What if Apocalypse Now never screwed Coppola's brain up...

Tools    





Ever see the documentary Hearts of Darkness? Effing good doc. I've been wondering for a while why he seemed to stop consecutively making amazing movies after Apocalypse Now, and it looks like there was so much trouble putting it together that it wore on his psyche. Obviously, this would affect his movies. What if he never got so screwed up by Apocalypse Now? How different would his movies be???


Because Coppola's my favorite director, this is something I've been wondering for a while.



Welcome to the human race...
I daresay a big part of it was down to it being such a huge financial risk that he had to reduce the scale of his subsequent passion projects and also take on for-hire jobs to pay off his debts. Even if he hadn't been quote-unquote screwed up, I still think that as filmmaking moved away from the New Hollywood era in which he flourished into the high-concept '80s and beyond he'd have arguably maintained the same career trajectory where anything big he did had to have built-in appeal (Godfather Part III, Dracula) and everything else had to be a small, practically independent project (Rumble Fish, The Outsiders).
__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0



Same story as G Lucas, isn't it? He more or less retired from directing.
Maybe he WENT OFF (re his more recent films) because he's lost his bearings, got taken in by (christ) Koyaanisqatsi



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Did it really screw him up, or is that just a media made up story?



Apocalypse Now is by far the best thing he ever did and the best thing Hollywood did in the last 50 years. And it was so grear BECAUSE of the nuttiness. One masterpiece is worth a thousand good movies so it was for the best.



They went insane making it, Coppola said that.
The documentary is super, you should watch it

The doc gave me some incredible insight on what Coppola was put through while making it, though making a movie about hell on Earth is pretty much putting yourself through the same thing.



Sorry if I'm rude but I'm right
Are any post-Apocalypse Now Coppola films worthwhile? I've only seen Godfather 3 and Dracula and both were meh.
__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.



Welcome to the human race...
Are any post-Apocalypse Now Coppola films worthwhile? I've only seen Godfather 3 and Dracula and both were meh.
I'd say One From the Heart and Rumble Fish are definitely worth a watch at least. Beyond that, it's a mixed bag.



I don't think the diminishment of Coppola's output has as much to do with him going off the rails during the filming of Apocalypse Now, as it does to do with an increasingly risk adverse studio system that began at the beginning of the 80s. A man of such outsized ambitions as Coppola was always going to struggle when under the thumb of the beancounters.


Also I would put Rumblefish right amidst his best work. I might even put it above Apocalypse Now. So, it's not like his talent went out to pasture after AN



Are any post-Apocalypse Now Coppola films worthwhile? I've only seen Godfather 3 and Dracula and both were meh.

I fell in love with Tetro months back. It's one of the movies he made for himself, so there are a lot of little references to his own past. On top of that, its message is entirely agreeable for any aspiring artist. It's the most "Coppola" thing I've ever seen.



matt72582's Avatar
Please Quote/Tag Or I'll Miss Your Responses
Did it really screw him up, or is that just a media made up story?

Maybe to excuse his future and horrible movies, with the exception of "The Outsiders" which had the most pre-stars in a movie.


I actually thought I'd give him another shot, and saw a recent movie of his called "Tetro". I was insulted. Imagine an already flawed "Fedora" with more flaws, less... everything.



They went insane making it, Coppola said that.
The documentary is super, you should watch it

Well, if someone said it in a documentary, then it must not be hype.



Sorry if I'm rude but I'm right
I'd say One From the Heart and Rumble Fish are definitely worth a watch at least. Beyond that, it's a mixed bag.
Watched both today and I watched The Outsiders, too.

I watched these three 80s Coppola films in a row. I meant to watch four, but I couldn't bring myself to watch the last one. Coppola combines populist cinema with artistic pretensions much better than Spielberg. His eye for visuals is better, too, especially in how he frames a shot, but also in his use of color. It's almost shocking how nobody talks about post-Apocalypse Now Coppola. I knew he kept making films but I had no idea he made so many. I decided to watch at least a few of them, and One from the Heart is the next one after Apocalypse Now, so I thought why not?

One From the Heart (1982)



SICK visuals. All those cross-fades, seamless transitions, and double exposures are impressive, as are the colors. The opening shot could have continued and followed the girl into the shop, though. A wasted opportunity for a master shot if you ask me! The transitions showing the two lovers talking to their best friends are seamless and really neat! Good soundtrack from Tom Waits, too. The story is easily my least favorite aspect of the movie, but who cares about the story when you have this kind of freakin' visuals! I treat it like a Jacques Demy film and while it doesn't have the same emotional beats as Demy's best, it doubles the visual overload. I loved that moment when all four met in the middle of the street, and how one of the men walked under the other's spread legs. I found Hank coming through the roof really hilarious, too. This movie really feels like Coppola finally getting the upper hand and doing exactly what he wanted to do therefore making the whole studio go bankrupt. He ditches the story and just attacks with the visuals, and I love that. This is easily TOP 3 Coppola for me, maybe even his best but I can't tell for sure without rewatching The Conversation and Apocalypse Now.

The Outsiders (1983)



This was very good. Coppola is again slick with visuals and he clearly remakes the feel and look of a juvenile gang movie of the late 50s or early 60s like Rebel Without a Cause or West Side Story. (The protagonist goes to see a double bill of The Hustler and Gidget Goes to Rome at the cinema; the first is a masterpiece and I haven't seen the second.) The emotional beats were surprisingly good here, and the ending almost gave me Angels with Dirty Faces feels, though the two movies are obviously disparate. All in all, not Coppola's best but a movie very much worth seeing.

Rumble Fish (1983)



I liked this one the least of the three. I already had amazing visuals in One From the Heart and the gang story in The Outsiders so this film brought nothing new for me today. The black'n'white cinematography felt a bit overcooked at times, too, and the splashes of color felt gimmicky, not unlike Spielberg's use of red in Schindler's List. I think only Kurosawa pulled it off the right way in High and Low. Still, this was a good movie.



I guess we never would have received the cinematic gift of Jack.



In regards to his Dracula, which I don't think is a very good movie overall, it's still more than worth the watch. It's like a hoary and tacky love letter to the early days of cinema with its assortment of in camera trickery. You know it's a good director when even his failures have value.



I really need to see One From the Heart....and should probably rewatch the Outsiders at some point as I remember hating it as a kid.


But I was a kid, and kids are stupid.