jack says: The addition of that scene alone made it a better
movie, but I think, the original ending--at the end where it
belonged--was better.
************************************************
i'd like to see the director's cut version now. i just talked
to someone and they said the same as posted here... that the
french plantation scene really explained the movie a lot
more.
spoiler follows:
and yes, i think the ending should be left as the ending. one
of the things i disliked about conrad's book was the way it
ended. kurtz simply gets sick and gets his butt dragged onto
the boat without a struggle, croaks out his "horror" lines,
and then dies. instead of a few more dreary ruminations from
poor willard (is his name willard in the book, too?) and then
ending, he has to drag himself back home and go talk to
kurtz's wife. it was ineffective and grossly
anticlimatic.
kilgore's attack on charlie point, the USO scene, and the
outpost from hell were all excellent. i believe some literary
critics likened the book to dante's inferno. although i
stated that i thought the movie true to the spirit of the
book, coppola expanded the philosopher/murderer theme to com-
ment on some of the absurdities of war. it was as effective
as catch-22 at suggesting that policies for conducting war
are oftentimes ineffective and absurd. "thats some catch,
catch-22." "yeah, its the best they got."
miker
-- # To unsubscribe from the regular list, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to # majordomo@icomm.ca. This will not work for the digest version. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 30 Apr 2002 EDT