Originally Posted by Bulldog I loved this when I first saw it, but after getting over the ending I started seeing all these little mediocrities in it too. Not a film that exactly benefits repeated viewing. Still a good film, but far from a favourite of mine. A much better crime-centred film that Gabriel Byrne's starred in is Miller's Crossing - being a Coens film it's much more character-driven, which always makes a good film for me. Brilliantly written and shot too, and well worth checking out if you haven't already.

Originally Posted by WolfAtTheDoor I'll have to check it out, I've never really checked anything out by the Coen brothers though I've always thought that if I did, I'd enjoy what they do.

Originally Posted by storymilo I love what I've seen by them, that is, No Country For Old Men, Fargo, Raising Arizona, The Big Lebowski (my favorite), Ladykillers (my least favorite), and Burn After Reading They are one of my favorite directors/directing teams.

"This is not a film about Vietnam, this is Vietnam". So reads the infamous quote by director Francis Ford Coppola, a statement so strong that it put me off ever sitting down with the 3 hour war epic. After watching it, I see what he means.

Apocalypse Now, in its 3-hour redux form, is a complete and utter mindf*ck. There is no easier nor better way to describe it. It shines an honest light onto the Vietnam war in all its brutal, unneccesary glory. It is bleak to the point of nearly unwatchable. It is a masterpiece.

Whereas other war movies such as Saving Private Ryan briefly touch upon the horrors of war and the effect it has on its participants, Apocalypse Now focusses on nothing but those issues. We watch each and every perfectly well-rounded character lose a grip of themselves, becoming nothing more than neanderthalic lunatics resorting to their primal urges. It is incredibly satisfying to watch a war movie that is more interested in the psychological than the physical.

The only gung-ho, all-American hero we are treated to is Colonel Bill Kilgore, who in any other action-er would have slotted perfectly into the role of badass patriot, but here he is shown for exactly what he is - unsympathetic, bloodthirsty and blinded by power. Coppola maintains this unbiased approach throughout. The heroes and villains are never outlined, and even though we view the war through the eyes of protagonist Captain Willard, it becomes apparent that he is just as morally unstable as the rest of them.

However, even masterpieces are not without their faults. The screentime shared between Sheen's Willard and Brando's fascinating Colonel E. Kurtz is far too brief, and it leaves the film feeling somewhat unfinished as Kurtz' demise is brought about too quickly considering the amount of build-up and characterisation we were put through prior to the characters unveiling. My only other complaint would be that the Redux version (I have not viewed the original as it is incredibly difficult to get a hold of) is perhaps too bleak for its lengthy runtime. Even though Apocalypse Now isn't intended as light-entertainment, the point remains that it made for an incredibly tough viewing experience.

Nonetheless it is an incredible piece of work and, if in a particularly level-headed state of mind, it is absolutely essential that you sit through it.

Rating:



8 'wtf happened to Lawrence Fishburne's face's

Spirited Away is a film that I have placed high on my 'things to do' list countless times, yet somehow never got around to actually viewing it. Since seeing the above image and being intrigued/disturbed by the faceless, erm, 'No Face', I came to the conclusion that it was a film that I would no doubt enjoy. Fantastical story combined with beautiful artwork; how could it possibly go wrong?

The problem with my preconceptions of Spirited Away is that I have thus far read no negative reviews. It was a crossover sleeper hit, therefore attracting no scathing cynicism or hype backlash, meaning that my expectations for it were horrendously high. Upon viewing it, I am a little disappointed and not nearly as captivated as I assumed I would be.

It begins with a wonderful introduction to the surreal Spirit World, full of charming and imaginative characters that are given just enough screen time to capture our imaginations yet retain their mysteriousness. The artwork is gorgeously detailed, and is one of the best-looking films I have ever seen. The first 40 or so minutes continue in this delightful and charming manner. However, after we are introduced to all the bright characters Spirited Away has to offer, it is revealed that there is very little substance to this stylish adventure.

The plot, for the most part, is completely irrelevant. It only serves as a reasoning behind our hero Sen's meeting of the various inhabitants of the Spirit World. Likewise, Sen is completely irrelevant. She offers nothing new or original to the child-protagonist format, always approaching life with complete selflessness as is the case for most of these young do-gooders. It can be argued that Sen's goal of rescuing her parents and the confusing sub-plot between her and boy-dragon Haku is not what we as viewers are supposed to focus on; that Spirited Away is not about the destination, it is about the journey to reach that destination. This would be completely acceptable if the film continuously paced itself as it did in its first half. But that is not the case, and as Sen's adventure finds itself unable to lead us to any new locations or meet any new characters, the breathtaking creative streak displayed previously simmers down until it is merely a pretty shell of its former self.

In terms of Visuals, Spirited Away could not be improved. It is a glorious sight to behold, and if you can forgive it for its shortcomings as an adventure then your eyes are certainly in for a treat. However, as a story, there are too many plotholes and under-developed characters for Spirited Away to be considered a great movie. It is a flawed, dense, beautiful creation that is perhaps a little too well-loved for its own good.

Rating:



7 cartoon frogs.