😂😂😂

History buffs is correct that the Maya abandoned most of their big cities during the post-classic period, however according to the Spanish, wealthy Mayan cities and marketplaces still existed when they arrived. So it's a bit of a leap to say "city + famine HAS to mean classic Mayan civilization".

I choose to accept this scenario as the truth thank you for this

Two words: worm hole. That's the only way that this makes sense.

Well done, sir!

This is very true. All European explorers knew it was essential to bring along LOTS of gifts & trade goods beyond just the samples for establishing potential future trade routes. This was to help ease the minds & create friendly rapport with any kings, leaders or groups they might come into contact with as well as to help cross the cultural & language barriers. Unfortunately some of the gifts & trade items (like quilts & blankets) likely carried the small pox virus. Due to the lack of prior generational exposure like ppl from the Old World the virus completely ravished their populations with estimates of up to 90% dying in the 1st waves. These are Black Death rates of death... The spread was documented by both the surviving groups in the New World & the freaked out European explorers who were losing men to it too but at a much lower percentage overall. They said the pox had caused a total epidemic & was moving along the well established trade routes faster than they were traveling. It completely ended some kingdoms that were failing due to population collapse. They documented traveling to major kingdoms only to find some completely abandoned with the locals living tribally. Now I've heard some pseudo-historians try & claim this was done intentionally. This is inarguably false. At the time this happened Europeans still incorrectly believed in the 4 humors & that illness was spread by "bad air." They did not understand how the pox spread. They were also very good with documenting their unethical intentions, planning & their reasoning but it was never mentioned. In fact we don't see anyone mention trying to intentionally give a native population small pox till over 300 years later after the establishment of America & an understanding or better understanding of viral spread was established. In a letter an officer made the highly immoral suggestion to a superior that in order to deal with a local tribe giving his area trouble they could gift them blankets used by ppl who died from small pox. We don't know how his superior replied but hopefully he rejected the cold blooded idea.

Yeah, if there was trade between Spanish Cuba, Hispanola and the mainland - the disease could have entered earlier than when the conquistadors arrived.

This is exactly what I was hoping someone would point out. Also, history buffs is mad saying the spanish hadn't arrived yet - but the movie doesn't ever suggest they haven't already arrived before. In fact, the spanish left and came back at one point. This could be their second arrival and so the girl 100% could have small pox.

@@gsimon123 Thanks, I wanted to pointing that out too, also I always felt the little girl was not to be taken literally, she's a bad omen, maybe even a demon.

@@gsimon123no this doesn’t make sense. This is too early for even the Spanish to exist. That’s what he’s pointing out that she can’t have small pox because no Europeans have made it to the America’s yet.

Yea accurate or not who cares. That ending is intense, making the entire movie beforehand (which was awesome) seem like a warm up.

Except .. as explained they are not the Aztecs because they don’t exist yet lol

That's what I thought when the Spanish showed up

Because the Maya weren't even around when the Spanish showed up

@@johnmoreno5965wow your knowledge of Mayan history sucks. Not only were they there, they were the last civilization/cities to be conquered all the way up to 1800s! 300 years later after the Spanish arrived.

underrated comment.

This is gold, mate!

Do they have Johnny Depp with them? If they don't they're not the real Spanish Time Travelling Conquistadors.

I cracked up when the Spanish showed up :P

or the Spanish Inquisition (Monty Python reference)

😂😂😂

HAHAHAHA

DAAAAAAAA obviously Apocalypto is a Sci-fi Time travelling portals in the jungle movie!!!! XD

😂😂😂😂😂 this made me laugh hard broo

Lmfao, the more i think about this, the funnier it gets 😂🤣😂 Just imagine: Lets say these dudes start the chase in 950 AD, ok? So: 962 - Holy Roman Empire is being established. These dudes still chasing each other 1066 - The battle of Hastings. These dudes still chasing each other 1215 - Declaration of Magna Carta. Dudes still chasing each other 1315 - The great famine. Dudes still chasing each other 1337 - The hundred years' war. Dudes still chasing each other 1348 - The Black Death. Dudes still chasing each other 1378 - The great Schism. Dudes still in the woods, chasing each other 1456 - The Ottomam Turks enter Europe. The Balkans are being enslaved. Dudes still chasing each other 1460 - DaVinci is already inventing planes amd tanks and golden ratios. Dudes still chasong each other. 1492 - Columbus arrives on the Carribeans and finds an entire new world. Dudes still chasing each other in the jungle. Its finally 1500 and the Spanish are allready colonizing America. Good guy gets shot by an arrow in the chest and him and the hunters go on the beach and see the Spanish arriving The End

As well as borderline insulting to every cultural group they depict. Especially when he injects his personal opinions into it, such as rabid Christianity and distaste for the English (and for a decidedly more oppressed people that I won't name. You know the one.).

Im not sure his vision isnt closer than you think. They really werent that impressive.

@@Tea-rettescry bout it + British people are terrible

​@@Tea-retteslol no

@@Tea-rettesI think you are confusing the oppressed vs oppressor narrative. Mel understands this, like the majority of the non western world understands.

It really is. Anybody who goes to watch a film like this and expect historical accuracy must have a screw loose. It’s first priority is to entertain and make money with this film did. I saw it when I was 16 and it blew my mind. It was so great.

@@scionixx9568 If you want to make a movie with mayan/aztec influence, fine. The issue isn't that, its the fact that it markets itself as an accurate, historical film. Which this movie does not do. Imagine if Star Wars marketed itself as a horror movie because George Lucas was inspired by a horror movie he liked, you'd be PISSED because star wars is OBVIOUSLY not a horror movie. this movie markets itself as a historical film/historical fiction (think Saving Private Ryan), and it just isnt... its closer to a fantasy film.

Mehh it’s alright

@@scionixx9568ancient history & an entire people are not your entertainment

Exactly, me too.

Same😭😭

Yea i thought it was the aztecs who captured the villagers and that the villagers weren’t mayan

Yep, same. I assumed all along it was the Aztecs and not the Mayans, and the villagers were some other tribe altogether. Nothing about this movie screamed Mayan to me.

@@simdoughnut659 nothing about it scream aztec either

@@markdavis7397 source?

Frank Lucas So out all all the tribes and the entire region, this one tribe is one of the few to encounter disease? Look, I get that could be a reason, but it’s not the most likely, and if there can be an argument made against it, then why even have it in the movie? Why not have a disease that was already native to the region? So it makes sense if you try to rationalize it but it also doesn’t

@@markdavis7397 keep in mind that native tribes were devastated by such diseases, this movie takes several hundred years before the conquistadors had arrived, if disease like that had already existed then the native tribes would have already been devastated before they arrived, or they would have already been found medicine to counter it, keep in mind that the fact that they didn't have medicine at the time gave those who came across the sea a great advantage when colonization began, so if those diseases had already been present at a large scale then history would be very different. Mel Gibson is a huge religious nut, my bet is that he wanted to displaced the blame to put the god worshiping conquistadors in a better light, why else would he have them come in at the last moment and have them save the day.

@Frank Lucas This movie definitely takes place in 1511

@Eddie Gooden what's so funny?

Wanted to say the same. Also, as far as I learned the diseases conquered the continent way faster than the Europeans themselves. To the point that whole villages where eradicated without ever having contact with any white people.

Moreover, it’s not told at all that this movie pertains to the 900AD collapse. I usually like this channel, but this video felt pretty weak.

Agreed, this youtuber missed the whole point of this movie. Too much bias against Mel Gibson, and we know why.

My sentiments exactly - the backdrop of the movie is clearly an ongoing apocalypse underlined by the city-dwelling natives have become decadent. The reviewer was so eager to dump on Mel Gibson that this is entirely lost on him.

Come on dude! Stop hating on Mel…

I don't care about inaccuracies as long as there's a good story. I rewatch this movie every year. It's fantastic.

​@@wPleasur3Liking a movie doesn't mean you don't care about natives or history. This movie NEVER promoted itself as a documentary. Plus, nobody should be learning about history from Hollywood.

@@wPleasur3 Ignorance persists bc our school systems are crap. Anyone out of elementary school should be old enough to know Hollywood has never and will never make a 100% accurate movie/tv show. When Hollywood does their job right they send ppl down rabbit holes for hours/days looking up documentaries for actual knowledge on the subject of the movie/tv show. I watched tons of documentaries after 300, Gladiator, Troy, HBO's Chernobyl etc.

@@wPleasur3 Why thank you but no.

This movie was shit tho

agreed, also this was a pretty freaking amazing film IMO--it gives you a rough idea of the peoples and cultures, but ultimately it is a movie and needs a plot, etc. Visually it is gorgeous.

lengthyounarther All valid points. I myself felt that he was being too harsh. Plus, I hope he reads your comment. Maybe then he'll realize that he was being incredibly harsh. And, don't get me wrong, I am definitely not a fan of Mel Gibson but this was a one of a kind film in terms of the setting. Have to give credit where credit is due.

"one of a kind film in terms of the setting. " How on Earth is that supposed to be a justification for *historical falsification?* So, what, make enough films with the Mayan setting and Apocalypto will magically be revealed for what it is once the setting is saturated enough?

"Go ahead and wish hard that the ever make a movie as detailed as apocalypto about mayans or aztecs won't happen." Oh, so that justifies falsifying their culture and history to make them more "exotic" to the viewer? Got it. Yeah, turns out that a lot of people of Mayan descent didn't like, you know, their ancestors being portrayed as *genocidal maniacs* because Gibson couldn't be assed to differentiate between the Aztecs and Mayans.

"the arrival of the Europeans was a deliverance?" how did you get that out of this movie. I do believe that showing the child and mother with small pox was a fore shadowing of what was/would be happening with the arrival of the Spanish--not a "good" thing wouldn't you agree?

I wouldn't say totally worthless. A lot in the film was accurately portrayed. HOWEVER, (like this video explains) it all happened at DIFFERENT PERIODS in history. Not on the same timeline. Yes, parts of the film are a mixture of several periods, but still happened nonetheless. And as you stated, still cool to see.

I liked it too, too bad it was historically incorrect tho!!!

@@chrisheidt1836 I totally agree with you 👍

Spiritual stand point . Make fear, fear you. 😤

Exactly, thank you!

Mexico was discovered 1517, but smallpox was only introduced 2-3 years later. The first European to reach Mexico was Francisco Hernández de Córdoba, who landed in the Yucatan, if the movie takes place in the Mayan polities, then it would make sense that the ship at the end of the movie belongs to Francisco Hernández. Actually, Smallpox hit the former Aztec Empire first in the north, it didn't reach the Yucatan till much later, because it was brought by african slaves the spanish brought in to replace the native labor after the conquest of the Mexicas. Either way you look at it, the timeline doesn't match up, because by the time Smallpox was brought to Mexico, the Mayan city-states already had knowledge of the Spanish, and had fought them in several occasions (though like the guy state, the architecture is wrong for that timeline). Anyways, it's a movie, and I have yet to see a "historical movie" that is 100% free of historical inaccuracies. I'm thankful for Mel Gibson for making a movie in the Mayan language with Maya people (I'm part Maya). He's definitely one of the best of our time and Apacalypto is quite enjoyable nonetheless.

@@Comical1984 Mel Gibson should just made it about Aztecs or set it after the Aztecs fell since the Spaniards were interacting with the remnants of the Mayans in the 16th century

Sax Beat Mel Gibson just acted in The Patriot. He didn’t write (Robert Rodat) or direct it (Roland Emmerich). He didn’t even produce it. So he had no say in the creative process other than how he acted.

Well there is alternate history that Muslims Iberia colonise america

@@dragonbones3885 yeah this is a case of trying to put everything in, I think, and so the lack of focus creates far more problems than benefits accrued from all the inclusion. There was enough with just the Aztecs, and the simple story can obviously be worked into almost any civilization or time period.

@@isyraf9989 lol

I thought they were Vikings

@@alexcore697 Well you sir are rather dumb.

Yeah, but what a show.

@@tacolepaco Christian Viking

Haha, yeah I thought the exact same thing

My thoughts exactly. Not to mention, the illness being smallpox is just yet another questionable assumption made by the video. There are other infectious diseases that produce blisters. The truth is we don't really know when the movie is set nor what precise cultures are being depicted. Are the Europeans at the end Spanish or Portuguese? Is this first contact? Are they Mayans, Aztecs or an imaginary syncretic civilization incorporating practices and behaviors from different Mesoamerican cultures at different times? Are all groups in the movie part of the same civilization/culture? What sickness are they suffering from? The movie remains purposefully indeterminate on those issues. The guy in the vid makes tons of assumptions and then faults the movie for inaccuracies based on said questionable assumptions. Apocalypto is a masterpiece in my book.

Right. This video is nitpicking in the most annoying way because half of what he says isn’t backed by any truthful information, just a guy getting upset over assumptions lol

@@shiivainu9442 Is not about acuracy is all about shitting on Gibson.

@@sirparzival9372 i can get behind that 🫡

Not only is it possible. It's expressly stated in the film.

The historical inaccuracy isn't in that the people had smallpox before Cortez. Obviously they'd had it since Columbus. It's that they're getting smallpox and seeing Spaniards, not a few years or decades before Cortez, but half a millennium before Columbus or Spain even existed

“ Set in Yucatán around the year 1502, Apocalypto portrays the hero's journey of a young man named Jaguar Paw, a late Mesoamerican hunter and his fellow tribesmen who are captured by an invading force.” It is at most almost two decades off from Cortez’s arrival. I don’t know why people are so eager to back date this movie’s timeline when the synopsis itself gives a clear year.

@@intersubjective7129 Because if it takes place in 1502, as the synopsis claims, then that opens a whole new can of worms, as what we see in the movie is in no way consistent with the post-classic period. One could lessen the blow of historical inaccuracy by claiming it takes place in the 16th century, but that doesn't change the fact that cities shouldn't look like ones that were abandoned by the 10th century, nor should there be mass famine, which is a clear reference to the classic Maya collapse. Moreover, why have the quote at the beginning which deliberately indicates it's about the collapse of Mayan civilization?

I agree about your point about the cities, that seems to be the director wanting to show them at an apex of development while by 1502 they were largely reduced to warring tribes in the shadow of the Nahuatl (Aztecs). On issue of mass famines, we didn’t see more than the effect in a small region. I mean who would suffer the effects of famine worst than a deposed people living near a large empire. Granted the movie depictions does mutter that. As the far as the quote it fits perfectly with Mayans at that people who were then divided among themselves to the point of intra-tribal conflict. Their collapse had already taken place well before the movie as well as not at the hands of the Spanish. It’s fits as setup that the Mayans have themselves to blame and not some foreign force for their collapse. Though on some level the same can be argued about Aztecs though a bit more up to interpretation of history.

Great point.

That's exactly what I thought. To my knowledge, there were other neighboring tribes that weren't necessarily Mayan, but I could be wrong

exactly

yeah its like in Senegal, a lot of them speak their own tribal language but the vast majority (or at least a very good chunk) speak French and Wolof as well.

Yeah that's what I always thought as well. I thought it was obvious by the fact that they were so blown away upon entering the city, suggesting they were a remote tribe with no knowledge of a greater "civilization".

I was hoping for Mel Gibson screaming freedom

@@OkurkaBinLadin -_-

@@OkurkaBinLadin no shit

@@OkurkaBinLadin I'm still wondering if you did not get the joke

The chase portion of the movie is pretty much a remake of The Naked Prey.

It is actually historically accurate, the Mayans were still around during the Aztecs

@@termsconditions9433 Did you even watch this video??? 🤣🤣

@@fire398017 yes? And my dad is a historian he knows stuff

Exactly. I was actually kinda surprised this was a issue or confusing to people. Especially people who actually watched the movie. By the end of the movie its crystal clear they weren’t Mayan and had no real contact with the Mayans.

eXACTUMUNDO

The Problem is: Why do they speak Mayan than? Because they do.

​@@ludwigvan3649 It's not that unusual for there to be a cultural difference but a linguistic similarity. Cree, Ojibwa, Miqmaw, and Innu all Speak Algonkian, but are not synonymous with the Algonquin tribe. The narrator is correct here, that I think they used Maya to create an overall impression of authenticity, but given that Maya is still taught in schools in Mexico, it was probably just an easier indigenous language to learn, or perhaps the actors already knew it. More irksome to me was the realisation that Gibson had lifted a lot of the ritualistic elements from Juan Mora Catlett's "Return to Aztlan" which was an Aztec movie. Apocolypto had struck me as rather Aztec seeming when I saw it as well. It's true that the characters are speaking Maya, and even one captured lady prays to Mayan Moon Goddess Ixchele to pretect her children, but I think the creators were assuming that the audience would not realise or care that it was Maya they were speaking. It was my impression though, that even in the context of the film narrative, this captured tribe was intended to be distinct though.

@@aaroncarson1770 educate these fools

That's becuase they sailed thru 'El Caribe.' The Spanish Main. It's the land of voodoo, hoodoo and all kinda weird shit.

so this is a pirates sequel we never saw. Captain Salazar just went back in time then???

BMT115 PotC: endgame

Send magellan back

666 likes, hmm.

Vikings discovered America before Spanish explorers

If the movie is set in 1502 why are the Mayans still in their cities

There was no solar eclipse in this region in 1502. There was one in 1496, though.

Wikipedia says 1517, but either way, I really didn't like this History Buffs video. All the yelling and screaming... and virtually all of that and all the criticisms are because his interpretation that the movie is set in the 9th century. If he would only drop that, few criticisms are valid, and no need for the annoying screaming and absurd time traveling nonsense part. If set in 1517, the girl with smallpox could be reasonable as Spanish and other exporers had already arrived in other locations, and the disease could have (and did) spread by then. The fact the main characters weren't aware of major cities would be explained as the Maya largely collapsed 600 years earlier, so saying there were Mayan cities everywhere wouldn't be correct at that time. However there were a few that remained, such as Iximche, which scattered Mayan villages remaining at the time (Mayans didn't fully disappear till almost 1700) might be shocked seeing. Which also explains his other criticisms early in the video such as "the land not being cultivated". In the 16th century, the few remaining Maya were scattered and no thriving civilization existed anymore! Point being, if we set the movie in early 16th century, nearly everything makes sense. Only major critique might be they portray a Mayan cultural city that's more accurate to one from the 9th century.

Sure, but as Nick points out, this movie takes place during the Classical Mayan collapse, which happened during the 8th-11th centuries, hundreds of years before Europeans arrive.

@@bigj1905 tbh, I allways assumed these all were Aztecs. These are obviously Mayan cities, but didn't Aztecs use at least some of them? - they clearly were very mutualy culturally influenced, and these are some good cities fully intact it good condition. So bsically the main movie problem as I see it - they LOOK LIKE the Mayans in their day-to-day life, but everything else is explained if we assume these are Aztecs. The collapse situation too, like, this deforestation-bad crops cicle was not unique, it was and mosly is the way, Ucatan ecology works. Surely Aztecs would face the same issue - and find the same f-ed up solution.

Exactly, this youtuber got so many points wrong. The Europeans had already been In North America for many years at this point before the Spanish discovered the mayans. Cuba was already conquered before Mexico was even considered for conquest

@@bigj1905 On wikipedia it says the movie takes place in the year 1502.

​@@mr.c.3760 There are things happening in the movie that happened around the 11th century. So, which europeans were already in North America at that point in time? The problem with the movie is, that it takes a time period of several hundred years and crams it all in one movie and one specific point in time. Its like making a movie about the rise and fall of rome and its all Ceasar, ruling for a thousand years, like a guy playing Civ6.

The movie actually makes sense now.

No, no, no. He ran so fast he time traveled and drew his pursuers along with him in his time vortex wake, thing.

Johann Gaius isiNwinga Zulu Ahuitcoyotzin Hirohito he must be a highlander

Yeah, now its making sense. In the chase relative time frame, it lasted a couple of hours. But since they ran so fast, outside their time reference, it took 600 years. Had the chase gone on longer, and they went farther up the coast, maybe they would have stopped in time, to witness, Winfield Scott's landing at Veracruz, in the Mexican War. Even farther, and rounding the Gulf, stop in South Florida, to watch Apollo 11 taking off ! Now that's some science fiction ! Where's Mr. Peabody, and his boy Sherman ?

The movie is set in the year 1511, the same year the spaniards arrived to Yucatan. Sadly the reviewer got carried away with the fact that some things in the movie happened also (or seemed like they could've happened) in the 900 century, and that was most of the video.

I just finished the review and I don’t get how you ever thought that this movie was about the Mayan collapse. That was your fallacy. It’s not a perfect movie but they’re is definitely a lot to be said about it if properly construed

Yeah i don't get how he thought this movie was set in the 900s, it is far more believable that they misrepresented the mayans than them trying to say the spanish arrived in the 900s

I figured all the damage to their crops was the Rampaging Minotaur.

the crops were in the soil of the land though

And more corn.

@@19ars92 well the Minotaur would stomp them to ruin I thought...

@@Molandria He would’ve killed them to death

...how is that a bad thing?

@@MarvinT0606 Mate, does Mad max sound like a good historical movie?

@@walangchahangyelingden8252 [checks timeline] *yes*

@@MarvinT0606 Oh yeah, but hey wait a minute. Aren't nuclear weapons gonna make winters? How did that deserts come into play? Anyway, I did love Fury road.

@@walangchahangyelingden8252 it’s more factually accurate than Braveheart.

Yeah but why make it so inaccurate .. fuckin Gibson

​@@joshwuzhere1did anybody do any better with same scenery, devotion and charismatic amateur actors?

The Mayans were to the Aztec what the Spanish are to Germans.

​@@Section5_CdnIntelServicecould you please elaborate?

@@ulvschmidt7174 Mayans and Aztecs are completely different ethno-cultural groups that happened to share similar architecture and religious beliefs. Likewise, Spaniards and Germans may construct similar buildings and largely practice similar religions, but they have completely unrelated languages and cultures.

Pretty sure Cortez had help from thousands of locals.

@@Tea-rettes there was a lot of overlap between the two towards the end of the mayan civilization as the aztecs had risen in power and influence while the mayans had been slowly collapsing.

And, who gives af about historical accuracy in Hollywood films?

@@connorbranscombe6819 Pedants. That's you, and all your friends Connor, and Nick, and his subscribers. That's who cares about historical facts in films made for the recreational enjoyment of the masses. Edit. Lmfao.

@David, because that’s where many people get their history ... from the movies.

@Lord Kevolo Uh... have you seen the trailers for this film? The "masses" most certainly did not go to see this film for a history lesson.

No.

Having them without shields makes the fights more intense. Also, most of the actors have no idea what they´re doing, so giving them another thing to handle would just be too much. They would end up moving the shield all the way behind their back while swinging anyway, because a lobotomy is apparently a job requirement for a choreographer..

Jirka Zalabák It becomes stupid when someone in the movie actually starts using shields, and gains an advantage. Like when Boltons SUDDENLY have a shit load of shields, while nobody before that moment used them. And, predictably, they sweep the floor cause they have shields. With long spears. In formation. It's ETHER nobody has shields, OR everyone has them. There is no culture that didn't invent a shield.

"most of the actors have no idea what they´re doing" That's why they are actors on a $40 million Hollywood movie.

I meant they have no idea how to fight properly. Just look at the silly way Kit Harrington clenches his fists while beating up Ramsay(it is not the dumbest thing I have ever seen, but it could still lead to some unnecessary injuries). The thumb is out of the fist. IRL, the hand would break so easily, especially when hitting someone right in the mouth and teeth, as he did like 20 times. There are very few actors who actually know shit about swordfighting, or fighting in general(and those who know something are often terrible actors, so...). Also, if they gave them shields, it would make sense to fight in a formation, which Holywood will not have, because then, the viewers would start demanding battles in formations. And well, where will it end? What will the poor Holywood do then?

AlHoresmi They're clearly slavers who are out to capture slaves without killing too many so they'd attack with surprise and without killing too many, perhaps rendering shields over encumbering for their use.

Yeah you can really see history buffs obvious hate boner with Mel Gibson here, you can see the same in We Were Soilders, like the channel but really can't hold his bias back lol

No, they were different Mayan countries or states, some of them more powerful and developed than others

@@servandopereira3482It’s never specified that they are Mayans. Jaguar Paw’s tribe is unnamed. While they could be affiliated with the wider Mayan civilization, that’s just an assumption.

@@thenablade858 Oh, reallyyyyy? If they’re speaking Mayan, well then, they’re french

Not really though. Quebec Canada are French speakers and they're not French, plenty of African countries use french too, they're not French. More importantly, plenty of French people living in France are not speaking french, they're speaking Norman, Corse and Basque, to name a few. Yet, they're Frenchier than any non-French french speaker.

@@KZfaq_is_Trash Most stupid answer ever

But this nerd just needs to hate on the great Mel

@@MetalRampage23 let's not act like everything he touches is gold. I'm not a fan of Mel Gibson as an actor, and I don't even like Braveheart. But this film is a masterpiece and I'll always defend this film for what a Cinematic experience it is.

@@MetalRampage23 I agree totally. I love historybuff's videos, but anything that deals with Mel Gibson will be hated and criticized, regardless of how good the movie is.

@@MetalRampage23 Uh... Right... So much that's wrong in your one sentence. 👻🤦‍♂️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♀️

@@MetalRampage23 go adjust your nipple clamps

Oh shii- Spanish inquisiton: Allow us to introduce ourselfs.

I see you what you did there.

"Surprise, hijosdeputa!" -some Spanish inquisitor

EU4 agrees

Hahahaha came here for this

Time travelling Spanish Inquisition? That's legit.

Lol i get it XD

I love Monty Python

well in wow my disc priest does

Surprise!

Inglorious Basterds doesn’t claim to be historically accurate you fucking idiot

@@zakkarywhiting8304 Neither does Apocalypto. You're toting a spare chromosome to think so.

Andrew, did you watch this movie because of the story, OR because it was directed by Mel Gibson? In other words are you interested in the history of the country's culture that was being represented or were you simply interested because it was a Mel Gibson film?

@@zakkarywhiting8304 Did you watch this movie because of the story, OR because it was directed by Mel Gibson? In other words are you interested in the history of the country's culture that was being represented or were you simply interested because it was a Mel Gibson film?

@Kenny G Did you watch this movie because of the story, OR because it was directed by Mel Gibson? In other words are you interested in the history of the country's culture that was being represented or were you simply interested because it was a Mel Gibson film?

your uncle sounds like a douche. it's an entertainment piece.

Well sure, because a college education is absolutely no guarantee that one will understand life, or the world around you…. You know, things like movies for example. 😂🤷‍♂️😁

​@@wilsonbeckett9487if you get all your history from movies you are one sad individual

I get that but if your Uncle made a movie on the same subject it would probably be unwatchable. It is a movie, it has to stretch reality a bit to make it entertaining.

@@luckymetal13 Wow, his point really flew over your head. Let me help u out. Movies have fake stuff in them!

I loved road to Eldorado. Masterpiece

@I don’t exist For tax and insurance purposes yes

It actually kind of is. They include things like the ball game, the sacrifices, the way many of the people were dressed, how the high ranking soldier had a jaguar skin (jaguars were considered divine and killing one gave you a lot of respect and praise), how much richer in gold was the New World (until Europe went there and turn everything into sh*t) and even depicted the Spanish as obviously terrible people (there's literally a scene were Cortes says that Miguel and Tulio will be sent to Cuban slavers). Heck the jaguar year thing is a reference to Tezcalipoctla, the jaguar God and a pretty insane deity (although pretty much every pre-Colonial deity in Mexico was blood thirsty).

@@admin.slayerenryu5217 quetzalcoal (?) as well?'sorry... just wanted to seem educated after playing a game ... many years ago 😌

@I don’t exist For tax and insurance purposes Yes and no. If you go as a tourist on vacation to visit the historic places you don't have to, but if you want a more meaningful interaction with the people then yes, you do need to speak Spanish fluently.

And that’s the point. It’s not a documentary

It is a very intense movie and has pretty good acting, I've always really liked it and never have watched it from a historical lens that's why I clicked this video cause I thought learning of the history it's based in would be cool and it was definitely interesting learning about it. What you can actually learn from watching a movie like Apocalypto is more broad things of the human condition. Jaguar Paw struggles and overcomes great hardships for those he loves he's a good role model character. The whole film has the classic literary devices of man vs. X as main sticking points and the film is basically Jaguar Paw vs. The World I view it as a testament to the power of clever perseverance when you are struggling in life.

@@JordoGarcia exceed qsqxesdwwwscwdwxxd

Sorry but it wasn't that intense or tense. It relies too heavily on the outrageous events (like the beheadings or... That's about it) to create tension. If you want a true movie with tension watch 'Dunkirk' that's a truly tense movie.

Breath taking movie !!!! Absolutely. Iv watched it 5 times

This!

Hell yea

That’s what I thought as a kid too haha

Yeah, I was thinking it was the Aztecs making a sacrifice to their god, by sacrificing other tribes

@@winniethepooh8353 Mayans did sacrifices too, but at a smaller scale, and I don't think they practiced the flower war (a poetic name to describe the war done by Aztecs to take prisonners for sacrifice). A ting noteworthy, even for the Aztecs, it was not very common to take peasants of another tribe for sacrifice, when they were fighting the flower war, they were trying to captured the ennemy warriors, it was the most worthy offers to the Gods ^^

Ha

Krankar Volund well according to Stephen Douglas, a professor for the department of anthropology at brown university says that Mayan sacrifices mostly consisted of royalty and elites rather than slaves and according to Karl Taube (another anthropologist professor) said that there's no evidence that the mayans had large numbers of slaves. I could show you the link if you want it.

I think its not even such a big deal. Im just hoping I will never watch a movie like the maker of this video does. it does not sound enjoyable. somebody should tell him he did not watch a historical documentary but a movie...

apart from that I think a lot of people who did not even know the real difference between mayan and aztec made recherches after watching the movie. so it actually had a good side effect. people who are lazy to look things up and get their historical view through movies by mel gibson should anyways reconsider their sources..

When I first saw this film with my dad, we were both under the impression the focus was on the Aztecs, especially because of the human sacrifice scene, the emphasis on jaguars, and the conquistadors arriving.

@@zamorano18x92 You're not a history buff, so you don't have to worry about seeing movies differently, but he has a point. This movie's history is false and misrepresents the Mayans, but most people get their history nowadays from movies, so they're being misinformed about a important part of civilization's history. It may not be a documentary, but if you're gonna be set in a different time period, it's important to represent it accurately and not just make it whatever you think it should be, unless the whole point is to not be what that time period was. Plus, some of the stuff just doesn't make sense, like one Mayan tribe being advanced while the other's primitive, and they somehow never meet each other for years.

@@zamorano18x92 same guy who wouldn't care about historical accuracy would lose his shit if in a movie people celebrated moon landing in the 30s or a movie set in the 50s had a car from the 80s or if a movie set in the 90s had a ps5.. which taken how ridiculous those examples sounds this movie is 100 time worse just because you don't know history it doesn't matter to you and it doesn't bother you

The Nanman tribes from southern china in the three kingdoms period spoke a slightly altered dialect from the civilized chinese. If a people descend from the same migratory ethnic group they'll speak simillar languages despite technological disparities.

but the movie still implies that they are mayan, it could very well be another type of culture, but that is not explained in the movie

Just my thougts

Except the people in the region would also have been Mayan.

Nanman The Legend like he said, this would have worked if you didn't have them speaking Mayan and cut out that part where they admit to never having seen a Mayan city before even though, whether this movie is representing the Classic Maya or the Post-Classic Maya, these cities where literally everywhere. He's not exaggerating, I've lived in central America before (from Mexico all the way to Costa Rica) and these cities, or remnants of them, are literally all over the place.

I am not sure if the declined THAT much. I mean most natives still used small fields for various crops - even in the rainforrest they cleared areas and planted something. The village in the movie is even much "inferior" to quiet a number of typical villages in the rainforrest in size and buildings (as far as I know). That mean not it could not exist in that way, but I think it is unlikely that people from the Maya would live in that way.

Lmao

Epic

🤣🤣🤣

Gen alphas will likely never cease to make fun of NF end-credit scenes 100%

lol

Nah mate it was just a 600 year long chase scene through the jungle.

Did you watch this movie because of the story, OR because it was directed by Mel Gibson? In other words are you interested in the history of the country's culture that was being represented or were you simply interested because it was a Mel Gibson film?

@@jwalker-zf5fd Did you watch this movie because of the story, OR because it was directed by Mel Gibson? In other words are you interested in the history of the country's culture that was being represented or were you simply interested because it was a Mel Gibson film?

jwalker 0405 lmao

Benito Gonzalez Jr. I watched it just to watch a good movie However all of the human sacrifice scenes actually did happen under the Aztec empire right before the Spaniards got here And the Spaniards did not have any back up Imagine traveling to another world and seeing Native American priest ripping beating human hearts out of their chests That’s some scary bullshit right there

All the cities were abandoned wdym youre actually so stupid

so film depicts how Mayans hunted small tribes (actually accurate) living in the forest and this channel straight up missed that point completely, thinking they hunted in other Mayan village?!.... and the movie is just about how civilizations of that area roughly looked like etc... not really about historical accuracy so its kinda lame to point out inaccuracies in a movie that wasnt meant to show any real historical event, just romantise it.... it deserves some complains

Zoltan1251 lol so you know Mayas hunted small tribes

Because people don't like it when things they like receive criticism, no matter how fair that criticism is.

@@MonstersNotUnderTheBed Many people take it as hard fact. That is what bothers us.

These guys would be the ones who complain that Pornhub has too much Porn.

then why he is speaking Mayan?

@jawz9184 plenty of people speak Spanish that aren't Spanish. What he is speaking just reflects the influence of the Mayan empire on the surrounding areas

@@LeRealJawzsimple, Mayan influence

​@@LeRealJawzbc it was likely the dominant language.

I love the people in the comments that think they know more about this subject than the doctor who’s life is dedicated to this topic at the beginning of this video

Don't trust 100% on Wikipedia not all of its data are accurate. 😂

that may be the case but I think this movie took licence to mix content. if spanish had not arrived already the small pox would have been impossible too... and the idea of sacrifice was very Aztec in its description. Mayans were known for bringing prosperity to ppl they conquered not death and sacrificing

@akhenatuh Mayan civilization never died actually. There are still living Maya peoples. They live differently obviously.

@akhenatuh actually they were on decline.... aztecs ruled mexico area and had influence on maya at the time.. this is called as post classic mayan period... if you have any more doubts just do a simple google search of mayan civilization timeline...

Spaniards did not arrive in the Mayan Peninsula, but in the Veracruz area they went to Central Mexico from there

Lol

I definitely agree that this movie is set in the year 1511, because that would explain the reason why some of the characters have never seen a city-state before

@@antoniobeardall6520 And some of the Maya were still around in 1511.

Storymaker2 They should have made it about the Aztecs then.

@@boolosboi7503 agreed

There were no Mayan villages like those depicted in the film in the 16th century

Except that the so-called "Mayan collapse" being depicted in the movie occurred around 900, which was well before Europeans came to the New World and exposed Natives to diseases like Small Pox.

@@steelheron1309 wiki does say it was meant to be 1502

@@johnballard7775 Fair enough, in the time period of 1500, there would be a slight chance that they could have been exposed to Small Pox, however, what the movie is depicting wasn't a thing in the Mayan civilization in 1500. That was in 900. That's the problem.

@@steelheron1309 I always thought it was the plague.....

@@slipjones2 The Mayan didn't exist in force? The part of the Mayan civilization that built the pyramids, built other architectural structures, used hieroglyphic writing, mastered farming, and mapping the stars was a very strong and unified civilization for a very long time. While the Mayan civilization didn't just disappear, until being conquered by Europeans around 1600, what's known as the classic Mayan collapse (not really a collapse) occurred between 700 to 900 CE. This so-called collapse according to the archeological record, is when a vast majority of the Southern parts of the classic Mayan civilization was abandoned in favor of the Northern region and became more splintered afterwards. The Southern region, where the Mayan civilization basically started saw a boom in population and architectural building from essentially 20 CE onward, then around 700 to 800 CE the population and architectural building slowed down exponentially and disappeared around 900 CE. While there's a lot of theories as to why such a civilization grew then abandoned everything so rapidly is still unknown. However, the one theory that's gaining the most traction is a drought. This drought occurred around the 800 and 900 CE time frame which was depicted in the movie. The problem is that there wasn't any drought around 1500 when the Spanish first arrived in the region which the movie depicted that too. Since the movie showed what is Small Pox, the two events couldn't have occurred at the same time. This really isn't that hard to understand.

No it's not.

@@widukindgaladh949 yes it is. 🥴

@@widukindgaladh949 you got trolled… damn dude that’s embarrassing

Lmao

🤣🤣

Thank you Mauther for making my argument better then I possibly could have. The whole point of this channel is to essentially fact check films, but this review feels like it's from someone who is so blinded by his hatred for its director, that he's incapable of offering a well-informed unbiased critique. I'm not a fan of Mel Gibson, but this should not be the venue for bashing him for being a douschebag racist.

Mauther Hacksaw Ridge is pretty accurate, with only 2 major exceptions. The film skips the prior battles the protagonist fought in and instead makes it out like Okinawa was the only battle he fought. Also, it crams the whole battle (at least the part he fought in) into 4 days. It took 3 weeks.

Yes, its like he's going out of his way to misunderstand the film. Even as I watched it in the theatre when it first came out, it was clear to me that the first village was an offshoot of the many mayan sub-tribes. And that the little girl's small pox was an indicator of spanish presence in the continent and of things to come. I only questioned the chronology of the mayan civilization coinciding with the spanish arrival but excused it as being a Zapotec, Toltec or any of the other pre-colombian civilizations active in Mesoamerica during the time.

Mauther beautifully said it's a shame Nick couldn't put aside his Mel Gibson hatred.

I agree that smallpox could have and probably did reach the Maya and other indigenous peoples before there was contact with Europeans. However I feel as though I must contents a few points if not for the sake of devil's advocate. Yes it is easy to hide small isolated tribes in jungles, but the few uncontacted tribes live in the Amazon rain forest, while the Yucatan peninsula is mainly a rainforest biome it isn't as large as the size of the Amazon and is different in terms of soil fertility. One jungle may be similar to another but it is small differences that can make the difference between isolation and communication. While it is true that the Spanish had trouble navigating the rainforests without guides, the Maya would not have been so restricted. In the classic era and the postclassic era, many Mayan armies and traders crisis crossed the peninsula. I imagine it wouldn't take long before even the most isolated tribe would have been discovered. I should also say that even though human sacrifice did grow in the Maya region, it did not florish. what I will critise the review for saying heart extraction did exist in the classic era according to current evidence, mostly in the precursor to the Mexica (Ectonym: Aztecs) nation, the city state of Teotihuacan. Even with that said, there is very little to suggest the Mayan's sacrificed often. And they hated it, according to one of my sources. The priest who performed the sacrifice, called the Nacom (not to be mistaken with the military position of the same name) was disliked in the community. Presumably because the concept of sacrifice was mainly brought in by the Toltec invasion of the Yucatan peninsula. Even if there was sacrifices that the Mayans believe needed to be made, it would not have been heart extraction nor would it have been an entire village. Heart extraction tended to be reserved for warriors of great respect or captured leaders. Cenote or decapitation (due to it's association with the Mayan rain God Chaac) would have been the most likely. Even then the Mayans would have sacrificed only a couple of people at most, because: 1) The Mayans were human beings and as I said before disliked human sacrifice, there is a poem named Little Arrow that was used to comfort to the victims of the arrow sacrifice (a native Mayan sacrifice technique at that). WhileI cannot speak with certainty I'd say that to the ancient Mayan sacrificing the amount shown in the film would be a tragic and unnecessary action even in times of drought. 2) In the time of the collapse, every life would have counted, it is not like with the Mexica who had neighboring nations full of people they could point to and say "it's alright to kill them en masse, they are inferior to us". The Mayans, while no strangers to believing in one state being better than another, where on a much more level playing field and were all suffering from the collapse. Nearly all captives (including warriors) would have been made into slaves. Even then, why bother raiding a tribe when you could just make them a vessel. Many Mayan tribes would have been attached to a state/chiefdom as the nearby royal family would install a noble to act as a tribal chieftain, called a Batab who would report to the Halach Unik (pretty much a king). Lastly on the subject of sacrifice, the Mayans waged war the same reason as most other cultures: power. Even the Mexica waged more wars to expand their empire than to capture for sacrifice. Mayan warfare was pretty fascinating in that they liked to leave things intact more or less. When a city state was defeated, the city wasn't razed, the lord wasn't always executed and it's people weren't enslaved or slaughtered. It was far more usful to make a fallen city state a vassal rather than exterminate it. Therefore the raid of the village for the sole purpose of capturing people seems unlikly. Lastly, the no one could blame someone for mistaking the time era, the Mayan's simply weren't making cities on the same scale anymore. Fair enough there was construction, and some city states like Uxmal and Chichen Itza remained population centers for quite some time. But overall, to see buildings like that in the postclassic, it wouldn't be likly.

Yeah, that's part of the problem. The Mayan cities had been abandoned for centuries by the time the Europeans arrived.

Haytham Kenway mayans were eliminated in the 9th century

No, Mayans weren't eliminated in the 9th century. They exist to this day.

Michael Park thats not true the last Mayan great capital city was conquered in 1527 by Herman Cortes. by this time most big cities had been abandoned but the Mayans were still a formidable Empire in the region

Well, not exactly, as the Mayans still existed as city-states during the conquest of the Aztec empire and there were actually one of the biggest allies of Cortes aggaints the Mexicas (the ruling tribe of the Aztec Empire). Nobody likes mass human sacrifices.

A lot of the increased human sacrifice is consistent with Terminal Period, which saw increased influence by Toltec/Uto-Aztecan groups.

This is the only way that movie starts making sense thanks, it's a really cool theory.

Alot of that had to do with population. brute force your way to success by having alot of people and alot of food. Gotta remember when the spanish made it to tenochtitlan, the city was bigger and more populated than madrid at the time

@@kyzerBC No, no, I think that has to do with them being humans with brains. I don't like the idea of dismissing native american success without horses and iron as simply "brute-forcing". It kinda takes away merit where it's certainly due.

@@andreribeiro4639 No doubt they were brilliant, especially considering the acoustic characteristics of their temples, and their knowledge of astronomy. Certainly intelligent people but having alot of people and the means to feed them allows you to focus on such things, rather than being constantly concerned with not starving. And building the structures as large as they did would demand a large pool of man power. In THAT sense, having alot of people meant they didnt need pig iron tools. Probably would have come up with something like that though had they enough time to.

@@andreribeiro4639 Perhaps even obsidian tools? That woulda been awesome

Egyptians predated Pythagoras and didn't know Pi either, and yet built the pyramids.

damit gibson

best comment ive seen all day

No one ever expects the mexican inquisition. I didnt. No one ever does.

FortuneZero I think trump is that the real reason for that wall

John Handzlik Nah Trump only has it for criminals and we all know the Inquisition was righteous.

That...actually makes a lot more sense. After all, the Maya civilization WAS still around in the 16th Century, even if they were in decline whereas the Aztecs were top dog in Mesoamerica. However, for the sake of comedy, we’ll assume that the conquistadors were time travelers.

This should be the top commentary.

Perfectly makes sense mate... was thinking the same.... they even consulted maya archeologist Richard Hensen for this movie... some youtubers goto any length just to bish bash a movie...

Best comment

There it is, finally a comment that makes perfect sense, he also went for how the natives should speak english so that the common audience digest it better yet nitpicks to the point where if the people breathe inaccurately it is worthy of condemnation.

It's a great flick.

I watch it several times a year.

@@offtherealm5438 Ha. I haven't seen this one in about 5 or 6 years but I am due.

Eh people get a wrong understanding of the Mayans

@@satanasteguarda It may no longer be a civilization but Mayan people still very much exist and I'm sure they don't like their history being depicted as such

Which makes no freaking sense due to the architecture and size of the cities, along with advanced agriculture and the massive crop failure, and even the film's starting quote clearly indicating the movie takes place during the collapse of the Mayan civilization in the 9th century, about as far removed from smallpox and Spaniards as you are from the Eastern Roman Empire and bloody Joan of Arc.

Rather than his brown eye

@@JohnDoe-ee6qs lmao

Yeah I was just thinking that. It’s foreshadowing, maybe there were a few colonists that scouted before the armada arrived and spread the disease idk. Either way I got it and I thought it was a good move by Gibson. The harsh criticism of this point made me skeptical of the rest of the video

The little girl even made a prophecy about the end of their civilization, the whole movie is filled with foreshadowing about the incoming apocalypse, you know, "Apocalypto" ... but, this is a channel about historical accuracy in movies that are label as "historical" so i understand his critisism while i don't really agree with him.

Seems that this was Christopher Columbus fourth travel. Before some years he did visit islands like Cuba and Jamaica. From there some travellers could bring disease to todays Mexico.

Julius Caesar? She made it as far as feudal Japan! :)

I'm only up to season two :)

Sorry! Spoilers :S

Don't diss the lady... she had a SLOW horse.

+Slippy Wasn't there an episode or two where she actually did time travel to the 90s or am I misremembering

It seems like there's some DVD commentary that more explicitly puts the year in the 1500s, with the Mayans already being influenced by Aztec human sacrifice.

You don’t see the problem with a film maker, changing history and affecting the general public’s view of an entire regions history? 21:12 listen to what he says. This is the problem.

@@tumsfestival8027 i understand your point totally.

I just watched the movie, thought it was awesome. The ending was hilarious though (made zero sense indeed) and there were numerous other moments that I was highly skeptical of. so after the movie did some reading and also just landed here on this very informative video. I don't place that kind of blame on Mel Gibson, if you want to learn something about history you should hit the books and not watch exciting action movies. 100% will watch and enjoy again.

@@tumsfestival8027 Nah, I don't. People who watch anything Hollywood makes that expect to reasonably 'learn' anything are rubes, and will essentially believe anything. If it wasn't Mel, it would be someone else. If you watch a cinema blockbuster thinking you're in HIST203, your brain is already mush. I hate Hollywood as much as any reasonable person, but the gullibility of the masses isn't Hollywood's fault.

I think it's supposed to be a dramatized ('apocalyptic' if you will) depiction of postclassical mayan civilization.