Apocalypto: Fact or Fiction?

Apocalypto: Fact or Fiction?
A review by Romy Smith and Kirk Pearson
2/20/08
During the first fifteen minutes alone, Mel Gibson’s gruesome horror flick
“Apocalypto” dishes out enough misinformation and gory special effects to last a
lifetime. The film confuses the Aztec and Mayan cultures simultaneously, crunches
thousands of years of culture into a week and depicts the people closer to blood thirsty
zombies than the technological advancers they were. One almost never envisions these
types of movies to be historically accurate, but “Apocalypto” is simply so over the top,
one can’t believe that the film comes even close to accuracy. Although the motion picture
was badly researched, the plotline itself managed to keep you on the edge of your seat
and occasionally turn your head from the screen in fear and disgust. We believe
“Apocalypto” was a good recreational film, but depicted cultures very falsely.
Many renowned historians agree with our point of view as well. As Mayan
scholar Andrea Stone says, “The fact is, this concoction [Apocalypto] of the ancient
Maya, which, to the film’s credit, includes many accurate details, but anachronistically,
drawn from over a 1,700 year period.” She describes her view in the article Orcs in
Loincloths as an entertaining movie, but very badly planned out. On the other hand, critic
Marc Norton comments that “Apocalypto” will “create interest in the field on Mayan
archeology.” Both views of the film point out the inaccuracies as well as the
entertainment factor. We believe that the film was indeed an intriguing one, yet was a
horrible way to express Mayan values to the public.
The film starts out with the violent slaughter of a tapir and the consumption of its
testicles. Here we meet the man who slaughtered the tapir, our protagonist, the Mayan
Jaguar Paw. Just as a side note, Mayans were an agricultural community and rarely ever
hunted unless for royalty (news.nationalgeographic.com). Jaguar Paw is next in line to be
the head of their tribe, somehow a subsidiary of the Mayan civilization. Sounds peaceful,
right? But sticking with cheap movie 101, another subsidiary of the Mayan culture
interrupts Jaguar Paw’s nightly siesta to pillage their village with 21st century fighting
techniques and weapons that didn’t evolve in the Mayan culture for another couple
hundred years.
Once the good guys are captured, they take a nice day long walk to a giant
industrial city. It is here where Jaguar Paw and his friends are set to have their hearts
extracted and their cadavers thrown down a Chichen Itza replica. The ceremony was set
to appease “the sun god”, which is ended when an eclipse occurs. If any culture really did
as graphic a sacrifice as seen in the movie, it would have been the Aztecs, who were a
much more violent culture. Naturally, the Aztecs weren’t a convenient 24 hours away. If
anything was that close to where they were living, they would certainly know about it.
However, Mayan culture was centered around cities built for religious practice and
sacrifice, although not the same kind you saw in the movie. Even still, the Mayans never
had a sun god to appease. They did have “Kukulkahn” however, which was the god for
sacrifice. However, the actual Mayan sacrifice would have been more sacred and much
less public.
Another clue to the poor research done for the movie was the appearance of the
Mayans in Mel Gibson’s movie. Ms. Stone points out that the Mayans did not have the
stereotypical stick-through-the-nose piercing that we saw in the movie as well as the
elaborate scarring applied to the chest and abdomen of the warriors. The list describing
the inaccuracies in the character’s appearance could go on. Many of the physical
characteristics were invented to make the characters appear more exotic and exciting.
Even the weapons were inaccurate; the film featured more Aztec weapons, such as
macuahuitls, a blunt cosh resembling what you think an Aztec baseball bat would look
like.
But in his article “Beyond Chron” by Marc Norton, it is argued that “Apocalypto”
is bringing awareness to the Mayan culture and therefore, keeping it alive. Mr. Norton
points out that although the film is a gore-fest, it should not be flamed by the critics for
this reason. He brings to light the fact that we expose ourselves to massive amounts of
violence just by turning on the TV or picking up a newspaper. The viewers also witness,
not only the “Maya-on-Maya” violence that makes up roughly ninety-percent of the film,
the destruction brought on by the Spanish. The film shows us an eerie reflection of our
own society.
Overall, “Apocalypto” is a great film to see as long as one isn’t too critical of the
historical precision. Although Gibson repeatedly points out how traditionally accurate the
movie is, “Apocalypto” is a popcorn picture, and nothing else. The movie is a very poor
stab at a historical fiction film and should not, under any circumstance, be taken as an
actual portrayal of any culture seen in the film. The simple reason the movie is shown
this way is all due to the appeal of gore, violence, sex and “ancient barbarianism” which
the public loves so very much. In conclusion, we recommend Apocalypto to see as a time
waster, but serves as a pitiful source to a history project.