Francis Ford Coppola's Megalopolis

Wow, the step up is the decade, not the century. Why not of all time?

Meanwhile, I'm thinking about rewatching Apocalypse Now, but don't know which version I should watch.

__________________
Preserving the sanctity of cinema. Subtitles preferred, mainstream dismissed, and always in search of yet another film you have never heard of. I speak fluent French New Wave.

Why not, indeed.

That's perfect for me. Babylon spent some time in my top 10 ever since I saw it on opening day, but has recently been kicked out in place of Magnolia and Godfather Pt. II (rewatch). And I'm still the biggest Coppola nut on this site.

I doubt that

Whadja rate Tetro?

Tetro was awesome

His post 70’s output wasn’t very good, but I haven’t seen any Tetro or Yourh Without Youth yet.

I prefer the original version over Redux

Tucker: The Man and his Dream is one of his very best films

Disagree here. I found it pretty average.

I watched it twice in the same day so I could write an article on it here.

From what I've read, everyone says The Final Cut is the best. BUT! I've had absolute hell trying to find it free online.

If you don't understand the brilliance of Tucker you probably don't understand Coppola, either

Enough to understand that his best work was in the 70’s, and personally (key word here) felt his films declined rather sharply after Apocalypse Now.
Maybe Megalopolis is his best in years (again, having seen his post 90’s films).
Maybe not.

I felt Bridges didn’t exactly embody Tucker as a man of vision but rather a man of fancy, which was a result of the script of course.

Then it's clear you totally misunderstood the film. It's abundantly clear that Coppola identifies with Tucker - another misunderstood visionary who had some really great ideas, but was trapped in a society that more often rewards predictable mediocrity.

And the film makes an absolutely valid point - sometimes visionaries are too far ahead of their own time, and face constant obstacles because society sometimes doesn't know what to do with really visionary ideas.

It is a movie that completely reflects how Coppola sees himself in an industry that is afraid to try something really radical, his recent comments at Cannes about the timidity of the movie industry demonstrate he hasn't changed how he feels.

I actually understood his point of the film. I just didn’t think it worked well. It comes off as a tad too whimsical for my tastes. A little too light hearted at times.
Stop taking this so personal.

Suuuuuuuure!

Again, I’m not sure why you’re taking this personally and at least not attempting to discuss the film merits (the cinematography, the acting, both of which I don’t recall being all that great.) At least convince me of the films worth and not how personal the film was to Coppola, rather the. falling back on your usual habits.

The cinematography is actually one of the elements of the film that was praised in the contemporaneous reviews... Vittorio Storaro is a genius.

I’m aware it’s highly praised, but this is one of those films where I look at it and think it’s merely ok rather than anything great.
It’s definitely a film I should rewatch, and perhaps I’ll get something more out of its cinematography, but it’s main issue was it’s script and was too whimsical