| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
TarTar
* Dog in the Sand *
1968 Posts |
 Posted - 04/29/2004 : 02:28:08
|
Apocalypse Now. Somehow, I've never found the time or really taken the effort to rent this and watch it. I suppose it's one I've been saving for a rainy day, which today wasn't, but it was kinda windy and rather empty, so close enough. I decided to rent the original release rather than the Reduxe. I wanted to see how it was first viewed by the public before seeing the TRUE version, if that's what the Reduxe is.
Anyway, yeah, I liked the film. It was a long film, but nearly every second was used wisely. I don't think a 2 and a half hour film has ever seemed so long. My eyes would glance at the time on the DVD player every now and again, thinking an hour had gone by, and only 20 minutes or so had gone by. This wasn't due to boredom, it was becase there was so much going on in the film yet it didn't necessarily move along at a brisk pace that was pleasing to the viewer. It was brutal, and even 10 seconds of violence seemed like an eternity because it was so grueling. Just like they say a 10 second earthquake can seem like hours. Even the downtime is intense cuz I was just waiting for shit to go down. I really don't think I'm in the right mindframe to do a real review of the film or state my proper reaction yet because I've just disconnected myself from the film (well, maybe I haven't even done that yet), and can't critique it yet. I really want to understand the entire Marlon Brando section more, cuz by that time in the film I was a bit weary from all the war and settling down into that section was difficult, and it's not a flaw on the films' behalf, I was just overloaded and tired by that point and couldn't fully appreciate that section of the film for what it was, but it was still beautifully filmed and a great ending. I just wanted to say that I finally watched this and would now like to discuss it with fellow forumers.
"(insert clever quote here)" |
Edited by - TarTar on 04/29/2004 02:31:25 |
|
|
realmeanmotorscutor
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1764 Posts |
Posted - 04/29/2004 : 10:05:26
|
AN sucks. It's just another example of movie makers butchering a gorgeous literary work for their own dumbass contemporary purposes.
 |
 |
|
|
shineoftheever
> Teenager of the Year <
Canada
4307 Posts |
Posted - 04/29/2004 : 12:15:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by realmeanmotorscutor
AN sucks. It's just another example of movie makers butchering a gorgeous literary work for their own dumbass contemporary purposes.
THE HORROR! THE HORROR!
Why is 'monosyllabic' such a long word? |
|
|
|
floop
= Wannabe Volunteer =
Mexico
15297 Posts |
Posted - 04/29/2004 : 12:32:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by realmeanmotorscutor
AN sucks. It's just another example of movie makers butchering a gorgeous literary work for their own dumbass contemporary purposes.
it's an adaptation. movies are movies, books are books. why should the movie be like the book? and how did it butcher the book anyway? i thought it remained fairly faithful to the gist of it (not that it has to).. |
|
|
|
Homers_pet_monkey
= Official forum monkey =
United Kingdom
17125 Posts |
Posted - 04/29/2004 : 13:41:38
|
I agree with TarTar. I was so tired by the time Kurtz came into it that I didn't really get into his character and fully appreciate that part of the film. I still really enjoyed it though and have since bought the Redux version. Haven't found the time to watch it yet though. I might take a week off work soon.
Hansel and Gretel have formed a band, .....And You Will Know Us By The Trail Of Breadcrumbs!!! |
|
|
|
realmeanmotorscutor
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1764 Posts |
Posted - 04/29/2004 : 16:54:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by floop
quote:
Originally posted by realmeanmotorscutor
AN sucks. It's just another example of movie makers butchering a gorgeous literary work for their own dumbass contemporary purposes.
it's an adaptation. movies are movies, books are books. why should the movie be like the book? and how did it butcher the book anyway? i thought it remained fairly faithful to the gist of it (not that it has to)..
yes, movies are movies and books are books but if a movie is going to adapt a book it ought to try to do it right. "The Heart of Darkness" was not during Vietnam and the whole ending with Kurtz (Brando) was half-assed. The similarities are minimal and the modernization is a stretch. As I see it AN is just a poorly plagiarized, boring movie.
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
so moviegeek TarTar finally saw...
