Which version is best

Theatrical of final

CRIME Shirt $21.68

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

CRIME Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    The final cut is the most psychedelic, the theatrical cut is probablya tie, maybe slightly not as good. I was planning on rewatching the total dossier version but never got around to it, i remember not liking it

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I just watched it for the first time with the Redux version. The french plantation scene is out of place and interrupts the plot to me.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      French plantation scene is crucial for the completeness of the film as a microcosm history of the Vietnam war. The french telling willard that he's crazy for thinking the Americans will win where the french lost is really vital.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        the french plantation scene is a good scene but it interrupts the flow too much. for me it's theatrical all the way

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          I hear what you're saying, the theatrical cut maintains the creeping insanity of the heart of darkness voyage - the plantation scene certainly interrupts that, and i wasn't a fan when i first saw it in redux, but now (in the final cut) i think it's not THAT much of an interruption since they bury clean whereas he just disappears in the theatrical, also the aforementioned important historical component i already mentioned.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Another thing is the plantation scene builds on reverse time element - as they are going up the river they're traveling back through the history of indochina

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        What makes you think willard thinks that. Its an interesting scene, but overall it's uneeded outside of burying morpheus.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          I don't have it on hand but he has a discussion with the plantation owners during dinner where they talk about the french defeat and there's some back and forth. Iirc they do tell willard the Americans will lose anyway

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            My question is aimed more at the fact Willard is mostly silent while the french people moan. He doesn't outright express any belief unless I'm misremembering?

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              I rewatched it and the dialogue is that it really makes no sense for the Americans to be there - it makes more sense for the French to be in Indochina, if anything, than the Americans. The patriarch of the family points out the CIA/OSS created the vietminh during the ww2 to fight the Japanese and kick out the french colonialists, which, importantly, Willard doesn't believe.

              They repeat that the Americans created the vietcong and now the Americans are taking the place of the French, and that the Americans will lose against the viet cong, who aren't really Soviet or chinese bloc communists.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Graham greene of course pointed out the OSS/CIA- Vietminh connection in the Quiet American

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                They also ask Willard if he knows about dien bien phu, and says he does, but they go on to explain to him how insane it really was, and that he hasn't really grasped yet how desperate the French were not to lose - so desperate they'd rather be dead.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                The key part of the scene is right before they break up dinner when one of the guys says to Willard kind of melodramaticly "why dont you Americans learn from us? From our mistakes?" - because the Americans are doing it all over again. The guy is convinced the Americans can win, or could win, but Willard indeed seems less certain, or at least says nothing.

                The two french guys get in an argument about wether the french socialists at home are communist sympathizers or not. The old patriarch is led off pathetically repeating "we can make it work, we help the people."

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Good analysis anon. I gotta rewatch it. I liked the French holding their home like an outpost in the middle of it all. And all the patriarch said related well to what happened in Afghanistan also

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                They also ask Willard if he knows about dien bien phu, and says he does, but they go on to explain to him how insane it really was, and that he hasn't really grasped yet how desperate the French were not to lose - so desperate they'd rather be dead.

                The key part of the scene is right before they break up dinner when one of the guys says to Willard kind of melodramaticly "why dont you Americans learn from us? From our mistakes?" - because the Americans are doing it all over again. The guy is convinced the Americans can win, or could win, but Willard indeed seems less certain, or at least says nothing.

                The two french guys get in an argument about wether the french socialists at home are communist sympathizers or not. The old patriarch is led off pathetically repeating "we can make it work, we help the people."

                yeah, none of this shit belongs in the movie. Stick to one angle. The assassination plot surrounded by extreme chaos. We dont need an added political agenda, explaining some nonsense to someone who doesn't have any power to change it. Trying too hard to be too many things. No one wants a history lesson or some heavyhanded moral high ground b.s. that has nothing to do with the plot.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >apocalypse now is not political or historical

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                it is but it’s better at doing that in a more cerebral way with Willard’s relation to Kurtz. Running into a cajun family for dinner is just a giant speed bump for the movie’s pacing. I guess at the time most Americans were ignorant to the fact that they were fighting a war effort the french already abandoned, which is what makes it somewhat interesting, but that’s a no brained now and Willard’s reflective monologues do a better job of setting up the tone of the war. Now throw in some ex SS soldiers who have been fighting in the jungles against communism since 1938 and then you’d have an actually interesting scene that further challenges the audience’s perspective.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        I liked it but just stood out too much. Theatrical is smoother but people who want more out of the movie will be happy with it

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      The french plantation scene fit well into the movie. I think it meandered too much after Kilgore when the movie involved the women and sex scenes. If you cut that out of the entry, I don't think much value would've been lost.

  3. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I like the girlies with their petite butts.

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    redux

  5. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Redux is supreme

  6. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Both are good but the frenchy stuff kinda cuts in. Adds good history and context though

  7. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    OH SUZIE Q

  8. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I watched theatrical recently for my first ever viewing of the movie and thought it was kino. I felt the pacing was pretty perfect, without having known what other cut or added scenes there are

  9. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Redux is a frickup. The entire movie is them going up river and slowly going mad, further away from society and further into the heart of darkness. The bridge is the tipping point of no return. In Redux the bridge happens way to early and the sequences are tonally out of order

  10. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Redux. Only for the weird French family part.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      This, the French family is kino; honestly the meeting with the bunnies is more off-putting to me.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        well I for one appreciated the breasts

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        The bunny scene explains why Lance is going crazy and becoming an acid freak. I agree though its probably the weakest sequence in the entire film

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          I don't disagree. In fact, I wouldn't mind Coppola cutting the entire bunnies perfomance scene for the Final cut and extending the French plantation scene even more.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            The entire susie q scene exists so Willard can voice over the line, "charlies' idea of good r&r is cold rice and a little rat meat - he has only two ways home: death, or victory". I think it's a pretty kino scene though, like the bbq scene with kilgore, showing how the Americans (except kilgore - maybe even kilgore who seems more interested in surfing) don't want to be there.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Frick off the bunny scene was kino

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              Plantation scene was better, that's what I'm saying. Even Redux left out too much.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Plantation scene was more general and touched upon the vietnam war as a whole, but the bunny scene was leagues better in terms of humanizing and grounding the characters themselves

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                So what you're saying here is redux is the best cut

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                I don't know, in my opinion the plantation scene said much more about Willard with very little dialogue. His acting in the dinner and bedroom scenes as a very tired, but stoic man is phenomenal.

  11. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    How did the French plantation scene even become a pleb lithmus test, like where did the meme come from?

  12. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Theatrical cut is perfect. Perfect pacing, perfect characterization, perfect set-pieces, etc. The added scenes in the other cuts frick with the pacing, the characterization (humanizing Willard, making Kilgore a joke, etc.) or the focus. Theatrical or bust.

  13. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Theatrical is the best. The fricking french plantation scene completely obliterates the pacing and tone of the movie. The kid fricking dies and then suddenly they're around a dinner table eating happily. The original has a ramp up of every location being more insane than the last that gets completely broken in Redux and the Final Cut. The scene itself is fine it's just an hour too late into the movie.
    Watch Theatrical then Hearts of Darkness, THEN MAYBE Final Cut or Redux.

  14. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Final and it's not even close, incredible flow, good sound design, no image flaws

  15. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Always theatrical for everything

  16. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    whats the difference between the Redux and the Final Cut? I didn't even know the Final Cut was a thing until this thread tbh.

  17. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Redux

  18. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    It's baffling to see, how many people got filtered by the plantation owners. Redux is the best.
    How come no one mentions there's more rape in it as well?

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Its not a "filtered" thing, its a matter of tone
      The french plantation scene by itself is good and explores interesting themes but because it takes place post Do Long bridge it fricks up with the heightened sence of danger and chaos by acting as a sanctuary type thing for the characters, it breaks the tension
      I suggest you watch the theatrical and then watch the redux you will see what im talking about

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *