Home Movies

An unflinchingly violent and wildly inaccurate historical epic makes a sacrifice at the altar of reevaluation

A brutal dive into the past that doesn't have much interest being rooted in reality.

apocalypto
via 20th Century Fox

Although it’s important to separate the artist from the art when applicable, one of the longest-held conspiracy theories surrounding Mel Gibson’s Apocalypto is that the jaw-dropping historical epic was given the short shrift by critics based on the unsavory antics of its director.

Recommended Videos

You can see why that opinion was formed, considering the two-time Academy Award winner’s infamous DUI arrest came mere months before the film’s December 2006 release date. On the other side of the coin, though, the negativity surrounding Gibson’s personal life didn’t prevent Apocalypto from recouping its $40 million budget three times over at the box office, before going on to land Academy ward nominations for Best Makeup, Best Sound Editing, and Best Sound Mixing.

apocalypto
via Buena Vista

That doesn’t paint the picture of a feature maliciously tanked due to the behavior of its architect, but an incredulous Reddit thread lambasting the frenetic chase thriller for only having a Rotten Tomatoes score of 65 percent has reignited the conversation. As it turns out, Apocalypto remains incredibly popular and underrated to this day, regardless of how it doesn’t pay much heed to historical accuracy.

Unflinchingly violent, wildly inaccurate, and filmed entirely in a language the vast majority of audiences wouldn’t understand without subtitles, it doesn’t sound like the type of production to be defended to the hilt, although it’s readily apparent that whatever people think of Gibson off-camera, he remains an incredible presence when he’s standing behind it calling the shots.

Just make sure you don’t watch it while eating, because the rampant decapitations and grisly dispatches might just turn your stomach.