Continued my impromptu Vietnam War movie marathon with We Were Soldiers on Wednesday night and Apocalypse Now tonight. Hadnt seen either before (yes, I know Im behind the times). We Were Soldiers wasnt too bad: there was a lot I liked, some minor bits I couldve done without, and I can understand some of the criticism leveled on the movie. But it was an altogether positive experience, I think. However, Apocalypse Now I really didnt care for. In my opinion, its not really even a war movie, and Vietnam is treated like an incidental backdrop to loosely justify the plot rather than having a hand in shaping the plot. At first it felt like a Vietnam War version of Saving Private Ryan, but Spielberg embraced the WW2 milieu rather than treating it like backstory and irrelevant buildup: SPR being set during WW2 was important. By the end of SPR, everything that came before shapes the end, but in Apocalypse Now, the end devolves into a horror story that I feel doesnt really tie into what came before. I mean, the USO show or the nighttime fight at the bridge or shooting up the boat in the river—these are all nice Vietnam vignettes, but as far as Im concerned thats ALL they are, and the real plot is the Temple of Doom-ish fracas that occurs in the last few reels, and the first two hours are merely a stalling tactic . Then again, Im not a fan of The Godfather either, so maybe I just dont like Coppolas style. But a Vietnam movie should ABOUT Vietnam, not just merely happen to take place there incidentally.
Posted on: Sun, 10 Nov 2013 06:22:24 +0000