I feel the redux includes so much more that doesn't necessarily move the story but adds to the crazed atmosphere of Vietnam. I feel like a cut inbetween the original and the redux would be best, shorten the French plantation scene just a tad (which I didn't entirely mind) and maybe a few other spots, but that's all questionable. I really love redux, I'll stand by it any day.
shareI wouldn't say it's unusual to prefer Redux, but it's the minority opinion. I feel the added scenes bog the movie down and would've worked better as deleted scenes on the DVD to view if interested. Not every idea that comes to an artist is worthy of the final product and that's how I feel about most of the extra scenes.
My 150 (or so) favorite movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/
No, not that strange. Before I watched the Redux version I thought "Why try to improve on perfection?" but soon realised the merits of some of the additional scenes. Anything extra involving Colonel Kilgore / Robert Duvall is definitely a win as the character is comedy gold and Duvall's performance was superb. Some parts of the French plantation scene are very useful, and give you a clue to where the US is going with the war and why they will lose it (but some of it feels like padding too, and it does give a few relaxing scenes when really the tension should be escalating).
On the other hand, the entire Medevac scene (with the Playboy bunnies) is unnecessary. Also, as mentioned re the French plantation, any additional scenes in the second half of the movie don't help Coppola's ramping up of the tension and suffocation factor, as the scene sequence from the original built up perfectly to the conclusion.
So a bit hit-and-miss. Overall the extra scenes enhance the movie, slightly, I feel.
Like a bird on the wire, like a drunk in a midnight choir, I have tried in my way to be free
I enjoyed the redux when I first saw it (a special showing at an old revitalized theater), but after I though about it, it made the movie unrealistic (Willard gets laid by a Playboy bunny AND a French MILF with great knockers...in the jungles of Viet Nam???) and sort of comedic (a chopper flying over begging for the return of a surf board??).
Keith Moon was the greatest 'Keith Moon Style' drummer ever!!share
Redux, is an interesting cut; but something that was ultimately unnecessary. Coppola had the footage, so he re-inserted it to give the film a slightly different spin and politics, which only served to make the film drawn out and appear even more over-blown than it already was. Not that I mind the style of the original cut and the film is an awesome directorial achievement; but the redux only serves to enhance any self-indulgences.
I like the mysterious atmosphere of Willard's surreal journey down the river, which was more compelling and tighter paced in the original cut. It didn't need further explanations and pointless silly scenes, to spoil the pace. Redux, only turns it into a more objective pov from Coppola, which also mars the mystical nature of the mission in the original cut.
Exorcist: Christ's power compels you. Cast out, unclean spirit.
Destinata:💩
Not strange at all. It is an opinion that is in the minority but I agree that the Redux is the superior cut.
It's been my experience that it's all in the interpretation of what the flow of the film is "supposed" to be. Those that view Apocalypse Now as a linear journey tend to favor the original cut and view any scenes that divert from Willard's dark journey as distractions. Those who view the film as more of an immersive, dis-jointed journey seem to favor the Redux. In short, there is really no right or wrong, there is merely a preference based on interpretation of what suits the film best.
As a Redux supporter, I always welcome the additional scenes. I feel the viewer "absorbs" more of "the horror" and that the cut better symbolizes a never-ending and unpredictable journey up the river. The length makes an epic film TRULY an epic film!
I also think the film's incredible cinematography is further strengthened by the additional material, especially during the plantation scene.
All in all, the positives of the Redux definitely outweigh any negatives (at least for me).
nope. the best movie ever. what ever the cut. wish workprint would be released officially.
...
Keep your 'lectric eye on me babe/Put your ray gun to my head
No, not strange. There is no rule saying what you should prefer. I personally prefer the 1979 cut, but I believe the Redux cut has its value too.
http://ourfeaturepresentation.tumblr.com
http://photocinema.tumblr.com
No. I also prefer the REDUX version. The new scenes are PRICELESS and enhance the experience. The original version is DEAD for me!
shareHaving seen the Redux version first (multiple times), I thought the original cut was a bit too fast-paced. So I prefer Redux, though I think the part at the Kurtz' compound is just a tad too long in it; it would be better without the scene of Kurtz reading the magazine.
shareI just watched Apocalypse Now for the first time--the Redux version. I could not imagine watching an edited version of this film.
shareMy preference would be for something in the middle. I would leave out from Redux the second bunnies scene and the parts added in Kurtz's compound. In the middle would be some of the earlier scenes involving the surfboard, but I would clearly keep ones with Duvall in them.
The key question involves the French plantation scene. Which in turn raises the question whether the original cut adequately addressed the nature of Willard's character. Clearly in both Conrad's original and in the original cut the Marlow/Willard character is not some mere cypher, or blank slate through whom the viewer sees the events and particularly the polar comparison of Kilgore and Kurtz. The state of Willard's previous marriage, the way he sees his connection to a personal need for a mission, the wonderings about the meaning of the War and the relation of that to his mission, all are there in the original.
What is not there, though, and which I think is given added attention in the French plantation scene, is the state of Willard's humanity in the pull between good and evil, to put it a bit simply. The stated objective and purpose of pursuing "the French officer's mentality" compares to Willard's sense of mission and purpose. The conflict, duality and sense of self in the dynamic between the man who fights and the man who loves (and lives) is addressed directly in Willard's dealing with the French widow, Roxanne. Her analysis precedes Willard's encounter with Kurtz and the decisions and actions that follow.
without the French plantation scene, my own view is that the character of Willard is not adequately drawn. with it I hear Roxanne's words ringing in Willard's ears as he is present with Kurtz, hearing how Kurtz in effect has lost his sense of the balance that Roxanne identified. That in turn helps explain to a large extent why Willard pursued the course he did.
So in short my ideal cut would have been something in the middle, but on the whole I prefer Redux because the film misses too much without the French plantation scenes.