Apocalypse Now

Apocalypse Now es una película existencialista muy pesada que te pesará en el estómago durante unos días y te hará preguntarte qué acabas de ver. Un viaje deprimente a través de un infierno ardiendo. Se diferencia de otras películas bélicas en que aquí el mal que encarna la guerra no se ve, sino que se siente. Y aunque nos duela y nos pese desagradablemente, no podemos darle la espalda. Una obra hipnótica y sobrecogedora. (13.02.2003)

I first saw Apocalypse Now practically at the same time as the similarly famous film Platoon. While Stone impressed me, I had a reserved attitude toward Coppola's war drama. I couldn't help but feel a certain disappointment, which partly came from exaggerated expectations - according to many movie fans, it should have been the greatest war film of all time. The execution is undoubtedly luxurious - Coppola showcases cunning filmmaking full of suggestive scenes, the camera works wonders, and the visual compositions send shivers down your spine. Everyone interested in film direction could learn from the effective use of double exposures and crossfades (the opening scene is characteristic, where the camera focuses on the detail of a helicopter propeller and then transitions to a hotel room, where we observe the spinning fan propeller). The gloomy jungle, the fascinating panoramic shots of tropical landscapes - it all creates what we call atmosphere. The quality actors portray intense characters exposed to extreme conditions. At this juncture, everything was fine and the reputation of Apocalypse Now was not a lie. However, I have a problem with the story. Coppola took it from Joseph Conrad's novel "Heart of Darkness." Its plot takes place in Belgian Congo and anyone familiar with the history of the Congolese genocide and bloody wars of the 20th century regarding the local natural riches will understand that the story of a deranged officer who escapes any control fits perfectly. The same narrative set in the Vietnam War, combined with an American officer, seems inappropriate and exaggerated. Not to mention that Coppola is so carried away by his artistic vision that it seems like he is not shooting a war drama, but rather staging a theater. This theatrical overexertion culminates in the execution of a rebellious officer, reminiscent of a pagan ritual, and it disturbs me to such an extent that the film didn't even come close to a five-star rating from my perspective. Overall impression: 75%. (06.02.2015)

Conrad's “Heart of Darkness” is one of those timeless books, and it's not bad at all. It is all the more remarkable that Coppola's adaptation does not fall short in any respect, it even surpasses it in many ways. At least in the director's cut, it is an equally riveting probe through the darkness of the soul and madness. (14.09.2006)

With his depiction of the war in Vietnam, Coppola managed to show all of the influences that slowly turned a regular man into a deranged madman. The dark aura built around Colonel Walter E. Kurtz is entrancing and Coppola’s style of gradually revealing his personality is just perfect. Also equally perfect is Marlon Brando himself who in his acting shaves the essence of man down to the marrow in his acting. Martin Sheen as Captain Willard superbly captured the transformation of a person scarred by war. His dilemma and inability to live as before. A breathtaking experience. A masterpiece. (01.12.2006)

This isn't a film about war, it's a braving foray into the hell of the human soul into the backdrop of Vietnam. Like Conrad's Marlowe in Heart of Darkness, Coppola's Willard travels down the river in purgatory to find hell at the end of it. The apocalypse is conceived as a sequence of diverse stories that illuminate horror from different angles. Horror is the key word in the film. It doesn't matter if it's horror from the point of view of reed warblers or the French... it's the same horror Kurtz embodied in his apocalyptic and pagan-brutal encampment. It's the same horror that's been eating Willard since the beginning... Emptiness. The removal of humanity. Coppola's film is shot in an almost cynical tone. Absurdity often evokes Heller's Catch-22 with its power... Despite the runtime the gradation is amazing... I didn't find a weak spot. Every shot, every speech, every sound creates a riveting picture of horror on the bloody canvas of the Vietnamese jungle – suffering, loss of humanity, loss of self. I'm reluctant to write that Apocalypse Now is a metaphor. No, it's eerily literal and explicit. It is a direct image that impacts through all the means used. A masterful film in every way. In terms of suggestiveness, I don't know of any stronger war films. The actors have an incredibly naturalistic feel – crazy Brando, crazy Sheen... as if hell had consumed them. Apocalypse Now is masterful in the sense that while it says much about the nature of the Vietnam conflict, its impact is universal. It reveals something from the darkness of the human soul... And as for the oft-mentioned unfinished plot... can anything be said that still lasts? Coppola's Apocalypse Now doesn't end with headlines... in the film world, maybe. (04.02.2005)