'Apocalypto' now
Having stirred many souls -- and much controversy -- with "The Passion of the Christ," Mel Gibson is taking on a movie project that may be even further removed from the days of "Lethal Weapon 4."
"Apocalypto" will be set among the ancient Mayans and its actors will speak entirely in the ancient tongue of the Mayans.
The film, which Gibson co-wrote, is an allegory whose themes include "the collapse of civilizations -- with warnings about environmental abuse and political fear-mongering, not the sort of thing to comfort conservatives," reports Time magazine.
There also will be human sacrifices.
Not that Gibson is particularly worried about the reactions to those graphic scenes.
"After what I experienced with 'The Passion,' " he says in Time, "I frankly don’t give a flying (expletive) about much of what they think."
Pssst, Mel: You may be eroding your church base.
Comments (9)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
I don't think Gibson is worried too much about who he may offend. Perhaps he would rather express openly and honestly his feelings on whatever subject he feels needs to be addressed. He wanted to express a message in the Passion and perhaps in the Apocalypto he is doing the same. Not having read much about the movie perhaps the scenes of human sacrifice speak more than just about the bloody gore of the Mayan's. In today's society there are bloodless human sacrifices made that are just as gory and terrible all in the name of getting ahead or some agenda.That should be one subject that many in the news media would understand.
I wouldn't worry to much about Gibson loosing what ever base he may wish to speak too. What is lost in one fashion may be gained in another.
Posted on March 22, 2006 6:20 PM
Allen, PLEASE tell me this is a satirical story. Or has Mel really gone from merely cracked to completely deranged?
Posted on March 23, 2006 5:07 AM
So what's the problem?
The N&R sure isn't concerned about offending it's base. You let the Muslims dictate what you can say about them, but run anti-Bush/anti-Christian cartoons and articles ad nauseum with no concern for offending your readers.
Posted on March 23, 2006 8:42 AM
Jaycee:
Please name three, or even two examples in which Muslims have dictated content in the N&R. Better yet, name one.
Posted on March 23, 2006 10:24 AM
The reluctance of the N&R to publish the Muhammed cartoon for fear of offending Muslims. Yet you gleefully publish anti-Bush cartoons all the time. 50% of Guilford County residents voted for President Bush in the last election, yet you continue to offend them while kowtowing to the infinitesimally small (but vocal) Muslim residents.
Posted on March 23, 2006 12:02 PM
Mr. Johnson, Please do not offend our intelligence by asking us to name "just one" instance where the local Muslims dictated what you would report. YOU all know very well that you were frightened of the local Muslims and what they might do to you or your newspaper plant because these people are fanatics. Fear of this group is "allowing them to dictate" to you. As for naming three instances, I would do better than that I would name every article or blog where you defended your "choice" not to publish the silly cartoons as proof. Dear Lord, own up to your fear and get on with it!
Now as for Mel Gibson: he is in the business of making money and nothing more nor less than that. His "The passion of the Christ" was made to make money, which it did very well. His professed study of the subject for years so he coiuld portray it accurately was so much publicity and playing to the religious crowd. so now he has another movie (money maker) and is pandering to another group.
Posted on March 24, 2006 12:04 PM
Brenda Fay writes: "YOU all know very well that you were frightened of the local Muslims and what they might do to you or your newspaper plant because these people are fanatics."
You mean all Muslims?
Or all Muslims in Greensboro?
Are you honestly willing to paint an entire group of people with that broad a brush?
So far as I know, the few U.S. papers that reprinted the cartoons hasve suffered no such repercussions.
In any event, that wasn't our reasoning at all in choosing not to run the cartoons. We simply felt it was the right thing to. But perhaps you're reading minds now, so you know our motives better than we do?
Posted on March 24, 2006 12:29 PM
You felt it was "...the right thing to do."?
Right by what account? Right in that you didn't want to face the consequences from the small but vocal Muslim minority? Maybe if conservatives were as militant as Muslim extremists you'd be afraid of them, too, and wouldn't run degrading cartoons of conservative politicians. Is that what it takes to get parity from your newspaper?
You'd get a lot more respect from our community if you quit catering to special interest groups and tried some fair and impartial news reporting.
Posted on March 24, 2006 3:56 PM
Mr. Johnson, Muslims are taught by the Koran to kill the infidel. That is a fact. Who is the infidel? The non-believer of Islam! Who is Non-believer of Islam? You and I Sir, you and I. Just what part of that is difficult to understand? It is as clear as I can make it, and as the Iman I talked to made it to me when I asked the same questions and he gave the same answers. Read you own newspaper Mr. Johnson. There was an article yesterday and again today about a Muslim man who had become a Christian and now is on trial for his life in Afghanistan because he violated Islamic law. No Mr. Johnson, it is not I who paint these people with a broad brush, it is their own beliefs and actions.
No, I have not become a mind reader, but I am a bit familiar with the human psyche and your vehement and frequently repeated denial of fear was in itself an admission. If you will allow me to paraphrase, The N&R doth protest too much, me thinks…..
Posted on March 25, 2006 11:43 AM