MovieChat Forums > Apocalypse Now (1979) Discussion > McQueen?

McQueen?

posted 8 years ago by amkatz
12 replies | jump to latest

Granted, I think Martin Sheen gets way, way too little credit for his performance as Capt Willard--he is, after all, the only character in every scene given that the story is from his pov, but I also think Brando fat nearly destroys the film.

Especially as he's presented near to the end after so much build up.

I recall reading that Steve McQueen missed being cast as Willard through some differences in salary, travel, etc, that were ultimately resolved, but too late.

So I'm left to wonder, if McQueen had been cast, would his name above the title been enough to allow Coppola to minimize or even replace Brando?

I believe, as I posted elsewhere, that a non-existent Kurtz in the finale would have been preferable to a fat Kurtz. There is simply no justification for it. It takes one out of the story completely & reminds the viewer that Brando's in the film to ensure its box office.

Of course it's impossible now to imagine any other Willard than Sheen, & I highly doubt McQueen would have gone to the extremes Sheen did, especially in the opening scenes. But, who knows, he might have brought his own style & somehow made Willard his own.

Mainly, I wonder if he would have been enough to offset Brando.

[–] jbaddock 8 years ago

The point is that, in some respects, Willard is not the main character in the story - Kurtz is. A lot of the time, Willard is a passive character, meeting others who make much more of an impact than he does. Sheen is ideal for that - he wasn't well known at the time, so he can just blend into the background a lot of the time, which is perfect, given that Willard is operating covertly. McQueen would have brought too much star power into the mix, and would inevitably have dominated proceedings, which Sheen doesn't - the character is there as an observer, as much as anything else (which is what Marlow is in Heart Of Darkness). Having a palpably overweight Brando actually helps to emphasise Kurtz's deterioration, physically as well as mentally and emotionally - the guy is a wreck, in every sense of the word.

[–] amkatz 8 years ago

Good points about the characters relative prominence. But even as the main character, it would still have been possible for Kurtz not to actually appear on the screen.

& yes, certainly Kurtz has deteriorated, but that kind of weight gain might be plausible were Kurtz & Co holed up in an urban center like Saigon, but not in the middle of the jungle. Then there's still the implication of malaria. Hard to imagine weight gain while suffering malarial illness.

The issue's a bit less in the fore with the original edit, in which Kurtz has fewer scenes, & they're all at night. The daytime scene during which he reads from Time really exacerbates the matter.

[–] Steadybox 8 years ago

The issue's a bit less in the fore with the original edit, in which Kurtz has fewer scenes, & they're all at night. The daytime scene during which he reads from Time really exacerbates the matter.

I'm one of those few who prefer the redux to the original version, but I do wish that particular scene would have been left out of it.

[–] DepheatingRub 8 years ago

I've spent my life with this film and an equal part of its power, mythos, durability, and deserved status is *because* you think so little of Brando in it. This movie is like no other in every way that counts. As far ad I'm concerned, for all its flaws it is perfect.

[–] vicky_lc2001 (1907) 8 years ago

McQueen is too old whereas Sheen looked 10-15 years younger than his age. Coppola wanted Pacino as Willard actually but Pacino didn't want to leave NY for the Philippines. He didn't like going to Sicily and Cuba (S. America) and got sick in tgf2.

[–] Otter (24464) 8 years ago

The age difference really does matter, McQueen looked older than his years and Sheen looked younger. And soldiers were terribly young in that war, boys in their teens were drafted and put under the command of men in their twenties, McQueen would have looked horribly out of place even if the rest of the cast was older than the real people would gave been.

Besides, I've never been a big fan of McQueen's. Not a great actor, smug self-indulgent presence that would have been all wrong for this film. Could the man look horrified, or was he too cool for that?

[–] telegonus (738) 7 years ago

I can see a younger, pre-superstar Steve McQueen pull off Willard in Apocalypse, Now. The Steve McQueen of The Magnificent Seven and Hell Is For Heroes, but by the Seventies McQueen was a veteran star and somewhat of an icon. My sense is that his time with Brando would have been star versus star. A sort of celebrity death match.

[–] whynotwriteme (7725) 7 years ago

McQueen as Willard, Lee Marvin as Kurz. It would have been an entirely different movie, but it also would have been a great one.

[–] AP (5288) 7 years ago

As others have said, Brando/Kurtz’s state emphasizes the idea of a deteriorated man. Getting fat in the jungle seems unrealistic but the movie is very surreal so I think it still works with the overall tone.

If one wants an in-universe explanation for being overweight, it could be explained as a younger Kurtz being very muscular with all that bulk turning into fat as old age and a lack of a healthy diet took hold.

[–] Rocky15 (509) 5 years ago

I can see McQueen playing Kilgore more than I can Willard.

[–] PaladinNJ (21528) 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] whynotwriteme (7725) 5 years ago

If they had McQueen as Willard and Lee Marvin as Kurtz, this probably would have been my favorite war movie of all time.