• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades
  • Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Mel Gibson's 'Apocalypto'

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Story

40 Cal.
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
509
Reaction score
103
What do you want to bet, this movie will be about the Spanish invasion as seen from the locals' perspective???

Mel tongue-ties studios
'Apocalypto' to be filmed in obscure Mayan dialect
By MICHAEL FLEMING
http://www.variety.com/VR1117926430.html

When production chiefs from selected studios trooped to Icon Prods. headquarters after an invite to read the film Mel Gibson planned for summer 2006, they were surprised at the very first page of the script.
"The dialogue you are about to read will not be spoken in English."

Gibson, who last made the most successful Aramaic-language film ever, is at it again.

"Apocalypto" hardly fits the traditional definition of a summer film. Set 500 years ago, pic will be filmed in an obscure Mayan dialect, presumably with the same kind of subtitles Gibson reluctantly added to "The Passion of the Christ." It will star a neophyte cast indigenous to the region of Mexico where Gibson will shoot in October. And it likely will carry an R rating, unless Gibson tempers the onscreen depiction of violent scenes he wrote in his script.

Since Gibson's bankrolling his pic and will sell foreign himself, studios were offered only a rent-a-system deal, such as George Lucas had with 20th Century Fox for his last three "Star Wars" films. And because "Apocalypto" is not a religious pic, there's no guarantee of an encore turnout of the church groups and hardcore Catholics who made "The Passion of the Christ" a nearly $1 billion box office/DVD bonanza.

'Passion' prediction

At least three studios passed on the project before Disney bought it. Nevertheless, the fact that more than one studio bid for the project shows Gibson's viability and makes laughable last year's prediction by the New York Times that Gibson would be blackballed by Jewish executives after the "Passion" controversy.

That charge never really had much traction, said sources within Gibson's agency, ICM. There was a post-"Passion" pile of scripts with $20 million-plus offers for Gibson's acting services. While that paper piled up on ICM co-prexy Ed Limato's desk, Gibson was accumulating pages of his own, scribbling "Apocalypto" in his office and becoming so passionate about it that he changed his plans to star in the Icon-produced drama "Under and Alone" for Warner Bros.

Even though studios including Paramount and Universal walked away from "Apocalypto" either for creative reasons or because Gibson's asking price of a high P&A commitment was too high, Disney's agreement to step up shows how much things have changed for Gibson since he struggled to get backing for "Braveheart." Gibson felt he was too old to play William Wallace, preferring to cast Jason Patric, but he was hard-pressed to raise coin even when he agreed to star.

Paramount wouldn't make "Braveheart" without a partner, and before Fox (which passed on "Passion") stepped up, Gibson had a demoralizing meeting with his longtime haunt Warner Bros., which wanted another "Lethal Weapon" as a condition of the deal. Gibson made "Braveheart" on a shoestring, won picture and director Oscars and made money for both Paramount and Fox.

Happy with Disney

Now content to bankroll his vision and armed with his own overseas distribution and sales company, Gibson no longer goes hat in hand. Sources said at least two studios wanted the pic, but Gibson liked Disney, where he has a good relationship with Dick Cook, chairman of the Walt Disney Studios. For its part, Disney agreed to Gibson's tough deal terms.

Already, there is talk that Disney will program "Apocalypto" against the Warner Bros. film "Lady in the Water," which just happens to be the first M. Night Shyamalan-directed film Disney hasn't financed since the filmmaker's breakthrough, "The Sixth Sense."

For his part, Cook said he was confident "Apocalypto" fits the summer bill.

"We couldn't be more excited about working again with Mel and his team," said Cook. "This is one of the most original and unique scripts we've had the opportunity to read recently, and we plan for this to be an anchor of our summer schedule."

Date in print: Mon., Jul. 25, 2005, Los Angeles
 
When I first saw this announcement I thought it was a joke but saw it later and now think it's for real.

It's all well and good that he shot "The Passion of the Christ" in aramaic and latin. I guess it gave a unique view of the subject. You also have a ready made audience to allow the film to at least break even. I understand Gibson did better than that and wound up with a stealth blockbuster.

Using real mayans is a good thing, doing it in a mayan dialect might be distracting. Gibson does have a good eye for this type of thing so it may work out.

I remember a short news piece, about 20 or 30 years ago, on a movie that was done in all Lakota. It was done by a french company so the chances are the moview was boring and pretentious. That one item was all I ever heard about it.
 
Nah, to portray the Native American side properly he would have to paint Catholics and the Church in a bad light.

Seriously, I am not sure if I want to see it or not. A movie all in subtitles is very distracting. :results:
 
I looked this up on[url] IMDB.com[/url] and they list as a film set 3,000 years ago. And the Mayan empire was long gone by the time of European arrival, it had been replaced by the Aztecs. So I wouldn't worry about making the Catholic Spaniards look bad! This movie is going to be pre-Passion. :peace:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually the official statement is that this new film of gibsons is sent in 500 hundred years ago from TODAY.
 
From my experience subtitled films aren't that bad. Once you get into the movie, reading the words becomes a side issue. Of course, the movie has to be interesting or it doesn't matter anyway. Sounds like an interesting concept and I support any efforts to make Hollywood's version of history more authentic.
 
Sub titles arnt bad its just that you miss so much of the dialogue.You can get a basic idea but thats all.With the passion it was fine cause just about evryone Has read or was told the storey .The first time was a charm the second time ? we will see.I like a few of Mr.Gibsons movies but I do think he goe's over bord with the violance and for thet reason I dont think it will do as good as the passion.
 
Subtitles can be fun. The first time I saw "A Fistfull of Dollars" I was in Ankara Turkey. The movie was in Italian with Turkish subtitles. About fifteen minutes in I realized it was "Jujumbo" in the old west so could follow it better.
 
... the Mayan empire was long gone by the time of European arrival, it had been replaced by the Aztecs.

I don't believe this is accurate.

I believe Aztec and Mayan cultures existed at the same time, in two different geographic locations. Aztec in Northern and Central Mexico and Maya in southern Mexico and Central America.

The Aztecs were conquered by Spain in 1521, when after long battle and a long siege where much of the population died from hunger and smallpox, Cuauht
 
Sorry about that Claude, I was going off of what I could remember from my old Archy and Anthro classes, I should have looked it up. The dates I was remembering were for the older, "Classical Period" that had seen its demise well before Europeans arrived (in South and Central America anyway!). There were still smaller Mayan states in existence, just not on the grand scale of their pre-Columbian (and pretty much pre-900CE) civilization. And the Mayans were conquered by the Spanish so perhaps we are back to that point of view for the movie!
 
All kidding aside I would be curious how the history is handled in the film. Are the Spaniards painted as the bad guys and the Indians the good, vice Versa? Will the more distasteful parts of both cultures be glossed over? Hmm.
 
I looked this up on[url] IMDB.com[/url] and they list as a film set 3,000 years ago. And the Mayan empire was long gone by the time of European arrival, it had been replaced by the Aztecs. So I wouldn't worry about making the Catholic Spaniards look bad! This movie is going to be pre-Passion. :peace:

Hmmmm...somebody's got the wrong word, then:
The writer-director plans an October starting date to shoot Apocalypto, set 500 years ago in Central America, his spokesman, Alan Nierob, said.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/features/3283388

2005 - 500 = 1505AD. Spanish era.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I did a web search for info on this film awhile ago. Most of the sites I came up with reported that the film will be set 3,000 years ago. While I did find a couple sites, including the one quoted in the OP, which stated the film will be set 500 years ago. :hmm: Somebody messed something up somewhere.
 
Back
Top