Why does this movie make liberals seethe so much?

Film would've made no sense without the Spanish foreshadowing. Women are tempted by the devil which lead to our chaotic demise. Men instinctively and wisely go back into the forest.

>"The fear-mongering we depict in the film reminds me of President Bush and his guys."

Was President Bush Mexican?

fpbp

>Why does this movie make liberals seethe so much?

didn't know it did
Is it because it was made by Mel Gibson

>The thematic meaning of the arrival of the Europeans is a subject of disagreement. Traci Ardren wrote that the Spanish arrivals were Christian missionaries and that the film had a "blatantly colonial message that the Mayas needed saving because they were 'rotten at the core'". According to Ardren, the Gibson film "replays, in glorious big-budget technicolor, an offensive and racist notion that Maya people were brutal to one another long before the arrival of Europeans and thus they deserved, in fact they needed, rescue. This same idea was used for 500 years to justify the subjugation of Maya people".[52] On the other hand, David van Biema questions whether the Spaniards are portrayed as saviors of the Mayas, since they are depicted ominously and Jaguar Paw decides to return to the woods.[58] This view is supported by the reference of the Oracle Girl to those who would "Scratch out the earth. Scratch you out. And end your world." However, recalling the opening quote to the film ("A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within"), professors David Stuart and Stephen Houston have written the implication is that Postclassic Mayans had become so corrupt that they were "a civilization ... that deserves to die."[49]

to this very day still EASILY the biggest kvetch ever heard on youtube

Attached: 78ioui26.png (247x310, 164.13K)

Are those people retarded? The meaning is in the fucking title.

Those guys arriving means game over, the apocalypse is here and your civilization gets it raw from here on out.

"Saving"? How the fuck would you ever come to that conclusion?

to be fair if the innacuracy adds nothing and could easily be swapped for something more accurate then why isn't it objectively a blight upon the work? Granted half the shit that buck-toothed cheddar-fag was bothered by made for a better story.

>pretty poor representation of mayan culture

compared to what other representations, faggot? Nerds can be upset but its not mel's fault the genre is basically non-existent. Why does his entry have to be the most accurate?

All I know is that the part where the jaguar leaps out of the bush and rips that dude's face clean off is one of the most metal fucking things I've ever seen.

>Today on Yas Forums pretends to be oblivious because people's interpretation of a movie isn't their self projected values.

People who's interpretation isn't compatible with mine shouldn't exist.

I think its more in the christian sense saving their souls destorying their culture.

>Ive seen people saying this about the 13th warrior ffs.
13th warrior is upfront about being fantasy, unlike apocalypto. It's actually really strange liberties it takes with the timeline, the exact mistakes an ignorant retard would make, which is just a coincidence I'm sure.

>compared to what other representations
Why does that matter?
>Nerds can be upset but its not mel's fault the genre is basically non-existent.
Why are you so defensive of the director? No one was making any personal attacks against him.

This movie, Passion of The Christ, The VVitch, and The lighthouse are on my list of linguistically accurate historical kino. Anymore movies where the language of the time is portrayed as accurately as possible?

that history buffs faggot in the video has it out for Mel, with this review and The Patriot, despite both being good flicks that shouldn't be taken as a history textbook.

it didnt and it doesnt

So you're intentionally being dumb and ignoring why Mel changes history? Like his intent and context shouldn't be looked at? That's what you do with art.

>movie shows nonwhites being violent brutes as they were in real life, not muh wise and noble savages.
Gee I wonder why.

Also the arrival of human ships in the end makes them buttblasted.

based solely on his voice and the type of videos he makes i have no doubt he's a lefty faggot, but all his criticisms were fair. he didn't even relate the opening quote to evil white imperialism, just pointed out how it doesn't fit the mayan/aztec reality

I'm a language autistic fag
no matter the issues this movie has, since it portrays the language such people spoke,it has my respect

Based and lingopilled.

This.

History scholars need to check their privilege. It's problematic not to acknowledge that language majors are being marginalized. We need to celebrate their heroes. Historians need to realize they are a part of the problem.

Put yourself in an oven with your cute bait.

I mean how many other directors made movies in the last 30 years accurately depict Yucatan Mayan dialect, Aramaic, Latin, or fuck even English dialects (save for Shakespeare adaptations). Eggers gets a pass for accurately depicting early American dialects like the late 1800's Maine accent or 1700's Middle Atlantic accent.

>the Witch
>the Lighthouse
>linguistically accurate
wtf?? they take place in English speaking places and are spoken in English
that would be almost every damn movie ever

The dialects he uses are near fucking spot on for the time periods they're set in.

Apocalypto isn't remotely inaccurate, it's all based on documented practices. What Apocalypto is, is Anachronistic. It's condensing 600 years of cultural evolution and decay into a single film.

my favorite movie

That makes it more of a pastiche or a stereotypical portrayal than "accurate".

Not that user, but this is pretty much common practice in movies since god knows when. To condense topic to make it interesting and full of content for the viewer. Calling it "stereotypical" is nonsense.

What? That makes no sense at all. All of the executions and rituals are based on factual accounts and historical reality. Accounts from both the Spanish and the Mayans who allied with the Spanish because they were sick of the Aztecs doing that exact shit to them. That isn't a stereotype, it's accepted reality.
Calling it a pastiche is utterly nonsensical, the only thing it's imitating is history, it's just doing it with no regard to time period for the sake of brevity.

Are you studying some university by any chance?

Yeah, I enjoy everyone yelling hark at me when I go to the store to pick up some milk and eggs.
Retard.

No, but I do teach English

based & catpilled

Attached: 1565811764028.jpg (1200x1800, 338.76K)

>Like his intent and context shouldn't be looked at?
Yes, it literally doesn't matter

Does it?

One of the best movies i've seen.
Liberals hate it because Mel Gibson is a no no man and when (((they))) tell you who to hate, they obey on command.

It doesnt, you just have nothing in your life

So it's some poltards projecting their mental illness onto the movie

I'm a liberal and I love it. I think you just need to believe your political opponents dislike things you like because it helps you dehumanize them

If Mel Gibson knew he had the same fanbase as Sam Hyde he'd probably question his face. He's too smart and pure for you schizo incels

>fresh rating on rotten tomatoes
>makes liberals seethe
You can only pick one

It does matter. Looking at the context and intent of the sender is literally what a historian does for a living.

I'm massively liberal, think Mel Gibson is a crazy piece of shit, and I think the movie is an absolute masterpiece. Never heard a bad word said about it either.

So you are a Liberal, but not a SJW npc?
That's nice for everyone

It doesn't. Why would it? Mayans are good guys, Spanish are bad. Pretty easy message for left wingers to digest

Literally everything triggers them, so who cares?

You are a massive faggot first and foremost.

Wait I thought Apocalypto is based in Brazil

Persistence running and the wild pig getting killed at the beginning of the movie.

People’s opinion about what the meaning of the end doesn’t mean shit. It’s only what the authors of the screen play intended the ending to mean, everything else is projection

This movie doesn't pretend to be accuate.
As Mel said it was for showing something about society.

Neither many Robin Hoods films are historical

Source?