History Buffs: Apocalypto
Added 2016-11-02 20:36:12 +0000 UTCHi guys! Here is the new episode of History Buffs. Many of you have been asking me to do a shit movie for a long time. So I figured that if I was going to do one it would have to really take the biscuit! Apocalypto is truly a dreadful movie when you analyze it from a historical perspective.
I also want to thank each and everyone of you for your donations. They are really helping me with keeping this channel going and I'm gonna try my best to keep things up with the quality. After this review I will be working on Apollo 13 and I think this will be a fun one to do.
Wish you all the very best,
Nick Hodges
Comments
I don't believe it is because he is lazy. Every thing Gibson does is an attempt to push his own beliefs. So if he has to twist history to justify his faith or prejudice, he will. And he does it because he believes he is doing gods work.
Sgt.Bradshaw
2020-02-13 15:27:58 +0000 UTCI think that Mel Gibson is too lazy to get it right and just films what ever pops into his head and calls it a historical film. P.s. Ive learned a lot from you and that my favorite historical films are not always accurate. also have you seen Django Unchained?
Jon (kragen)
2016-12-19 23:14:06 +0000 UTCThanks so much for being a Patron Harper. I'm willing to explain myself for the millionth time on why I believe my review was justified. 1.) My research was looked over by Dr Lia Tsesmeli who is a Mayan archaeologist. We discussed in the film in great detail. She know more about the Maya world then you and I ever will. Not once did she say that Jaguar Paw's villagers were Mayan. That's because they can't be. A primitive tribe (that speaks Mayan) cannot live side by side with an advanced civilization and not be conquered or assimilated. There is also no archaeological evidence that such a group or people existed in the Maya world at the same time as the Maya. Don't presume but research if you don't believe me. 2.) Concerning your small pox question. The Maya first learned about the Spanish in 1502, then 1508 and in 1511. The first small pox epidemic in the Maya world was in 1518. So your logical explanation is again based on presumption rather then research. 3.) I don't like the film because of Mel Gibson's disregard for history. I cannot pretend to like it if there are so many. And you are excusing the film based on assumptions and because you like it. If I had reviewed Iron Clad you wouldn't be leaving a comment defending it would you? My show is not only about informing people about innacuracies but giving my opinion on what is and what isn't a good historical film. Lastly....you completely overlook all the times I praised Mel Gibson for getting his research right in the review. So I wasn't trying to give him a hard time.
Nick Hodges
2016-11-07 13:17:05 +0000 UTCNick, while I agree that Gibson's decision to mix disparate civilizations was both stupid and dangerous, I feel that you made a couple of assumptions and oversimplifications early in the review. I think it is clear that Jaguar Paw and his fellow villagers are NOT Mayan, which is why they lack the culture and technology of their assailants, and explains why they are being targeted in the first place. If the idea of neighboring peoples having mutually intelligible languages is completely out of the question (which I don't believe is the case) then the phenomenon can be explained by simple narrative expediency (it wouldn't exactly be a first for Gibson). It also seems clear to me that the events taking place in the film are meant to be occurring in the early 16th century, which explains the arrival of the arrival of the Spanish (if not the fall of the Mayans, but we've already established that he is mashing up two different civilizations). As to why smallpox appears to precede the arrival of Europeans, the logical explanation is that the landing shown at the end of the film is not the first landfall that the Spanish had ever made. Disease spreads quickly, and Spanish explorers visited many different locations around the Caribbean in a short period of time. I am not interested in defending Gibson's choices or his film, but I suspect that your resentment of the man's treatment of history in other films colored this review heavily. You can give parts of Apocalypto the benefit of the doubt because it's most egregious errors speak for themselves. As a Patron, I would prefer that you give more credit to dissenting arguments in future reviews. Thanks!
Harper Scott Martin
2016-11-07 08:33:46 +0000 UTCMr hodges Hacksaw Ridge is Director Mel Gibson and tis film sidowing well.
steven-james van acker
2016-11-03 17:38:59 +0000 UTCI'll be honest, if this movie was about the Aztecs then it could have worked. But as someone who believes historical authenticity is important I can't let it slide. But if you like the film then that's awesome for you mate :)
Nick Hodges
2016-11-03 14:32:13 +0000 UTCI think in future I will refrain from Mel Gibson movies. Some of the comments defending these historical inaccuracies are a little infuriating lol
Nick Hodges
2016-11-03 14:27:05 +0000 UTCDear lord man review anything but a Mel Gibson movie. This was the movie that nearly killed me with laughter! And I don't want to go out like the Joker.
Farzad Mansouri
2016-11-03 02:18:04 +0000 UTCYeah well ... even though I knew most of this stuff, I still love this movie. I mean I see where you're coming from. Of course the setting is all over the place, from the spot on depiction of the marketplace and the gorgeous costume design and make up to the incredibly stupid and completely unneccesary timetraveling spaniards at the end. But the focus stays on Jaguar Paw the whole time and his quest to get back to his wife and child and especially the chase scene that makes up the second half of the movie is just awesome! And bonus points for the scene where he tricks his friend into rubbing some kind of chilli on his dick and his wife is later trying to wash it out of her mouth, that always gets me. I guess I'm a simple man. :D
Cryoboy
2016-11-02 21:44:55 +0000 UTC
