Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Apocalypse Now - The final cut

Options
  • 14-08-2019 12:41pm
    #1
    tunguska
    Registered Users Posts: 3,545 ✭✭✭


    Went to see this last night in Omniplex rathmines, I've seen Apocalypse now before, but never on the big screen and obviously, not this cut. 3hrs 30 mins and honestly it flew by, I loved every second of it. Seeing it on the big screen, where a film like this belongs, was an experience. What really struck me though was how well crafted a film it really is. I mean everyone is aware of the madness that went on behind the scenes in making this movie, but in spite of all the difficulties and disasters, the film is so well put together. The script is tight, and for me thats what really stood out, the dialogue. Not a word is wasted or out of place, its bullet proof. The acting is different class aswell, especially Martin sheen. I know the lads on the boat where jacked up on a daily concoction of narcotics so them playing stoner service men was probably not a stretch, still though I reckon you would not get away with any of that now. The one gripe I have though is Marlon Brando's performance. He apparently didnt learn the script that had been prepared for him and just improvised. And it shows. Some of his ramblings are absolute nonsense. I think in this case it wouldve worked out better had he actually stuck with the scripted dialogue(whatever that had been). I'd be interested to see what his scripted lines where originally and if it wouldve been more of a satisfying conclusion to such a great film. I was thinking after, who else couldve played Kurtz at that time? Maybe Clint eastwood wouldve been good, or even Jack nicholson.......who knows. Anyway great movie which holds up incredibly well.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Cetyl Palmitate
    Registered Users Posts: 530 ✭✭✭Cetyl Palmitate


    tunguska wrote: »
    Went to see this last night in Omniplex rathmines, I've seen Apocalypse now before, but never on the big screen and obviously, not this cut. 3hrs 30 mins and honestly it flew by, I loved every second of it. Seeing it on the big screen, where a film like this belongs, was an experience. What really struck me though was how well crafted a film it really is. I mean everyone is aware of the madness that went on behind the scenes in making this movie, but in spite of all the difficulties and disasters, the film is so well put together. The script is tight, and for me thats what really stood out, the dialogue. Not a word is wasted or out of place, its bullet proof. The acting is different class aswell, especially Martin sheen. I know the lads on the boat where jacked up on a daily concoction of narcotics so them playing stoner service men was probably not a stretch, still though I reckon you would not get away with any of that now. The one gripe I have though is Marlon Brando's performance. He apparently didnt learn the script that had been prepared for him and just improvised. And it shows. Some of his ramblings are absolute nonsense. I think in this case it wouldve worked out better had he actually stuck with the scripted dialogue(whatever that had been). I'd be interested to see what his scripted lines where originally and if it wouldve been more of a satisfying conclusion to such a great film. I was thinking after, who else couldve played Kurtz at that time? Maybe Clint eastwood wouldve been good, or even Jack nicholson.......who knows. Anyway great movie which holds up incredibly well.

    Saw this last night in Limerick. Great to see on the big screen as you say. The scale of the set pieces is so impressive.
    The final third with Dennis hopper and Kurtz is the weakest part I think. A load of incoherent rambling by Dennis hopper and Kurtz. Maybe it was edgier at the time but that 'far out' thinking hasn't aged well really. The unhinged element is far better represented by Kilgore and especially through the scene at the final bridge post.
    I forgot Harrison ford was in it. And Laurence fishborne!


  • Options
    #3
    neirbloom
    Registered Users Posts: 230 ✭✭neirbloom


    Laurence Fishbourne was only 14 when shooting began in 76. I never saw it on the big screen but loved to. Along with with Come and See its one of my favorite war movies, in terms of film making.


  • Options
    #4
    nix
    Registered Users Posts: 4,909 ✭✭✭nix


    I to went to see it in Rathmines, first time seeing it also, i had put off watching it for so long. I cant actually give a specific reason why, i guess the many different versions there are and their run times put me off. So figured catching it on the big screen was a must to finally tick off the box.

    I really liked it for the most part and agree with what was said above, it took a nose dive when Brando came into it, he spouts utter nonsense and pretty much detracts from the whole movie. Which is a shame as its a great idea for a war movie and has a lot of solid performances and set pieces throughout..

    Feckin Brando, he gets a lot of praise but hes just a massive dickhead if you ask me :(:rolleyes::pac:


  • Options
    #5
    tunguska
    Registered Users Posts: 3,545 ✭✭✭tunguska


    Cetyl Palmitate wrote: »
    The scale of the set pieces is so impressive.
    The final third with Dennis hopper and Kurtz is the weakest part I think. A load of incoherent rambling by Dennis hopper and Kurtz. Maybe it was edgier at the time but that 'far out' thinking hasn't aged well really. The unhinged element is far better represented by Kilgore and especially through the scene at the final bridge post.
    I forgot Harrison ford was in it. And Laurence fishborne!


    Meant to say this aswell. No CGI, just real sh1t being blown up. Incredible set pieces, especially the Ride of the Valkyries sequence and the Napalm drop. Its proper real film making. I was reading about Dennis Hopped after I saw the movie and he was an absolute lunatic. Apparently they just fed him cocaine and alcohol throughout the entire shoot.


  • Options
    #6
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,454 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    They still left the French dinner scene in though! Stops the movie dead in its tracks. I get what they were trying to do but the scene is too long.

    Brando is absolutely fantastic. Very unsettling performance.

    Anyone who hasn't seen this, do it. Nearly as good as the movie!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearts_of_Darkness:_A_Filmmaker%27s_Apocalypse


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Corvo
    Registered Users Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Corvo


    Seen this last week in IMAXX and I loved every moment, apart from the French dinner scene which was really out of place. I believe in the Redux version it is almost 20 minutes longer, and I'm glad I didn't watch that version in that case!

    However apart from that, it was really impressive on the big screen and the sound was amazing for the infamous beach attack scenes.


  • Options
    #8
    The Nal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,454 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    This is still incredible to watch. It would be today never mind 1976!

    tumblr_nuihzm5TW61s3fijgo2_500.gif


Advertisement