Apocalypse Now: Original vs. Redux (1 Viewer)

[Dave H]

My main reason for owning the Redux version is for the better video quality vs the original

I hear what you are saying. Redux has a significantly better transfer, but I think I am going to re-purchase the original for reasons I stated in my last post.
Too bad the original doesn't look like Redux. :frowning:

 

[Dave H]

If you like Apocalypse Now I recommend that you check out the 5 hour workprint of the film, it's very interesting to watch although the quality is close to unwatchable.

Where I check this out?

 

[Rob Gillespie]

A film that I had a lot of respect for - though I still fin to be a hard 'slog' and somewhat overlong - has been made unnecessarily longer and tedious.
Sorry, but Redux bored me s**tless.

 

[Terry St]

I must agree that not enough emphasis is placed upon preserving the origional theatrical versions of movies like AN when new versions are released. Whether the newer version is better or worse makes no difference. There will always be those who prefer the older version or the newer version. They should have the option of chosing based on that preference rather than availability or transfer quality. Besides this, the origional releases are of great historical importance. Look at our current situation with Metropolis. We are still missing parts of it because nobody thought to preserve the origional in addition to edited versions.

On the other hand, the theatrical re-release of movies like AN in movie theatres is most welcome. While a minority may have truly superior home theatres, for most it is a wonderful opportunity to see such films in a real theatre. I would jump at the chance to see the 70mm version of Lawrence of Arabia personally, but sadly it has not made its way to where I live yet, if indeed it ever will. I think studio's would be surprised at how much extra buisness they could generate by occasionally showing old classics instead of new mediocracies. Showing a different classic every week for just a couple showings is probably prohibitively expensive at the moment. Perhaps when digital distribution reduces theatre costs we will see this happen.

 

[Seth Paxton]

I hope people take note of my first post, specifically my opinion on re-doing a film (of your own).
I am not in the least against it...AS LONG AS it is seen as a new film and is not an attempt to replace the original (thus why Lucas stands pretty much alone in my wrath at this point).
It is not unusual, nor wrong for an artist to want to do some more with their work. Many artists can barely put down the brush as it is (just look at how long and overbudget FCC went in the first place). So I understand the compulsion to do some more work with a piece.
But it has to be kept in mind that the original was a collaboration and represents a frozen (somewhat) moment in time and space. Compromises, changes, etc that got made in some ways are just as much a part of the art.
So really Blade Runner and Brazil are examples of rework that improved the original. We like to think of these as just reparations to damaged work in which the artist was restricted. But really, outside of Kane perhaps, when HASN'T an artist been restricted? And even then it might be said that only Wells, and perhaps Toland were the unrestricted artists, everyone else still fell under Wells' control.
I say to the audiences, be understanding of some of this motivation. And I say to the artists, be understanding of what you are doing to the art in the eyes of it's original fans.
If you keep the 2 films seperate and each available, then both sides can easily be appeased. We don't need to stop Redux because we can just go buy the original version.
One side benefit was seeing much of the original stuff in a beautiful theatrical print (which I had never done). My jaw dropped at the beauty of the opening scenes (the print was pristine, colors brilliant).

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

The way I see it, the original 153 minute version was a HORROR film - bizarre, chaotic and extraordinary. "Redux" is makes the film out to be more your standardm, "hip action film". Willard's journey to Hell was a great Cinema odyssey, but in the 200 minute version, the odyssey is drawn-out and watered-down. I love the 153 minute version and will never watch the 200 minute version again.

Incidentally, I hear that Coppola is well on his way to making Megalopolis - a film set in the 60s, modern day and 30 years from now. I hope he makes it great.


Gordy

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

2003 will apparently bring a 2/3 disc version of Apocalypse Now with both version in new transfers. I havne't heard anything 100% official, but I would imagine that lots of extras are included. And I hope that Storaro oversees 2.40:1 transfers this time - the 2.00:1 framing is quite strange in certain scenes. Who knows.


Gordy

 

[Patrick Larkin]

I love Redux.

I don't know about you, but when I watch a film like this (there aren't many) with the volume way up and in the dark, I get physically effected. I feel all of the tension and get sucked right into the surreal chaos that ensues. That being said, I think the Bunny scene just adds to the "what the fuck is going on here" tone of the film. Complete chaos. The scene with the guys trying to swin out to the boat to get out was VERY effective but I think we needed a little more of the chaos factor.

I liked the plantation scene as well. First of all, if nothing else, it shows what happened to the soldier that gets killed (is that the arrow/spear sequence?). The funeral is good and the exposition on the role of the French in Vietnam is informative and gives the viewer a bit of a break before the rest of the movie.

All in all, I though the original was brilliant. I always had the feeling that something was missing and Redux sort of quells that nagging feeling.

I can't say I like one better than the other, however.

 

[Patrick Larkin]

2003 will apparently bring a 2/3 disc version of Apocalypse Now with both version in new transfers. I havne't heard anything 100% official, but I would imagine that lots of extras are included. And I hope that Storaro oversees 2.40:1 transfers this time - the 2.00:1 framing is quite strange in certain scenes. Who knows.

This is the first I've heard of this. I hope its true. "Hearts of Darkness" is included, hopefully.

 

[Bill J]

2003 will apparently bring a 2/3 disc version of Apocalypse Now with both version in new transfers. I havne't heard anything 100% official, but I would imagine that lots of extras are included. And I hope that Storaro oversees 2.40:1 transfers this time - the 2.00:1 framing is quite strange in certain scenes. Who knows.

Where did you hear this?

 

[TheoGB]

I think something was posted at the Zoetrope website by Coppolla??

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

I read about the 2/3 disc set earlier this year in a DVD magazine (either DVD Review orUltimate DVD) in which they interviewed the guy at Zoetrope who produced the Godfather Trilogy and The Conversation for Paramount and he said that there are plans for a SE sometime in 2003. That's all I have. Maybe the Zeotrope website has news...


Gordy

 

[Bill J]

I don't see anything on the Zoetrope website that implies a special edition. I guess we'll just have to wait and see...

 

[Jon_Are]

Post Dramatic Stress Disorder.

And this would be defined as the stress one encounters - while viewing the plantation scene - as a result of a complete lack of drama in relation to previous, original, genuinely dramatic scenes?

Jon

 

[Dave H]

Martin Blythe posted something at DVDTALK.com to the effect that a SE DVD was probably in the future, although he specified no date. I'm sure if you do a search there, you can find the thread.

 

[Dharmesh C]

I'm a biggish fan of Apoc Now, but redux kills a lot of ambiguity, seeing Sheen steal the surfboard is funny, but changes the character for me. The sex with the Bunnies is again, nice, but somehoe, it doesn't work in the context of the film.

The original is much more mysterious. I own the Redux for completeness sake, but not sure I want to watch it again.

 

[oscar_merkx]

Gordon
The magazine in question is Ultimate DVD and that is great news indeed

 

[Bill J]

Thanks, Dave.

 

[JimCo]

Put me in the camp that prefers the original to the Redux. The additional scenes added nothing to the movie, IMO they made it drag on longer and ruined some of the characters. But my main reason for posting is to comment on the "errors" cited in the music of the movie:

First, the AFVN (Armed Forces Vietnamess Network) was not allowed to play any songs by The Rolling Stones, so hearing Satisfaction only meant to me that he messed up.

Also, this did take place in Oct. of 67 (I joined up the following month) and they played CCR songs too, but the group didn't exist until '68. Shame on him!

First, the movie did not take place in '67. The only indication of the date I recall is that it took place some time after "Summer-Autumn 1968", as Willard is reviewing the dossier he reads an entry of activity at Kurtz's camp, events which took place "Summer-Autumn 1968", so the movie takes place after this, so CCR exists and might have been heard.

As far as the "ban" on The Rolling Stones. Historical records and interviews do not support calling the playing of "Satisfaction" as being an error. Indeed, AFRS has a policy to not play inappropriate material, but that policy is in very generic terms and is subject to interpretation by the CO of each AFRS station. Individual songs were all that were ever "officially" banned, not entire artist catalogs. And even when a song was banned, some DJ's would ignore the ban and play the song anyway, sympathetic officers would generally come to their defense, though a few received administrative punishment.

In Vietnam AFVN consisted of 7 stations. Each station's CO used their own judgement in what to ban and what to allow, and even "Fortunate Son" found itself getting occassional, infrequent play by some of the more rebellious DJ's or those working under a more lenient officer.

Interviews with DJ's agree that many songs were "banned", but those same interviews and daily reports also confirm, that almost every song that was banned, was played at one time or another by a DJ on one or more of the AFVN channels. So I would not call this an error, in fact, Mr. Clean's excitement at hearing The Stones, might be seen as an indication that FFC knew that "Satisfaction" would be unusual and a very rare treat...

 

[Steve K.H.]

Jimco...

Thank you (and Robin Williams thanks you) for clearing that up.