Films, by definition, are the results of what is put into them and what is expressed through them by means of story and/or theme, for better or worse. Some films turn out to be great and/or memorable (as the aforementioned), in spite of these issues. Others, unfortunately, are a clear indication of what went wrong, whether by studio interference, cast and crew conflicts, or so forth.
How is it that the former have succeeded while the latter have failed? A better question: what does this say about filmmaking in general? Should a film be judged merely on its behind-the-scenes drama, or on the final product? Let's look briefly at another prime example: Francis Ford Coppola's 1979 war epic, Apocalypse Now.
How is it that the former have succeeded while the latter have failed? A better question: what does this say about filmmaking in general? Should a film be judged merely on its behind-the-scenes drama, or on the final product? Let's look briefly at another prime example: Francis Ford Coppola's 1979 war epic, Apocalypse Now.
 |
| The 1979 theatrical release poster |
"The horror!"
Based on Joseph Conrad's esoteric novel "Heart of Darkness," an American soldier (Martin Sheen) is tasked with finding and assassinating a rogue American colonel (Marlon Brando), all while going through the horrors and traumas of the Vietnam war.
Filmed in 1976, the production troubles of Apocalypse Now were so great, that a documentary feature was made in 1991, titled Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse. Sheen suffered a heart attack. Brando arrived on set unprepared and overweight. Actor Dennis Hopper had an alcohol and cocaine addiction (although he would come clean years later). A hurricane destroyed the film's sets, delaying and increasing production from six weeks to sixteen months. The budget skyrocketed, that Coppola (who lost 100 lbs, and even contemplated suicide, in the process) mortgaged his home and his Napa Valley winery to finish the film. Coppola then spent the next three years editing the film.
The film stands as (and remains) a poetic yet psychological fever dream, and a haunting, harsh, and maddening examination of the horrors and traumas of war (including dehumanization from it). It still holds many iconic moments, from the napalm bombing set to Wagner's "Ride of the Valkyries" (complete with Robert DuVall's signature "I love the smell of napalm in the morning") to Brando's commanding and haunting presence. Coppola declared at the 1979 Cannes Film Festival (where the film first premiered, and eventually won the prestigious Palme d'Or award), "[This] film is not about Vietnam. It is Vietnam."
 |
| The 2001 "Redux" poster |
 |
| The 2019 "Final Cut" poster |
A "redux" edition was released in 2001, with almost an hour of additional footage, including new scenes at a French base in Vietnam and some (unnecessarily) featuring Playboy playmates from the USO sequence, as well as expanded scenes with Duvall and Brando, respectfully. This version proved "too long" for many critics and viewers.
Recently, Coppola went back and reassembled the film into a new "final cut" in celebration of the film's 40th anniversary. Just as Ridley Scott declared with Blade Runner's 2007 "final cut," Coppola considers this version of Apocalypse Now to be the definitive version. Either way, it remains, perhaps, the most surreal and psychological (and most maddening) take on war ever made for film, with Stanley Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket from 1987 coming close behind. (There's also Terrence Malick's more meditative The Thin Red Line from 1998 to consider.)
No comments:
Post a Comment