Now the only version of this movie that I have watched, is the redux version.
For those who haven't heard of it, it is just the original but with an extra [B]49 MINUTES[/B] of footage added in places, and basically a whole re-edit of the entire movie.
I have always adored the movie, but I have never watched the original 153 minute version. The reason being, and I know it is going to sound stupid. But I don't feel that the original is going to suffice by itself without the scenes in the redux version that add its surreal quality and overall artistic merit.
I will have to go back and watch the original, maybe buy a special edition copy for the director commentary to get a bigger insight of it (Coppola is great at these).
If you have not seen it, I suggest you buy a big chunk of time and let yourself witness this glory of film making.
It is very close, that this movie will take my top spot for favourite movie of all time after The Godfather.
I think in time that is going to happen.
What are your thoughts?
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxENJ2LwecY[/media]
I liked the board scene
I've seen both versions. The original is better because all the extra scenes in the redux sort of break the flow and they aren't too necessary in the first place. Either way you're still getting a masterpiece of a film.
It doesn't matter about adding to the story for me. Its about the adding the sense of surrealness to it.
That french family scene was great.
It built the picture so perfectly.
But yes, I guess getting to the point may make people dislike it.
3 and a half hours is a long while.
[editline]21st November 2010[/editline]
Although to be fair I haven't seen the original.
Haven't seen the redux. I adore the original so i'll probably check it out.
Redux was the best three hours I ever spent watching a movie.
I quite enjoyed the Redux version, mostly for the French plantation scene.
I'd recommend seeing either one really, just depends on how time you're willing to spend watching a movie.
i haven't actually seen this movie (i know, i need to get to it).
but i'm just gonna go with redux.
[QUOTE=Pops;26207155]i haven't actually seen this movie (i know, i need to get to it).
but i'm just gonna go with redux.[/QUOTE]
Its what I did and I don't regret it.
I watched it with headphones actually to ge a full whaft of the soundtrack.
Probably redux, but it's an incredible movie regardless.
[editline]21st November 2010[/editline]
They should have kept this scene in. It's great.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcDyGa2LdkQ[/media]
Has anyone seen the documentary "Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse"?
It's an incredibly in-depth look into everything that went into creating the movie.
A fascinating watch really, I recommend it to anyone that enjoyed the film.
[QUOTE=The_Marine;26208906]Has anyone seen the documentary "Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse"?
It's an incredibly in-depth look into everything that went into creating the movie.
A fascinating watch really, I recommend it to anyone that enjoyed the film.[/QUOTE]
I'd rather watch the movie with Coppola's commentary. It is much more interesting to have the creator watch the movie with you while giving you the details.
I'll grab that documentary in time though, cheers.
Oh man, you wouldn't say that if you saw the documentary.
It's practically an entire movie itself.
But then again, I've never actually listened to the commentary on anything.
I've always meant to try it but I just always figured it'd be extremely distracting.
Well as I said, sitting with the director to watch a movie is great :v:
Ridley Scott smokes while he did them too :v:
I will watch that documentary though.
[editline]22nd November 2010[/editline]
Why would it be distracting if you are intentionally watching it with the commentary? The movie takes a backseat.
I think Coppola is overrated as hell. I didn't find this or the Godfather films as good as everyone says they are.
[QUOTE=Akayz;26211578]Well as I said, sitting with the director to watch a movie is great :v:
Ridley Scott smokes while he did them too :v:
I will watch that documentary though.
[editline]22nd November 2010[/editline]
Why would it be distracting if you are intentionally watching it with the commentary? The movie takes a backseat.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I guess.
It's have to try it some time, just need to find the time to do so.
Also, calling Coppola overrated is ridiculous.
Nearly all of his films are works of art.
Apocalypse Now being the perfect example, it practically oozes arthouse.
Maybe you just can't appreciate them in that way.
[QUOTE=Dirty_Ape;26211818]I think Coppola is overrated as hell. I didn't find this or the Godfather films as good as everyone says they are.[/QUOTE]
I think The Godfather is overrated and Apocalypse Now is underrated.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;26211882]I think The Godfather is overrated and Apocalypse Now is underrated.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't really call Apocalypse Now underrated. Everyone points to it as the greatest war movie ever made and one of the greatest movies ever made already.
Now The Conversation. [I]That's[/I] an underrated movie.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;26211882]I think The Godfather is overrated and Apocalypse Now is underrated.[/QUOTE]
Very.
The Godfather is my favourite movie of all time only for Mr Brando's devotion to the role.
Its a masterpiece in an acting sense. Where as Apocalypse Now is a masterpiece in a creativity and artistic sense.
[editline]22nd November 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=pie_is_good;26211974]
Now The Conversation. [I]That's[/I] an underrated movie.[/QUOTE]
THIS is a complete masterpiece that is forgotten about.
It should be up with the significant movies and I still need to decypher more of what it is, I may have to sit with Coppola again so he can divulge into it more. Something very eerie about that character in Hackman yet he pulls of an amazing ending like that. That was good.
Redux.
Original.
The Redux scenes are good, but they royally fuck the movie's pacing.
[QUOTE=WickedIcon;26212284]Original.
The Redux scenes are good, but they royally fuck the movie's pacing.[/QUOTE]
Having only seen the Redux, I think speeding up the pace for that kind of movie is a bad idea.
Gives no time to think about it.
[QUOTE=Akayz;26212383]Having only seen the Redux, I think speeding up the pace for that kind of movie is a bad idea.
Gives no time to think about it.[/QUOTE]
They don't speed up the pacing at all. It's just shorter.
[editline]21st November 2010[/editline]
pacing and length are two different things.
[QUOTE=pie_is_good;26212476]They don't speed up the pacing at all. It's just shorter.[/QUOTE]
Needs more time to unfold rather than getting to the point.
I'll probably like the original a lot anyhow, doubt the experience will match that of Redux since I've already seen it technically :smug:
The original already has that time. It's two and a half hours. What do you think everything from the village invasion to Kurtz is cut in the original? In the original the journey across the river has great build-up as well.
[QUOTE=Dirty_Ape;26211818]I think Coppola is overrated as hell. I didn't find this or the Godfather films as good as everyone says they are.[/QUOTE]
Hey, Your the guy who hates 2001.
[IMG]http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o202/akayz_people/weird.png[/IMG]
Wow, now that has just lost the bit of the respect I had for that guy.
[QUOTE=drcortex;26220834]Hey, Your the guy who hates 2001.[/QUOTE]
I didn't enjoy it too much either. I watched the Original but don't plan on watching the redux, it's one of those films that you can only watch once for me.
I too have only seen the redux, I thought it was so awesome, I played it again.
[QUOTE=MachiniOs;26229441]I didn't enjoy it too much either. I watched the Original but don't plan on watching the redux, it's one of those films that you can only watch once for me.[/QUOTE]
The only types of movies I feel are only worth one viewing for me are things like Cloverfield and Paranormal Activity.
I wouldn't get more out of them at all.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.