My group is studying the director Francis Ford Coppola. We watched the movie Apocalypse Now. I would have to say that I liked this movie a lot despite the lengh and the ending which seemed to carry on literly for hours. But over all the movie was well done and worth the 200 plus days of shooting. But like we talked about in The Art of Film 1 last semester, I can see how it got most of it's credit and fame long after it came out.
Now I haven't seen many '70s films but according to Allen Barra this decade could have been the most exciting one in American film. Now I haven't seen any other of Coppola' films (so maybe I should just shut up) but I guess they were pretty good. According to Barra, Apocalypse Now was supposed to "put a cap on the most exciting decade in American film, that it would sum up everything that had come before and influence everything that came after." But Barra thinks otherwise. He thinks it was a disappointment.
Like I've said, I haven't seen any other of Coppola' films but I can't imagin that it is that bad to him. In The Art of Film 1 we talked about how the film didn't get much attention when it came out but in todays time, it seems pretty famous. So although "top critic" (according to rottontomatoes) thinks it is not a film worth seeing, I do...so if you haven't seen it pick 2 hours and 35 minutes out of your evening and plop down and watch it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I agree that its worth seeing, basically because of the name recognition, but I'm wondering if you actually enjoyed the movie slash if it lived up to your expectations because I have not been impressed with Coppola so far.
yes erik, I actually did enjoy it. Well the 1st half.
I disagree that this movie isn't impactful enough to watch. I see why people say it's worth watching much like you are but your ideas (and everyone else's) aren't strong enough for me to recommend it to aanyone else. I think Coppola did a pretty inadequete job.
Post a Comment