Apocalypto

When Apocalypto came to movie theaters, I decided I'd not see it because of what I had read would be gratuitous and graphic violence. I have rarely been a fan of mayhem or Mel Gibson. For me to see a film about violence requires there to be some higher purpose. Then the DVD for Apocalypto was released, and I cannot explain what led to a change of my mind. Maybe it was because I figured if the violence was too much, I could escape it. I also believed it was a film that I should see; so I bought it-- which means I was guessing I'd want to see it more than once.

I have always had a fascination with ancient cultures especially in the Americas. Because the Mayans had a fairly advanced culture for their times-- the good guys to the Aztec bad guys-- they have been of interest to many people. Who were they? Did they know things from which we today might benefit? The Mayans are also the ones with the calendar that ends in 2012 which is setting up a whole group of people for another millennium scenario about world's end.

What people today actually know about the Mayans, because of the destruction of their writings by Catholic priests, is based on oral histories, pictographs, buildings, and any discovered cultural artifacts as well as burial grounds. Anthropologists, who look at the current people's stories (who are descended from the Mayans), as well as archaeologists, who excavate the known sites, almost universally didn't like Apocalypto's creative license. They admired Mayan advances, of which there were many, wanted the story to be about that, felt that Gibson was using too much imagination to create a story that actually put down Mayans and depicted European priests as their rescuers. (I didn't see the story that way at all.)

Gibson didn't use models or computer simulations but instead real actors to portray a culture that destructed due to possibly its own excesses. He built pyramids. He took his crew and cast back into a world that no longer exists. The detail taken with things like costuming adds grace notes to what was already an impressive visual treat. If you see this film, watch the commentary on it for added appreciation.

The story is first and foremost an allegory. Those scientists who wanted a documentary missed the point. Apocalypto does what allegories do-- uses a people, an event, or a story to illustrate a bigger truth. Any recreation of the Mayan world is going to be based on speculation and fantasy-- whether you use dug up bones and oral histories or your imagination.

Given what I had been led to believe about this movie's violence, I was surprised I only had to close my eyes a couple of times. Yes, death was shown to be brutal. Uh would people prefer it to be like the television westerns I grew up with where you hit a guy hard with your fist, smash a gun over his head and no concussion, no spurting blood, no real injury? I think sanitized brutality too often has led people to get into or support wars with no understanding of their cost. For me, the violence, although graphic and extensive, was not gratuitous. It was necessary. It is also not a picture for children.

How do I begin to list all the things to which this poetic film spoke? I want to use the word epic but usually that's reserved for stories that last over a long span of time and this one is not long in the time in the character's life. It is nonetheless epic.

The story is about how religion corrupts, how some people use it to gain power when they no longer even believe in it. It's about how there is spiritual power in the world, that we can connect with it through opening our self to it. It's about, whatever happens to us, it's how we react that determines its meaning. Fear is our biggest enemy. Greed and a constant desire for more undermines any culture or individual. There was spiritual power depicted in this movie but the kind that comes with an inner connection to the spirit world.

Don't see Apocalypto with the idea that it will tell you who the Mayans were or accurately depict historic events. Yes, it has pieces of who they were, some darned good ones, but it is about a broader concept of who mankind is, who we can be, and especially what can happen when we turn over our spirituality to someone else. Mayans are a vehicle for a warning to us all.

What I think a lot of the critics missed, when they accused the film of putting down the Mayans, was that in the end, a Mayan character, who had led a more natural existence, had worked for his food, loved his family, been taught by a wise father, listened to his inner voice and that of his land, it was that man who was the victor over the cultural excesses of others who had come from his same roots but made other choices. It was that Mayan, whose descendants still live there, that man was the one who overcame what destroyed the others-- fear.

And someone could see none of what I wrote, watch it purely as an adrenaline pumping action film, and it would still be worth seeing. For me it was inspiring... and dang it all... Mel Gibson made it!? (reassessing Mel Gibson)

(Although I very much enjoyed this movie, my caveat on a recommendation comes down to the violence. If it is disturbing to you, then it might be something to skip.)