I'm trying to determine is the US was doing the same thing the French had been doing before they left, or genuinely trying to erect a barrier from an Alliance they had contributed in creating... But, yes...
This is a fun format and an outstanding discussion. You should have kept this discussion going about why this film is considered important. Please keep doing these movie reactions. React to landmark films that steered the history of cinema and their cultural impact. Try more Coppola movies. Then react to movies that influenced Coppola, such as Kurosawa and Bergman.
I will quote you directly what I have sent to my test subjects in response to your comment : (clears throat) "Woooow... Now THAT'S the kind of public I was looking for... Yesss...!" Thank you, truly. You have pleased us with your praise, and your patronage...
And the guy in black was right Kurtz knew he was dead and he just wanted for Willard to tell his son the truth that's why Willard took the journal Kurtz had and the overall meaning of the end is that Willard was worthy of the heart of darkness because he was able to pass all the test that the river gave him and remained sane while Lance went insane and the others died because they didn't pass the test that heart of darkness gave them so the consequences of failure is either insanity or death you guys should really read that book of the heart of darkness alot phycologist and famous one love it
The military has 2 jobs. Kill People and Break Stuff. So in light of watching the 1st reaction, the querion is should I watch the 2nd. This is the same dilemma for older gens...with the yputh, should you help them with their naivety or help direct them in a direction that will help them understanding when somthing is serious. These movies are the touchstones to understanding older folks...to repeatedly skip a rock across their waters of understanding while claiming in depth knowledge knocks on the door of disrespect.
For a more in-depth reply, I refer you to a long message I just left another commentator (MarioM), who has similar gripes about our review of Part 1. Check it out, it might answer some of your qualms... Essentially, yes, I agree. That was the point of our review (at least in this case), to try and give new viewers, borne from a new generation who had not been raised during the Viet-Nâm era, a feel for what soldiers went trough as they went in hot, not knowing anything about nothing, before being forced up-river into a disturbing ascent into nightmare... Again, you can see the results of this long, drawn-out experience on the faces of my test subjects, and in their attitudes, by the end of the Kurtz' speech, in the second part. So yes, I believe it would be worth your time to watch part 2, if simply to see the difference in reactions between the chipper, optimistic recruits at the beginning of part 1 and the deflated, introspective, sobre veterans they had become by the end comments we included in part 2. That was sort of the point of they review... You know, Christmas movies... (!) We don't claim to know anything about anything in this series, but we're not afraid to learn on the fly, and in front of your eyes as we record and edit our impressions... Which can de disconcerting to some viewers, I agree, but it was sort of the point, to show the generational difference in approaching this subject matter. And I promise we will always try to at least be genuine and sincere in our reactions, no matter the movie. Thank you for your time, and your comment...
"The horror" that Kurtz referred to with his dying breath is the result of the moral nihilism he deemed necessary to defeat the enemy, as viewed through normal human moral psychology. That's what Kurtz was explaining with his story about the children whose vaccinated arms were hacked off by the enemy. I think that Willard understood Kurtz's perspective, & that's part of why Kurtz wanted Willard to be the one to explain his actions to his children, but in the end, Willard saw the consequences of opting moral nihilism exhibited in Kurtz 's compound, & decided that he had to kill Kurtz & walk away. There is certainly truth in the idea that moral nihilism is valuable in war, yet it traumatizes us & wrecks our humanity, effects which are at the root of the evil of war. That's why we nee to make war a relic of the past. I think that's the deeper "moral of the story" when it comes to "Apocalypse Now". Receiving this message comes at an emotional price for the audience, & as a result, "Apocalypse Now" is by no means "feel-good" movie intended to "entertain". I would hope that no war movie would be a "feel-good" movie intended to "entertain".
The US was purposely dragged into the Vietnam war when the CIA had men dressed up as Viet-Cong soldiers and used stolen Vietnam patrol boats and fired upon a US war ship in the Gulf of Tonkin. This was admitted by General MacNamara and a few other top US commanders decades later who admitted that a false flag operation was created so that the Military Industrial Complex would make billions on war production arms for that war. War is hell, but those who create it seldom die from the hell they created. I want to let you all know that I watched this movie when it first came out in theaters back in 1979 about half a dozen times and the ending I saw was never shown or available in any format later on in video or DVD versions. Back then you could stay in the theaters and watch it play over again for the next showing just as long as you didn't leave the entire theater building. The ending I saw had the entire sector these people in Kurtz's camp blown up into dust because either Captain Willard called in the air strike of they triangulated his position when they did a radio check, but make no mistake, that entire army was wiped out from the total bombing that took place as you watched all the credits roll up. In fact the bombs were sequenced with this eerie music from a guitar that exploded in sync with the bombs as they exploded tearing the entire area apart, it was the strangest yet horrifying scene I'd ever watched and yet they never allowed that ending to be seen in any recorded format to this day and I don't know why. This Redux version does play that eerie music but it's very quiet and muted compared to what I heard and the bombings of course never takes place like it did in the theater, but that's how it played in the theater here in Canada back in 1979.
Fascinating stuff... ! I had seen a couple of versions before myself, of course, but only managed to catch it once it had gotten out on video, so I never got to see that rather somber ending you speak of... Which fits with Kurtz original plan, as well as the original intent of Kurtz wanting to wipe them all out... (and thus, part of the warning of the movie to humanity's soul...) I'm actually surprised they didn't stick with that ending, and opted instead for a more 'hopeful' one with Willard cancelling the airstrike in the Redux edition... I always love hearing about this sort of alternate versions, all the odd bits and ends of famous movies, especially as it's the ending I would have gotten had I been able to see this in theaters back in the day... OG stuff right there... Thank you for sharing, I wouldn't have known this intriguing fact without your personal recollection... Really fascinating read. Thank you !
Ouhhh, Great shout out. I would sincerely love to. But I think we should start the Chronomancers on the WW II subject matter with something a little more global, at least at first, much like we did with Apocalypse Now, before we dive into the specifics... But great taste in movie, though...
![[Full] 4 ต่อ 4 Celebrity EP.920 | 3 พ.ย. 67 | one31](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KwiW2M_kAg4/mqdefault.jpg)
"I'm not sure why the French were there."
Imperialism.
I'm trying to determine is the US was doing the same thing the French had been doing before they left, or genuinely trying to erect a barrier from an Alliance they had contributed in creating... But, yes...
The coloured smoke was a psychedelic element that Coppola used in the movie. In fact, the original title was “Psychedelic Soldiers”.
Hunh... I really, really didn't know that...! A new tidbit of trivia to savor ! Thank you !
Yes!
My favorite line was when he's looking for the commanding officer and a soldier says, "Ain't you?"
Great show, best to you!
Shucks, Many thanks, awesome to hear from you...
This is a fun format and an outstanding discussion. You should have kept this discussion going about why this film is considered important. Please keep doing these movie reactions. React to landmark films that steered the history of cinema and their cultural impact. Try more Coppola movies. Then react to movies that influenced Coppola, such as Kurosawa and Bergman.
I will quote you directly what I have sent to my test subjects in response to your comment : (clears throat) "Woooow... Now THAT'S the kind of public I was looking for... Yesss...!" Thank you, truly. You have pleased us with your praise, and your patronage...
And the guy in black was right Kurtz knew he was dead and he just wanted for Willard to tell his son the truth that's why Willard took the journal Kurtz had and the overall meaning of the end is that Willard was worthy of the heart of darkness because he was able to pass all the test that the river gave him and remained sane while Lance went insane and the others died because they didn't pass the test that heart of darkness gave them so the consequences of failure is either insanity or death you guys should really read that book of the heart of darkness alot phycologist and famous one love it
Vietnam was a French colony
Ouhh good to know!
The military has 2 jobs. Kill People and Break Stuff.
So in light of watching the 1st reaction, the querion is should I watch the 2nd.
This is the same dilemma for older gens...with the yputh, should you help them with their naivety or help direct them in a direction that will help them understanding when somthing is serious.
These movies are the touchstones to understanding older folks...to repeatedly skip a rock across their waters of understanding while claiming in depth knowledge knocks on the door of disrespect.
For a more in-depth reply, I refer you to a long message I just left another commentator (MarioM), who has similar gripes about our review of Part 1. Check it out, it might answer some of your qualms...
Essentially, yes, I agree. That was the point of our review (at least in this case), to try and give new viewers, borne from a new generation who had not been raised during the Viet-Nâm era, a feel for what soldiers went trough as they went in hot, not knowing anything about nothing, before being forced up-river into a disturbing ascent into nightmare...
Again, you can see the results of this long, drawn-out experience on the faces of my test subjects, and in their attitudes, by the end of the Kurtz' speech, in the second part.
So yes, I believe it would be worth your time to watch part 2, if simply to see the difference in reactions between the chipper, optimistic recruits at the beginning of part 1 and the deflated, introspective, sobre veterans they had become by the end comments we included in part 2. That was sort of the point of they review... You know, Christmas movies... (!)
We don't claim to know anything about anything in this series, but we're not afraid to learn on the fly, and in front of your eyes as we record and edit our impressions... Which can de disconcerting to some viewers, I agree, but it was sort of the point, to show the generational difference in approaching this subject matter. And I promise we will always try to at least be genuine and sincere in our reactions, no matter the movie.
Thank you for your time, and your comment...
@@TheChronomancers this is a well thought out response. Thank you.
"The horror" that Kurtz referred to with his dying breath is the result of the moral nihilism he deemed necessary to defeat the enemy, as viewed through normal human moral psychology. That's what Kurtz was explaining with his story about the children whose vaccinated arms were hacked off by the enemy. I think that Willard understood Kurtz's perspective, & that's part of why Kurtz wanted Willard to be the one to explain his actions to his children, but in the end, Willard saw the consequences of opting moral nihilism exhibited in Kurtz 's compound, & decided that he had to kill Kurtz & walk away.
There is certainly truth in the idea that moral nihilism is valuable in war, yet it traumatizes us & wrecks our humanity, effects which are at the root of the evil of war. That's why we nee to make war a relic of the past. I think that's the deeper "moral of the story" when it comes to "Apocalypse Now".
Receiving this message comes at an emotional price for the audience, & as a result, "Apocalypse Now" is by no means "feel-good" movie intended to "entertain". I would hope that no war movie would be a "feel-good" movie intended to "entertain".
Amen to that. Whole-heartedly agree with the sentiment...
All four are pretty shallow and naïve, although the top two picked up a bit at the end. The woman in red was completely clueless.
Welcome back! Thanks for watching part 2! ❤
The US was purposely dragged into the Vietnam war when the CIA had men dressed up as Viet-Cong soldiers and used stolen Vietnam patrol boats and fired upon a US war ship in the Gulf of Tonkin. This was admitted by General MacNamara and a few other top US commanders decades later who admitted that a false flag operation was created so that the Military Industrial Complex would make billions on war production arms for that war. War is hell, but those who create it seldom die from the hell they created.
I want to let you all know that I watched this movie when it first came out in theaters back in 1979 about half a dozen times and the ending I saw was never shown or available in any format later on in video or DVD versions. Back then you could stay in the theaters and watch it play over again for the next showing just as long as you didn't leave the entire theater building. The ending I saw had the entire sector these people in Kurtz's camp blown up into dust because either Captain Willard called in the air strike of they triangulated his position when they did a radio check, but make no mistake, that entire army was wiped out from the total bombing that took place as you watched all the credits roll up. In fact the bombs were sequenced with this eerie music from a guitar that exploded in sync with the bombs as they exploded tearing the entire area apart, it was the strangest yet horrifying scene I'd ever watched and yet they never allowed that ending to be seen in any recorded format to this day and I don't know why. This Redux version does play that eerie music but it's very quiet and muted compared to what I heard and the bombings of course never takes place like it did in the theater, but that's how it played in the theater here in Canada back in 1979.
Fascinating stuff... ! I had seen a couple of versions before myself, of course, but only managed to catch it once it had gotten out on video, so I never got to see that rather somber ending you speak of... Which fits with Kurtz original plan, as well as the original intent of Kurtz wanting to wipe them all out... (and thus, part of the warning of the movie to humanity's soul...) I'm actually surprised they didn't stick with that ending, and opted instead for a more 'hopeful' one with Willard cancelling the airstrike in the Redux edition... I always love hearing about this sort of alternate versions, all the odd bits and ends of famous movies, especially as it's the ending I would have gotten had I been able to see this in theaters back in the day... OG stuff right there... Thank you for sharing, I wouldn't have known this intriguing fact without your personal recollection... Really fascinating read. Thank you !
Make reaction Downfall (2004)
Ouhhh, Great shout out. I would sincerely love to. But I think we should start the Chronomancers on the WW II subject matter with something a little more global, at least at first, much like we did with Apocalypse Now, before we dive into the specifics... But great taste in movie, though...