Apocalypse Later?
There was a whole list of things that went wrong during the filming of Apocalypse Now. A star had a heart attack (Martin Sheen), there was severe weather that destroyed sets (Typhoon Olga), and another star showed up very overweight for filming (Marlon Brando). Heck, the movie took so long to produce that Laurence (billed as Larry) Fishburne, who was 15 when he said in the movie he was 17, was 17 when the movie was released. Clear?
The uncharitable part of my soul wonders if Coppola shouldn't have taken a hint. If the primary reason for a film's “being” is to entertain, then this fails. I don't think Coppola wanted to entertain much since he was depicting the difference between good and evil and making a statement on modern warfare. He was trying to get a reaction rather than entertain.
If you haven't seen the movie yet, then you probably want to stop reading. Lots of spoilers to follow.
The movie is an adaptation of the novella "Heart of Darkness" by Joseph Conrad. In the written work, the introspective Marlow journeys up the Congo River to meet the reputedly idealist and very able Kurtz. During the journey Marlow views abuse, excess and insanity on the river. He witnesses brutality to civilians and a lack of leadership. You should get picture. Apocalypse Now has the same general elements. Captain Bejamin L. Willard (Sheen) stands in for Marlow and witnesses much of the same type of excesses. He continues to read reports and information about Kurtz as he travels up the river and begins to admire him.
So the plot is:
- Officer asked to travel up river to kill renegade (and nuts) Colonel
- Officer reads about Colonel and starts to admire and empathize with nutty Colonel
- Officer sees strange, cruel and “insane” actions by both the US and the Vietnamese/ Cambodians
- Officer makes it to Colonel. Colonel IS nutso, army officer kills Colonel and gets back on boat
- Boat heads up or down river (in the version I watched it's not clear which). The Officer has either fulfilled his mission and is going back to base or has decided to take over the position of nutty Colonel.
A few days ago I wrote about "Duck Soup" and felt it was a number of gags held together by a little story. I think Apocalypse Now is a bunch of images and snap shots held together by a little story. Coppola shot millions of feet of film for this movie and many of the images are stunning and interesting. But, how many times do you need to see 20 helicopters flying in formation in one sequence? Does that add to the emotional impact of the film or does it just show everyone how pretty the cinematography is? Some of the imagery is as it is because Brando was so overweight. Not only did that require filming in a very dark and stylistic fashion, but it also required changing the ending from what was originally intended by Coppola. The ruins where Kurtz is found look like Khmer, most notably the carvings/statues of faces that have weathered until it's clear they are a bunch of rocks not just one big rock. But...this wasn't filmed in Cambodia but in Manilla....so...full marks for historical accuracy I guess.
There are some very memorable scenes/quotes such as Robert Duvall and his famous little chat about napalm smelling like victory. Dennis Hopper plays semi nutty and frenetic Dennis Hopper...again...as the photojournalist who's spent time with Kurtz. Some of Kurt's lines are memorable and even have some deeper meaning I suspect. But honestly I don't like to think that hard when I'm watching a movie. I like to watch movies to be entertained. Sure the movie can have a message and I'll even ponder the deeper meaning and symbolism but only to a point. T. S. Elliot's "The Hollow Men" is recited by Kurtz but I don't think the most famous portion of the poem, the conclusion, is:
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but with a whimper
Should it be on the list? I think so. Many people much smarter than I am rave about the movie. Critics are mixed but the film is widely touted as great and did portray how messed up Vietnam was, or at least how messed up we've been lead to believe it was. How's that for recursive? It's about good vs evil and gives us a message about being ruthless in war and whether that makes the war worth winning.
No comments:
Post a Comment