08-13-2009, 07:21 PM
IMHO article as stupid as it could be.
10 000 years B.C. hystoric film? Where did the lady study history? Why not The Fellowship of the Ring is placed in the list?
I think that the film is work of art, it isn't reconstuction - in that sence they can't compete with BBC educational films - and it's easy to see the difference between fiction and documentary. The artist should give to the viewer the image of the epoch and to express himself and if he could be as correct as possible - it's good, but that's not the main aim of historic film.
Mel Gibson could do as much mistakes as possible but still Apocalypto is good film. The same thing I could say about Gladiator.
By the way, it's possible to read memoirs by Bernard Diaz del Castilio - and to think that probably Mel Gison was too delicate in depicting of rituals
Apocalypto is the film about our modern society - not about Mayas, Aztecs etc.
10 000 years B.C. hystoric film? Where did the lady study history? Why not The Fellowship of the Ring is placed in the list?
I think that the film is work of art, it isn't reconstuction - in that sence they can't compete with BBC educational films - and it's easy to see the difference between fiction and documentary. The artist should give to the viewer the image of the epoch and to express himself and if he could be as correct as possible - it's good, but that's not the main aim of historic film.
Mel Gibson could do as much mistakes as possible but still Apocalypto is good film. The same thing I could say about Gladiator.
By the way, it's possible to read memoirs by Bernard Diaz del Castilio - and to think that probably Mel Gison was too delicate in depicting of rituals
Apocalypto is the film about our modern society - not about Mayas, Aztecs etc.
