.
If there's any pretension to be found, it's in that Mel Gibson sinks everything he knows about filmmaking into it. If that's pretension, it's a very crowdpleasing pretension a la popcorn auteur Steven Spielberg. I suppose you could call the depiction of the Mayan civilization pretentious, but that speaks to me more of wanting to make interesting bad guys more than anything else. I've never seen a better depiction of a decadent civilization gone unchecked.
Apocalypto: Four stars. |
Edited by - MisterBadIdea on 10/29/2007 03:55:16 |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 10/29/2007 : 05:04:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by MisterBadIdea
Apocalypto is a masterpiece of genre filmmaking. I strongly dispute the idea that "it was nothing more than a generic action/slasher/gore-fest while pretending to be an 'art movie'." I don't see how it pretended to be an art movie at all;
Through it's setting in the 16th century in the Yucatan, the use of 'native' actors, and the use of the Mayan language with subtitles. All of that caused me to expect something other than what it was.quote:
Seriously, do you know really anything about how Mayan cultures acted in the 16th century? Is it that hard to believe that they ever conceived of fellatio? Is that a Western invention?
That wasn't my point. I have no idea if they sucked dick back then or not (I'm guesing nobody will ever know unless someone discovers an ancient painting showing some knob-gobblin'). My point was it made them feel contemporary, hence feel less like they were actually living 500 years ago. I've seen plenty of movies set in old times that 'feel' old - making the people unlike modern westerners is a good way of doing this. But making them act like they were late-20th century frat house inhabitants had the opposite effect.
quote:
quote:
A golden opportunity to show some norks was lost. I'm pretty sure Mayan women didn't always cover their chests. But did we get a glimpse? Nope.
You, sir, were not paying attention. I remember plenty, although they didn't really try to draw attention to it.
Yep, hidden in the background and if you blinked you missed them. If I have to frame-by-frame watch and then zoom then I don't count it.quote:
I don't see the pretension. This movie doesn't really pretend to be more than an action movie; it revels in its B-movie plot machinations.
Then my expectations were wrong, I wasn't expecting an 'action movie with B-movie plot machinations'. But I agree that that is what it was. quote:
I think far better targets of such criticism are shitfests like Gladiator or Troy, high-minded yet equally stupid action movies which are deadeningly serious and emphasize a feeling of historical accuracy (while being pretty damn far from historically accurate). Those are the genuinely pretentious movies; Apocalypto does not pretend for historical accuracy nor does it provide it.
Agreed, to a point. I'd rate Apocalypto on a par with Gladiator, and miles ahead of that garbage Troy which looked good enough but had no other redeeming qualities.quote:
I suppose you could call the depiction of the Mayan civilization pretentious, but that speaks to me more of wanting to make interesting bad guys more than anything else. I've never seen a better depiction of a decadent civilization gone unchecked.
I thought the middle third of the movie was pretty good, from what I know of Mayan civilisation the city and sacrifice rituals were very well done, and I didn't find it pretentious at all. I'd be the last to argue that human sacrifice on screen should be sanitised.
quote:
Apocalypto: Four stars.
I won't argue with someone giving it three quarters of a star more than I gave it. |
Edited by - Sean on 10/29/2007 05:06:32 |
|
|
|
MisterBadIdea
"PLZ GET MILK, KTHXBYE"
|
Posted - 10/29/2007 : 06:09:04
|
quote:
But making them act like they were late-20th century frat house inhabitants had the opposite effect.
Well, my point is that he wants us to feel connected to these characters, and of course what you're proposing would be the opposite effect. This is not a film with any claim to historical significance, and I think what you're proposing would be the exact wrong thing to do. I appreciate what Mel does here, making the characters feel contemporary, I don't feel like making this a pure period piece would have been very smart.
quote:
Yep, hidden in the background and if you blinked you missed them. If I have to frame-by-frame watch and then zoom then I don't count it.
Okay, what I remember was lots of exposed nipples, but often decorated with jewelry and stuff, much like Janet Jackson's famous nipple shield in 2004.
quote:
I won't argue with someone giving it three quarters of a star more than I gave it.
I don't follow your math at all! To make it clearer: Apocalytpo, ten out of ten. |
Edited by - MisterBadIdea on 10/29/2007 06:10:10 |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 10/29/2007 : 11:00:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by MisterBadIdea
quote:
But making them act like they were late-20th century frat house inhabitants had the opposite effect.
Well, my point is that he wants us to feel connected to these characters, and of course what you're proposing would be the opposite effect. This is not a film with any claim to historical significance, and I think what you're proposing would be the exact wrong thing to do. I appreciate what Mel does here, making the characters feel contemporary, I don't feel like making this a pure period piece would have been very smart.
My issue is with the conflict between giving them contemporary characters, and having them speaking a language that nobody understands. What was the point in using native actors, dressing them up to look like it was 500 years ago, speaking Mayan, then giving them modern personalities? I understand your point about connecting them with the viewer, but then why not finish the job and have them speaking English so I don't have to read subs? The personalities of the characters cancelled out the 'periodising' effect of the language. That's where I'd call it 'pretentious'; the fact that it has a very generic plot and generic characters is disguised (although rather poorly) with setting, costumes and language.
quote:
quote:
I won't argue with someone giving it three quarters of a star more than I gave it.
I don't follow your math at all! To make it clearer: Apocalytpo, ten out of ten.
Arrgghh, the old 4-star scale! It should be banned!  ..
Ultimately I'm just a bit disappointed with this movie. When I hear that someone's doing something different (in this case making a movie set in the Yucatan in the 16th century - I'm not aware of any other movies set in this location and era) I get my hopes up and hope they're going to make something memorable and original. E.g., do an Apocalypse Now or an Aguirre: The Wrath of God that punched people in the face when they first came out, broke many rules and were anything but predictable. Well-connected and financed Hollywood movie makers who in theory could make anything they want seem all too keen to throw originality out the window and stick to tried and tested formulae. I.e., the kind of movie where people know the ending with certainty... before they've even bought their movie ticket. So now I'm waiting for someone to make a decent original movie in set in the Mayan era; one that people will be watching 20 years from now. I'm guessing that a couple of years into the future most will have forgotten about Apocalypto. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 10/30/2007 : 14:16:40
|
I agree with Sean about the overall quality of the film. I also agree that stars imply a maximum of five. (However, surely 6/10 = 3/5, so even if M.B.I. had meant 4/5 he would not be only three quarters of a star ahead with his rating.)
I agree with M.B.I. about not expecting this to be an arthouse film. I didn't see anything in the trailers that made me think that. I also agree that run-of-the-mill sex acts and physical pranks are not modern inventions, and are so highly likely to be present in most or all societies that it is O.K. to assume so. I'm not quite sure that the physical pranks are exactly right (eating testicles might well have been quite everyday anyway, and would they waste chilli?), but it isn't a big problem. Behaviours obviously change over time, but personality types don't. I wouldn't like films to need to make all the characters unidentifiable to us in order to 'prove' that they are set in the past! |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 10/30/2007 : 23:54:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sal8pian
I agree with Sean about the overall quality of the film. I also agree that stars imply a maximum of five. (However, surely 6/10 = 3/5, so even if M.B.I. had meant 4/5 he would not be only three quarters of a star ahead with his rating.)
Oops.  I meant to give it 6.5/10 (which is 3.25 stars) but wrote down my IMDb score which I rounded down to 6 (I always round away from the current IMDb score if the score I want to give it is something-point-five.) |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Apocalypto (contains minor spoilers)
