Let's Talk - Apocalypse Now

Legomancer mentioned seeing this for the first time in another thread. It being one of the greatest films ever made I thought it worth its own. I've seen the original countless times since I was a kid. I've seen Redux only once so far. I do like that Redux makes it feel more like an adventure movie, but I gotta give the edge to the original. I think my favorite scene is the tiger scene. Never get off the boat.

I was trippin out that Lawrence Fishburne was in it. I had no idea til my last viewing (redux). Anyway, timeless classic.

Ha, I was just thinking about this picture last night...watching TMNT with my kids. There's a frog mutant that they run into that is a parody of Brando...at the end, he's watching their treetop village burning and he says "The horra...the horra". I laughed. Kids obviously didn't get it.

This is definitely one of my top ten favorite films of all time and I don't particularly care for war films. The thing that sets this movie apart (among many other things) is how it manages to capture something very subtle not just about war but about any situations where things go completely FUBAR. It really nails that very surreal/hyperreal atmosphere of when things are about to get fucked up. That sort of almost dreamlike state you go into to deal with trauma, where little stupid details poke out like how green the leaves are or what some guy was hollering. The first few times I saw it when I was like ten or so, I didn't really get why people called it "surreal" or "hallucinatory"...but with some life experience, it started to make sense from that perspective.

I usually watch Redux, mainly because it's the DVD I have, I suppose. One of my favorite scenes is actually in that version, the bit where they're stoned in the crashed helicopter with the Playboy bunnies (LOVE that scene at the ASO show too- so desperate and over the top).

Of course, another reason I love this movie so much is the MAKING of it, such an amazing story of artistic near-insanity and tenacity. Hearts of Darkness is a must-see documentary, if you haven't seen it already.

Harrison Ford is in it too...post-Han Solo, actually.

Harrison Ford, too. I don't know if I have seen Redux or not. Why bother I guess? The original is amazing. The documentary about making it is amazing (HEARTS OF DARKNESS).

I feel like it captures the animal nature of Man in a deep way. For me, it's close with THE LORD OF THE FLIES for that sense. Not so much HEART OF DARKNESS, ironically, which I thought was still too "English gentleman."

Hex Sinister wrote: I was trippin out that Lawrence Fishburne was in it. I had no idea til my last viewing (redux). Anyway, timeless classic.

He's also cowboy curtis in the pee wee herman show. Go figure.

This and Aguirre, Wrath of God are both awesome. I mention the other one because they are both derived from the same book but they both take that into wildly different directions.

I saw the redux in theaters when it came out simply so I could see the movie in a theater. I enjoyed it but most of the scenes added nothing, several took away something and I can only think of one that genuinely added something. The dinner scene with the French soldiers right up until the romantic scene on the balcony (that's a take away scene in my mind, but the dinner itself was nice). It was stunning to see on the big screen though and I'll always remember that.

It's beautiful to look at and I think my favorite scene is probably when they're just pulling into Brando's little camp at the end. All the Natives gathered on the banks staring at them as the slowly move into the village. That's stunning.

Sheen is really good in it, it may be his best role (although I like Badlands a lot too), Duvall is always brilliant, Brando of course.. Larry Fishbourne ... ha. I like him better as Larry actually, he's also in Dream Warriors (Nightmare on Elm Street 3 I think). He's good in Apocalypse Now though... but the role doesn't ask for much.

What I like about the film is that I tend to remember it as a slow moving artsy war flick (like my fav war film Thin Red Line, which gets a lot of hate for being too slow) but in reality whenever I sit down to watch Apocalypse Now it actually clips along at a pretty good pace. It's very re-watchable.

My other favorite quality of the film is that it isn't disposable. You can watch it and you will never really be sure what it's all about. Probably this is mostly due to the ending and Brando's weirdo Hollow Men quoting speech at the end but that's still reason enough. There is a mystery going on, there are things that are unclear and perhaps will never be clear... that invites you to come back, that allows you to keep meditating on it.. that stops it from becoming disposable and it's a great strength for any piece of art to have.

All that said, I do think it's over-rated but when you're voted as a top ten of all time film over and over again and have this much pop culture visibility it's practically inevitable. The Beatles suffer from that too. It's still a great film and I'll probably watch it again before I die.

Man, I don't think it's over rated. In fact, thinking about the movie left me kind of bummed out about how hollywood stuff is so fuckin paste nowadays. I mean, when me and my dad walked out of this movie our eyes were wide and mouths hanging open. We didn't say a word, we just looked at each other like "WOW did you just see that shit"? How often does that happen.

I hear a lot about the docu but never watched it because I was worried that it'll spoil the film for me. You guys got me wanting to see it though...

Don't mistake me thinking it's over-rated for me not thinking it's a fucking fantastic film. It is... there's just a lot of fucking fantastic films that don't get any recognition that I like as much if not more than this. I still love Apocalypse Now though, I've seen it maybe ten times.

Hex Sinister wrote: I was trippin out that Lawrence Fishburne was in it. I had no idea til my last viewing (redux). Anyway, timeless classic.

I still can't believe he was 14-17 years old during the shooting of that movie.

Great flick. You can almost feel the life it sucked out of Coppola to make the film.

Hex Sinister wrote: I was trippin out that Lawrence Fishburne was in it. I had no idea til my last viewing (redux). Anyway, timeless classic.

I was more flipped out learning that Scott Glenn was in Apocalypse Now. I never put that one together out of seeing the movie over a dozen times.

It's a great movie. It's fucking trippy as balls, parts haunting and spiritual. Can you imagine fighting a war while stoned? Plenty of soldiers at that time did. If the movie has a weakpoint, it's obviously Brando. He was so fat, Coppola had to film him partially in shadow. It's not exactly his best performance either (read as: hammy). Given the behind-the-scenes problems, I imagine everyone involved wanted the damn thing over with.

I prefer the original to the longer 'redux' version. 90% of the new scenes are garbage.

I think it appeals to US (and maybe UK?) citizens more than anyone else, it is war, it is dreadful but it still is an invasion on a foreign country. The US glorifies war because it has been a long time since they have had any in their territory. Shame on you.

To see the other side: Come and See (1985) Belarussian film by Elem Klimov, shows the life in one of more than 600 villages that were invaded by the Nazis in Belarus.

Masterpiece.

Applejack: If the movie has a weakpoint, it's obviously Brando. He was so fat, Coppola had to film him partially in shadow. It's not exactly his best performance either (read as: hammy). Given the behind-the-scenes problems, I imagine everyone involved wanted the damn thing over with.

Gotta agree with this for sure. In fact, although I get it has the hallucination aspect the whole endgame sequence including The Doors The End tied to the sequence is garbage and has aged badly in what for me is otherwise a great film. For me, Brando almost fuckin sank it.

Raf, you get the impression that Apocalypse Now glorifies war from a US perpective? Or am I reading you wrong? I never got the feel it glorified war at all. If anything, the oppsoite.

For anti-war movies, I think I prefer Full Metal Jacket today, although it wuld have been the other way around when I was 20.

Still like Hurt Locker a lot from the more recent fucked up conflicts.

scissor, I think the movie is hailed as a great depiction of what war does to humans, but it is from the perspective of the invaders. Yes, it is awful for the soldiers, but it is so much worse for the people living there.

I think patriotism and reverence for the troops and veterans (it is somewhat justified, I bet many of you have relatives that fought in a war) blinds the regular US citizen into thinking they are heroes of the free world or something. Also, it is a cathartic experience that appeases the wrongdoings of your country to see how much a generation suffered.

I just think that the impact in the civilian side is much bigger, famine, genocide, inhumane bombing, that is what wars do, it just doesn't occur in your home.

Edit: War is 9/11 everyday everywhere. But worse. See how much you still cry about that? It is sad, but it's a drop in a bucket in comparison.

By all means it glorifies war. Christ, how many people have you heard quoting that "napalm in the morning" bit without irony? Kilgore is the Rorschach of war movies.

As for the occupation thing, it's also extremely paternalistic. The natives are either mute farm animals, sneaky treacherous bastards, or dirt-scrabbling barbarians. They barely even figure into the proceedings except for an unknown, ever-present threat. Kurtz' break from reality isn't triggered by men like Kilgore, it's triggered by the offenses of the Vietnamese.

It's still a fantastic movie. And I actually love Brando's performance in it. I've no desire to see the Redux or the documentary. I don't want trivia and stories about the movie to creep into the movie itself.