This came up in a zombie thread in GQ, but there seemed to be enough interest to warrant its own thread.
Apocalypse Now is one of my favorite movies of all time. So imagine my excitement in 2001 when Apocalypse Now Redux came out. Finally we would see it the way Francis Ford Coppola intended! Unfortunately, I thought it sucked donkey balls.
It meandered for way too long at the French rubber plantation, and that whole section seemed like it was from a different movie. Also added was the quasi-rape of the Playboy Playmates, which was just icky. The extra footage from the surfing section was okay.
All in all, it was subtraction by addition. I made sure to buy the original DVD before it went out of stock. Is there even an option on the Redux DVD to watch the 1979 cut? It’s shades of George Lucas not letting us see the Star Wars that was released in the movie theaters.
See the original theatrical version first. Maybe a couple times… and if you love it, then rent the Redux version. I agree it (Redux) went too long and killed the flow to some extent. The French plantation part seemed too “educational/documentary”, trying to shoehorn in a lot of history at the expense of the tauter pacing of the theatrical version.
The wife and I seriously dislike the Redux version. It seems too slapstick. Kills the mood entirely. Robert Duvall’s character, Bill Kilgore, comes across much, much better in the original version.
This makes me the only one here who prefers Redux to the original. The longer version truly fleshes out the back story with a better understanding of the absudities and madness of the whole mess.
Thought the original was excellent, why screw with it Francis (George)? Redux was interesting at least to just see what else was produced, didn’t kill the spirit imho.
I prefer REDUX. I love what they did with the color restoration and the enhanced soundtrack. Those who critique REDUX rarely mention how glorious the new print looks (and film is primarily a visual experience). As for the additional material, it’s kind of hit or miss. The extra scenes with Kurtz at the end are terrific. The only misstep was the inclusion of the Playmate rape scene, mainly because it was never filmed to completion (due to a sudden typhoon) and thus cuts short. The original was a masterpiece and I think REDUX is, on the whole, an improvement.
Skip the redux. In Hearts of Darkness, Coppola very convincingly explains why he left certain scenes out of the movie; how their inclusion would’ve weakened it. Redux is just an illustration of how right he was in the first place–it’s just Apocalypse Now plus those exact scenes.
…But you’ve got to see the scenes anyways. I had wondered why there was a surfboard on the boat as they were going up the river, and Redux answers that. Yes, some of those scenes are “extra”, but you’e got to see them once.
The original is a mess (although an impressive one at times), but Redux is just bad–shifting widely in tone, abandoning any concern of plot altogether, mistakenly believing its political meanderings are worth contemplating, and undermining powerful moments with unnecessary digressions. In a word: Blech.
The original was the right cut for a theater. And the right cut for audiences 30 years ago. But if you really loved the movie, if you’ve never ever thought that its too long, then definitely watch Redux. It makes the original just seem like an abridged version (which of course it is). Redux has the same mood, the same feel, the same point as the original, just with so much more content. All the extra Brando footage alone is worth it (you see him in the daytime!)
This is absolutely false. Every filmmaker, every novelist etc., makes false starts and follows abandoned paths when creating a work. It’s abridged unless all those meanderings are swept up off the floor and scotch taped back on? Ridiculous.
Erdosian, see the original, final film first. As Archive Guy suggests, some people–myself included–find it a flawed film, but there are moments of undeniable power. Many, many people see no flaws in it all; you’ll find it on many a top ten list. So see *that *film. If you like it a lot, definitely follow up with Hearts of Darkness, a documentary about its production. In which you will see most of the dead flesh that Coppola cut away to save it. If by then you’ve become such a hardcore fan–people do–and have an extra evening on your hands–a long, long evening–and want to see the discarded scenes inserted back into the film, no one’s stopping you.
I really didn’t like the way Redux turned Kilgore from a really badass little maniac into a whining, begging little pussy.
The French Plantation scene might have added a little backstory, but the whole whoring the Playmates out story added almosy nothing except nudity and depravity (not that there’s anything wrong with nudity and depravity if it adds something to the entire film…this didn’t).
I liked seeing the extra scenes, but I agree they were cut from the original for good reasons. It was cool to get some extra back story and fleshing out of the characters. But I’d have hated to have sat through all of it on my first viewing.
I liked the original quite a bit but it wasn’t until Redux that I fell in love. Movies are ejoyable entertainment for me that stand alone as I see them. I haven’t seen Heart Of Darkness though I want to. Even so, nothing in it including the director’s comments about what he did or didn’t intend won’t change my opinion about Redux.
I like the longer version. I do agree that the Kilgore character suffers in Redux but over all I think there is much more texture in it.
My suggestion is if you like the original, watch Redux without watching the ‘making of’ and without comparing it to the original in terms of the story it was trying to tell. Taking each as a picture on it’s own merit, I much prefer Redux.
I don’t have a copy handy, but I seem to remember that the DVD lets you choose which version you want to watch. I think this would be the version on Netflix, there’s a few.
Err… didn’t preview enough. Netflix’s version doesn’t say “Complete Dossier” though. It’s got an… interesting… cover.