Mel Gibson's APOCALYPTO!

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (242 of them)

View Previous Page...

Give in, give in. (I still haven't decided myself.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 15 November 2006 04:45 (nineteen years ago)

i propose gathering a group of a few dozen people to attend the opening all nerded-out in full-on Mayan gear.

― researching ur life (grady), Wednesday, 15 November 2006 05:45 (nineteen years ago)

ha, the new fanbase will be called 'Lyptoids

― latebloomer: not to be confused with the dolphin from Seaquest DSV (latebloomer), Wednesday, 15 November 2006 06:00 (nineteen years ago)

it'll be a week-long bizarre internet fad that will fizzle 3 seconds after the movie premiers.

― latebloomer: not to be confused with the dolphin from Seaquest DSV (latebloomer), Wednesday, 15 November 2006 06:06 (nineteen years ago)

Does crucial.bonus live in Seattle? I was gonna boo after the trailer, but it would've woken everyone else.

― From the Moon to Pluto Back Down to Earth (Rrrickey), Wednesday, 15 November 2006 11:08 (nineteen years ago)

one month passes...

so, this got really good reviews in the UK as well as getting the worst written review i think i've ever seen in print, from Philip French in the Observer. a bafflingly long and pointless career summary followed by a bafflingly long and pointless plot summary.

http://film.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/Critic_Review/Observer_Film_of_the_week/0,,1980473,00.html

― jed_ (jed), Monday, 8 January 2007 18:40 (nineteen years ago)

I spoke to Melton yesterday, he says he has seen this now. He's in it, right?

― teh_kit (g-kit), Monday, 8 January 2007 18:49 (nineteen years ago)

That Observer review is, indeed, the worst fucking review I have ever read outside of a student paper. It's not even a review. Baffling.

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Thursday, 11 January 2007 13:47 (nineteen years ago)

all of philip french's reviews are like that these days, srsly. occasionally he throws in an irrelevant anecdote about a film review he wrote in the seventies.

― the original hauntology blogging crew (Enrique), Thursday, 11 January 2007 13:55 (nineteen years ago)

Bloody hell.

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Thursday, 11 January 2007 14:00 (nineteen years ago)

this is from this week, and bafflingly personal:

"The saddest thing about this unpleasant, mirthless film is that it's photographed by Anthony Richmond, the British cinematographer who shot Nicolas Roeg's Don't Look Now, The Man Who Fell to Earth and Bad Timing. I suppose this is the kind of thing you have to do after you've married and been divorced by one of Charlie's Angels."

― the original hauntology blogging crew (Enrique), Thursday, 11 January 2007 14:02 (nineteen years ago)

"Many people have the feeling that they're not entirely free to act and are being manipulated by outside forces (some call themselves Marxists, others are diagnosed as schizophrenic)."

ZING!

― the original hauntology blogging crew (Enrique), Thursday, 11 January 2007 14:03 (nineteen years ago)

The saddest thing about this unpleasant, mirthless film

I don't think anyone involved was aiming for mirth.

― onimo (onimo), Thursday, 11 January 2007 14:04 (nineteen years ago)

oh sorry naw that was from a review of the jessica simpson comedy 'employee of the month'.

― the original hauntology blogging crew (Enrique), Thursday, 11 January 2007 14:04 (nineteen years ago)

though the parallels are striking.

― the original hauntology blogging crew (Enrique), Thursday, 11 January 2007 14:04 (nineteen years ago)

― onimo (onimo), Thursday, 11 January 2007 14:05 (nineteen years ago)

Phillip french is rubbish, his reviews are always a plot summary, sometimes even giving away twists, then a little bit at the end where he tries to impress you with his arcane knowledge of cinema: "interestingly, the first AD on this picture also worked with Altman in the 80s", that sort of thing.

Apocalypto's cracking, by the way.

― chap (chap), Thursday, 11 January 2007 14:21 (nineteen years ago)

it is!

and it's not even mirthless!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 11 January 2007 14:48 (nineteen years ago)

Does it include the blink-and-you'll-miss-Mel shot from the trailer?

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 11 January 2007 15:05 (nineteen years ago)

The first half - I feared for Mel's sanity tbh. It struck me that maybe he doesn't really have a Christian manifesto, he just loves torture. The first hour is simply looting, rape, pillaging, struggle, fighting, and torture after bloody torture. Then it perks up in the second half for the chase scene. Yeh the jaguar scene is a bit tacky with the guy's face being mauled by what looks like a Beanie Baby. And the guy does get himself out of a few jammy scrapes (escaping from quicksand, being "helped" by an angry panther and surviving an enormous waterfall plunge Fugitive-style) but that doesn't matter because it is a very exciting chase.

So all in all - 50% snoozy bloodlust, 50% exciting but shakily executed chase.

― wogan lenin (dog latin), Thursday, 11 January 2007 15:07 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, he could've easily cut ten minutes or so from the capture sequence. The march through the city was extrordinary, though.

― chap (chap), Thursday, 11 January 2007 15:13 (nineteen years ago)

It struck me that maybe he doesn't really have a Christian manifesto, he just loves torture.

Western civilization 2007 right there.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 11 January 2007 15:13 (nineteen years ago)

one month passes...

are there any Conquistadors in this thing?

researching ur life (grady) on maandag 13 november 2006 20:25 (3 months ago)
Nope -- it's set in pre-Columbian times.

so who are the people on the boat at the end of the film?

i thought it was a horrendous pile of dung. the only positive emotion i got: a giggle when the guy was running to the jungle pretending to be anthony kiedis.

― nathalie, Saturday, 10 March 2007 13:31 (nineteen years ago)

i was watching an interview with carine roitfeld @ f/w 07 collections and she said the headpieces @ gaultier and balenciaga were very apocalypto and it was the film of reference for the season. i want to see this now!

― daria-g, Saturday, 10 March 2007 17:56 (nineteen years ago)

tapir balls.

'sall i'm saying

― latebloomer, Saturday, 10 March 2007 17:59 (nineteen years ago)

two weeks pass...

Apparently Mel might still have anger management issues.

― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 24 March 2007 20:08 (nineteen years ago)

that article is ridiculously vague. surely they could have gotten some specifics, like uh what exactly the question was?

― s1ocki, Saturday, 24 March 2007 20:13 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, I'd want to hear/see some more. Surprised there's nothing on YouTube yet!

― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 24 March 2007 20:14 (nineteen years ago)

six months pass...

Saw this the other night. Thought I was going to be bored because the capture scene went on a bit, but as it got going it ruled. The city scene is amazing. Costumes deserved triple oscars. Those people with the elaborate headdresses and shaved foreheads!

― Beth Parker, Tuesday, 16 October 2007 00:39 (eighteen years ago)

the movie i hate to love!

― s1ocki, Tuesday, 16 October 2007 02:00 (eighteen years ago)

four months pass...

yeah so this basically fucking ruled. I watched it through twice yesterday, once with commentary. gibson is, uh, kind of a crypto-bigot, wow.

― El Tomboto, Monday, 25 February 2008 23:34 (eighteen years ago)

Hahah, any choice phrases?

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 25 February 2008 23:34 (eighteen years ago)

“Sharp-toothed Lithuanians armed with baseball bats are crawling across the beach into your house. What should we do with them? We have to fight back.”

― da croupier, Monday, 25 February 2008 23:35 (eighteen years ago)

"crypto"

― latebloomer, Monday, 25 February 2008 23:35 (eighteen years ago)

"kind of"

― Jordan, Monday, 25 February 2008 23:36 (eighteen years ago)

i will say this once more:

TAPIR BALLZ

― latebloomer, Monday, 25 February 2008 23:36 (eighteen years ago)

this was all in all a pretty enjoyable action flick. certainly better than that shitty jesus movie.

― latebloomer, Monday, 25 February 2008 23:39 (eighteen years ago)

so who are the people on the boat at the end of the film?

christopher columbus, played by the set designer, and a franciscan monk played by the film's armorer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyages_of_Christopher_Columbus#Fourth_voyage

― El Tomboto, Monday, 25 February 2008 23:40 (eighteen years ago)

I just thought it was funny that mel could only remember like three of his actors' names from the whole movie. I mean he did remember a lot of details about so many of the people who worked on the film but clearly in his brain everybody was probably pedro 1, pedro 2, frank, pedro 8, carlito, pedro 26, fast pedro, old pedro, etc.

― El Tomboto, Monday, 25 February 2008 23:42 (eighteen years ago)

I checked this out of the library and watched it the other night, up to the point where the hero escapes and clambers through the pit of corpses. Right there I could see the entire remainder of the film would be an extended chase scene, so I bailed out.

Mel's POV as a writer and director is simple, simple, simple. The whole plot could be written on a napkin. However, the costumes for this film were utterly, jaw-droppingly fabulous! I can't rave enough about the costumes. The set design, cinematography and editing were all pretty darn good, too, but the costumes were mesmerizing. Loved 'em all.

Bottom line: I still couldn't finish watching the movie. Too reductive and too predictable.

― Aimless, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 01:41 (eighteen years ago)

you missed some amazing, amazing sequences from the chase, though.

― El Tomboto, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 01:42 (eighteen years ago)

but if I didn't love, love, love well-filmed pursuit action I probably wouldn't rate stuff like the warriors and behind enemy lines in my top x for all time

― El Tomboto, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 01:44 (eighteen years ago)

i forgot about this!
i will like all chase stuff, i'm sure

― rrrobyn, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 02:39 (eighteen years ago)

is this sort of like The Naked Prey?

― gershy, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 03:15 (eighteen years ago)

Is it going to disgust me with all its "lol mayan empire collapse under own perversion!"?

― Laurel, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 03:22 (eighteen years ago)

Bottom line: I still couldn't finish watching the movie. Too reductive and too predictable.

-- Aimless, Tuesday, February 26, 2008 1:41 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Link

pretty rich to call a movie predictable when you didn't watch it all the way through.

― s1ocki, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 03:23 (eighteen years ago)

Maybe he predicted he was going to stop watching.

― Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 03:26 (eighteen years ago)

this film plays like a tribute to the color green. the nonstop lush action on acid worth any melophobia. loved it.

― Cosmo Vitelli, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 04:20 (eighteen years ago)

Laurel it's more like "lol mayan empire collapse under own fixation on building stuff out of cement"

― El Tomboto, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 04:23 (eighteen years ago)

pretty rich to call a movie predictable when you didn't watch it all the way through.

slocki, you don't seem to appreciate how simple-minded Mel is as a storyteller. When the storyline is laid out like a plank road for an hour, you can predict it's not going to suddenly change into a cloverleaf freeway exchange.

― Aimless, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 19:36 (eighteen years ago)

Skipping 142 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.