A U.S. Army officer serving in Vietnam is tasked with assassinating a renegade Special Forces Colonel who sees himself as a god.A U.S. Army officer serving in Vietnam is tasked with assassinating a renegade Special Forces Colonel who sees himself as a god.A U.S. Army officer serving in Vietnam is tasked with assassinating a renegade Special Forces Colonel who sees himself as a god.
- Won 2 Oscars
- 21 wins & 33 nominations total
Laurence Fishburne
- Clean
- (as Larry Fishburne)
Summary
Reviewers say 'Apocalypse Now' is acclaimed for its stunning visuals, strong performances, and deep psychological insights. Martin Sheen and Marlon Brando deliver unforgettable roles. Its depiction of war's chaos and horror is often lauded. Yet, some critics find the script and narrative lacking, with unclear direction and pacing issues. Despite these flaws, it stands as a significant cinematic achievement.
Featured reviews
In an updating of `Hearts of Darkness' a soldier is given a mission to travel up a river During the Vietnam war in order to terminate the command of Colonel Kurtz. Kurtz is operating without orders and is leading a group of natives in brutal violent strikes against the enemy. Despite his history of brilliance and decoration he has clearly gone mad. Willard joins a military boat and travels up river to his destiny. However the further he travels the more madness appears to have become the norm.
That Redux was going to be anything less than brilliant was never in doubt: it was never going to be so different from the original that it would destroy or significantly damage the reputation or impact that the film has. What was in question to my mind was whether or not Coppola should have just left well enough alone. I have seen the documentary about the making of the original film, wherein Coppola derides many of his scenes and decides to cut them out of his movie even as he finishes shooting them - the plantation scene being one of the key ones that he felt just didn't work. It was for this reason that I was interested to see what the additions and rejigging of scenes had done to the film.
The strengths of Redux is that Apocalypse Now was never about the straight story, it was more about the journey Willard undertakes rather than a build up to a traditional conclusion - while the ending is big, it is no more or less important that anything that has gone before it. So for that reason it is a good thing that, simply put, there is now more of the journey to be enjoyed! `49 minutes of new material' my dvd cover screams at me; combine this with the movement of scenes and certainly it does have the feel of a different (albeit familiar) film rather than just a bit of spit and polish with some new CGI effects (yes ET, I'm looking at you). However this increased material also brings with it the problems that not all the material compliments the film in terms of total quality.
None of the added scenes or sequential movements are bad or even average, they are all interesting, but some just don't seem to really fit. The plantation scene has some great dialogue (that strikes a real chord so recently post-Iraq) and it makes it's points but it just didn't seem to fit. I can see what Coppola was trying to do and, if you watch Hearts Of Darkness, you can see that it frustrates him that it doesn't work, but he got it right first time, it doesn't fit despite it's standalone merits. Likewise the playboy bunny scene intrigued me as I tried to get more from the bunny's semi-speech about being made to do things and the theme of objectification, but again it didn't totally work and seemed out of place.
Despite these two major scenes not totally fitting, they are still interesting and, if you came for the journey, then that is what matters and they present themselves as a flawed part of that journey - but a part of that journey nonetheless. Some of the smaller additions actually contribute a lot more to the film. Little moments in the boat show Willard to be more relaxed as a man than the original did - and this greatly benefits my understanding and appreciation of his character. How he interacts with the rest of the crew is also improved. Other minor additions to existing scenes serve to enhance them, but improvement in some areas is difficult when it comes to this film.
I won't go into details on cast, performances and the themes of the film as I have already done that in my other review. Suffice to say that, if you loved Apocalypse Now then Redux will likely both enhance your enjoyment and slightly irritate you at the same time. The film easily stands up to the longer running time - as another user said, I could easily give the five hour version a stab (well, maybe once!) as the journey is the all. The additions may not be without flaw, but then that's why they were higher on the editing hierarchy than the rest of the stuff! However they add interest and minutes to the journey - both of which are good things.
Overall, it is very difficult to take `one of the best films ever madeT ' and make it better - and Coppola hasn't done that here, but he hasn't damaged it either. It isn't a brand new film and it doesn't mess around with the original so much that it could be called a different film - so I won't compare the two as to which is `better'. Suffice to say that, while I don't totally agree that you `can't have too much of a good thing', certainly an extra 49 minutes is gratefully received where it doesn't damage or cheapen but only seeks to enhance and support.
That Redux was going to be anything less than brilliant was never in doubt: it was never going to be so different from the original that it would destroy or significantly damage the reputation or impact that the film has. What was in question to my mind was whether or not Coppola should have just left well enough alone. I have seen the documentary about the making of the original film, wherein Coppola derides many of his scenes and decides to cut them out of his movie even as he finishes shooting them - the plantation scene being one of the key ones that he felt just didn't work. It was for this reason that I was interested to see what the additions and rejigging of scenes had done to the film.
The strengths of Redux is that Apocalypse Now was never about the straight story, it was more about the journey Willard undertakes rather than a build up to a traditional conclusion - while the ending is big, it is no more or less important that anything that has gone before it. So for that reason it is a good thing that, simply put, there is now more of the journey to be enjoyed! `49 minutes of new material' my dvd cover screams at me; combine this with the movement of scenes and certainly it does have the feel of a different (albeit familiar) film rather than just a bit of spit and polish with some new CGI effects (yes ET, I'm looking at you). However this increased material also brings with it the problems that not all the material compliments the film in terms of total quality.
None of the added scenes or sequential movements are bad or even average, they are all interesting, but some just don't seem to really fit. The plantation scene has some great dialogue (that strikes a real chord so recently post-Iraq) and it makes it's points but it just didn't seem to fit. I can see what Coppola was trying to do and, if you watch Hearts Of Darkness, you can see that it frustrates him that it doesn't work, but he got it right first time, it doesn't fit despite it's standalone merits. Likewise the playboy bunny scene intrigued me as I tried to get more from the bunny's semi-speech about being made to do things and the theme of objectification, but again it didn't totally work and seemed out of place.
Despite these two major scenes not totally fitting, they are still interesting and, if you came for the journey, then that is what matters and they present themselves as a flawed part of that journey - but a part of that journey nonetheless. Some of the smaller additions actually contribute a lot more to the film. Little moments in the boat show Willard to be more relaxed as a man than the original did - and this greatly benefits my understanding and appreciation of his character. How he interacts with the rest of the crew is also improved. Other minor additions to existing scenes serve to enhance them, but improvement in some areas is difficult when it comes to this film.
I won't go into details on cast, performances and the themes of the film as I have already done that in my other review. Suffice to say that, if you loved Apocalypse Now then Redux will likely both enhance your enjoyment and slightly irritate you at the same time. The film easily stands up to the longer running time - as another user said, I could easily give the five hour version a stab (well, maybe once!) as the journey is the all. The additions may not be without flaw, but then that's why they were higher on the editing hierarchy than the rest of the stuff! However they add interest and minutes to the journey - both of which are good things.
Overall, it is very difficult to take `one of the best films ever madeT ' and make it better - and Coppola hasn't done that here, but he hasn't damaged it either. It isn't a brand new film and it doesn't mess around with the original so much that it could be called a different film - so I won't compare the two as to which is `better'. Suffice to say that, while I don't totally agree that you `can't have too much of a good thing', certainly an extra 49 minutes is gratefully received where it doesn't damage or cheapen but only seeks to enhance and support.
10dk777
Apocalypse Now is an interesting film, not because it is supposedly an anti-war film, but because it is surreal and shows an interesting journey into madness.
Martin Sheen gives us an insight into his character here and we see the senselessness of the whole situation and how easy it is to lose yourself in certain situations.
We follow his journey and the various events that befall him and a small group of soldiers in a patrol boat traveling deep into the jungle. On their way, really bizarre things happen.
Along the way, we also see Robert Duvall in the role of a completely insane officer, whose episodic role has a profound impact on the film.
The film should essentially be anti-war, but it didn't strike me as such, but simply as a film about the fate of various people who found themselves in unusual situations.
Their whole mission doesn't really make sense, and in the end they accomplished nothing, but that's the point. Everything was really in vain.
The direction is excellent, the music is perfectly integrated into the film and matches the tone of the film.
For me, this is a film about the loss of reason and the journey to madness. If civilization completely collapses, and somewhere it has already collapsed a long time ago, this is roughly what we can expect, madness and insanity.
I watched three versions of the film and I liked the Redux version the best.
An interesting and brutal journey into madness and darkness.
Martin Sheen gives us an insight into his character here and we see the senselessness of the whole situation and how easy it is to lose yourself in certain situations.
We follow his journey and the various events that befall him and a small group of soldiers in a patrol boat traveling deep into the jungle. On their way, really bizarre things happen.
Along the way, we also see Robert Duvall in the role of a completely insane officer, whose episodic role has a profound impact on the film.
The film should essentially be anti-war, but it didn't strike me as such, but simply as a film about the fate of various people who found themselves in unusual situations.
Their whole mission doesn't really make sense, and in the end they accomplished nothing, but that's the point. Everything was really in vain.
The direction is excellent, the music is perfectly integrated into the film and matches the tone of the film.
For me, this is a film about the loss of reason and the journey to madness. If civilization completely collapses, and somewhere it has already collapsed a long time ago, this is roughly what we can expect, madness and insanity.
I watched three versions of the film and I liked the Redux version the best.
An interesting and brutal journey into madness and darkness.
10jokeco68
My favourite movie of all time. This was a flawed piece of work by Coppola and seeing the documentary 'Heart of Darkness' made it even more compelling. Coppola at this point was king of Hollywood after making 'the Godfather' and 'GodfatherII' and had developed the ego necessary to even dare try to make a movie like 'Apocalypse Now'. Through sheer arrogance he went to the Phillipines with a partial script and thought he would know what he would do when he got there. Just as Captain Willard thought he would know what to do once he got to Col. Kurtz's compound. And just like Willard, he DIDN'T know what he was going to do once he got there. This is such a masterpiece of American cinema, beautifully photographed and the river is such a perfect metaphor and backdrop for the story. What I like most about 'Apocalypse Now' is that it offers no answers or conclusions. Consequently, because of this open-endedness, it infuriates some viewers who like their movies to be much more obvious.
This movie defies categorization. Some call it a war movie which it isn't at all, really it is more of a personal study of man. The best pic about Vietnam is 'Platoon' in my opinion and if a viewer is seeking a retelling of the Vietnam War go there first for answers.
Coppola should be commended for his take on the bureaucracy of war which he conveys quite effectively with the meeting with Gen.Corman and Lucas (Harrison Ford) and the Playmate review. The sheer audacity of Kilgore makes him an unforgettable character and the dawn attack will always be a Hollywood classic.
It is an almost psychedelic cruise to a very surreal ending which makes it a movie not accessible to everyone. Very challenging to watch but rewarding as well. I could offer my explanations on each scene but that would be totally pointless. This movie is intended for interpretation and contemplation as opposed to immediate gratification.
A little footnote, definitely if your a first-time viewer of Apocalypse Now, watch the original version first, the 'Redux' version is, I think, more intended for the hardcore fan and is more of a curiosity than a 'new and improved' version of the movie
This movie defies categorization. Some call it a war movie which it isn't at all, really it is more of a personal study of man. The best pic about Vietnam is 'Platoon' in my opinion and if a viewer is seeking a retelling of the Vietnam War go there first for answers.
Coppola should be commended for his take on the bureaucracy of war which he conveys quite effectively with the meeting with Gen.Corman and Lucas (Harrison Ford) and the Playmate review. The sheer audacity of Kilgore makes him an unforgettable character and the dawn attack will always be a Hollywood classic.
It is an almost psychedelic cruise to a very surreal ending which makes it a movie not accessible to everyone. Very challenging to watch but rewarding as well. I could offer my explanations on each scene but that would be totally pointless. This movie is intended for interpretation and contemplation as opposed to immediate gratification.
A little footnote, definitely if your a first-time viewer of Apocalypse Now, watch the original version first, the 'Redux' version is, I think, more intended for the hardcore fan and is more of a curiosity than a 'new and improved' version of the movie
10GOPC
As I stated above, I think that the 2000 version of the film ought to be treated separately. The Redux is not just a longer version. It contains two new and important scenes, and one of them, the "french" episode, adds a whole new touch to a classic movie, WITHOUT breaking the atmosphere or disturbing the overall picture. I remember as I saw the Redux for the first time, that my whole understanding of the war in Vietnam changed, and how I had to go to the library and get an update on a few things. Also it is interesting that Coppola chose the year 2000 for the longer Redux. My guess is that he feels that the movie is as important today as it was back in 1979. He even went to the trouble of making an excellent piece of art even better, in order to actually make all the old fans see the new stuff, and to present a whole new generation with a very controversial and strong comment on one of the most bloody wars in recorded history. The movie is thought-provoking indeed, but also it has a visually very beautifully composed screenplay. Capturing the madness and chaos of war the storyline is also filled with more or less obvious metaphors and philosophical or existential riddles. A friend of mine called it "the most philosophical of all movies" - perhaps an overstatement - in my opinion it is just a very good film about war and the politics of war. But I can see that there is plenty for everyone here. What I'm saying is that it's one of those movies that you are likely to hear distinctly different opinions about, and you are most probably going to think again and again about it. I've seen the Redux 5, 6 or 7 times, and it is always a puzzling experience. Highly recommended.
I have nothing but respect for Francis Ford Coppola. He is deservedly one of the greatest directors of all time and his style of film-making is pretty much inimitable. Yet I can't really say I enjoyed this movie. At least not the Redux version I saw.
First the good parts. It's a damn beautiful film. The mood, as they slowly drift up the Vietnamese river, keeps building and building and you can smell the heat and wetness in the air, feel the sweat dripping down your back, hear the hollow echoing screaming around you. The script was heavily inspired by the classic novella Heart of Darkness and that's exactly the mood and atmosphere they achieved.
The acting is also topnotch, with one glaring exception, and I've never seen Charlie Sheen do a more convincing role than here. You can almost see the cracks in their souls as the heaviness of the war settles around them as they are pulled from combat and send to face almost certain deaths as they hunt their elusive quarry.
It's a well-made film. Everything from camera-work to sets to directing works, and works so well, but the fact remains that's it's just too long. At least the Redux version. You can only stretch the atmosphere and suspense for so long until you start to look at the clock. That's partly the purpose and to this film's credit, any other film would have crumbled way sooner, but crumble it does, eventually.
I also have problems with Marlon Brando's performance. Apparently the man showed up hugely overweight, completely unprepared and pretty much being as unprofessional as you can be. And it shows. The final third of the film throws the suspense straight out of the window and pretty much the only question left is "Brando, what happened, man?"
I can see why people love this film. It's a haunting take on war, has amazing atmosphere, vivid imagery, memorable characters and as a whole there are very few movies like it. Personally I lost interest after the halfway point, but that's just me.
First the good parts. It's a damn beautiful film. The mood, as they slowly drift up the Vietnamese river, keeps building and building and you can smell the heat and wetness in the air, feel the sweat dripping down your back, hear the hollow echoing screaming around you. The script was heavily inspired by the classic novella Heart of Darkness and that's exactly the mood and atmosphere they achieved.
The acting is also topnotch, with one glaring exception, and I've never seen Charlie Sheen do a more convincing role than here. You can almost see the cracks in their souls as the heaviness of the war settles around them as they are pulled from combat and send to face almost certain deaths as they hunt their elusive quarry.
It's a well-made film. Everything from camera-work to sets to directing works, and works so well, but the fact remains that's it's just too long. At least the Redux version. You can only stretch the atmosphere and suspense for so long until you start to look at the clock. That's partly the purpose and to this film's credit, any other film would have crumbled way sooner, but crumble it does, eventually.
I also have problems with Marlon Brando's performance. Apparently the man showed up hugely overweight, completely unprepared and pretty much being as unprofessional as you can be. And it shows. The final third of the film throws the suspense straight out of the window and pretty much the only question left is "Brando, what happened, man?"
I can see why people love this film. It's a haunting take on war, has amazing atmosphere, vivid imagery, memorable characters and as a whole there are very few movies like it. Personally I lost interest after the halfway point, but that's just me.
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaMore than a year had passed between the filming of Willard and Chef searching the jungle for mangoes and encountering the tiger, and the immediately following shots (part of the same scene) of Chef clambering back onto the boat, ripping off his shirt and screaming.
- GoofsWhen Captain Willard first meets Colonel Kilgore, they exchange salutes while they are still in a combat zone. It is usually military protocol not to salute in a combat zone. Saluting would show a possible sniper who the commanding officer is. (e.g. in Forrest Gump (1994) Lt. Dan correctly instructed Gump and Bubba not to salute him in the field.)
- Crazy creditsThere are no opening credits in the film. The title can be seen as graffiti in the Kurtz compound late in the film.
- Alternate versionsThe theatrical and Redux DVDs released by Paramount Pictures and Lions Gate Studios in the United States, as well as the earlier letterbox VHS and LaserDisc releases, were re-framed in DP Vittorio Storaro's preferred 2.00:1 "Univision" format. The Lions Gate US Blu-ray release, however, restores the film's original 2.39:1 aspect ratio (although the packaging reads 2.35:1).
- ConnectionsEdited into Apocalypse Pooh (1987)
- SoundtracksThe End
by Jim Morrison (as The Doors), Ray Manzarek (as The Doors), Robby Krieger (as The Doors), and John Densmore (as The Doors)
Performed by The Doors
Courtesy of Elektra/Asylum Records
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official sites
- Languages
- Also known as
- Apocalipsis ahora
- Filming locations
- Baler Bay, Baler, Aurora, Philippines(beach with soldiers surfing)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $31,500,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $96,042,913
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $118,558
- Aug 19, 1979
- Gross worldwide
- $105,088,540
- Runtime2 hours 27 minutes
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
