Did he ever visit Kurtz's family and tell them the whole truth?

>>83879916
Yes

>>83879916
I still dont understand the moral of the film or the book it's based on.

>>83879972
i guess you didn't think on it too hard then

>>83879916
in the book he tells lies to the family to preserve the mythic aura around kurtz

>>83879995
We are just as wild as they are?
You know what, i'm just gonna see what google thinks.

>>83879972
It's not a fable. Why do you expect a simple and clear moral/message?

>>83879972
All men are savage at heart, even the "civilized" ones.

Jesus Christ, are you really that fucking stupid. I mean, the book is literally called "Heart of Darkness"

Spec Ops the line was the /v/ version of this movie.

>>83880064
I found the end just weird and unsatisfying. I am very bad at picking up themes and messages in media. I just figured it had a message.
>>83880107
>All men are savage at heart, even the "civilized" ones.
Really? I thought that was too simple and obvious. You dont need to read a book or watch a 3h movie to figure that out.

>>83880142
Yeah but way less subtle and far more melodramatic

>>83880158

It's okay for a film/book/etc to have a very simple theme, or message, as long as it tells the related story in an interesting way. And most people would agree that Apocalypse Now is an interesting movie.

>>83879916
in Apocalypse Now, i doubt it. Willard was an alcoholic and lost his own family, i doubt he would ever even return to the states. he even tells the french girl that he bangs that he wont return the the US.

>>83879972
it's about the morality of war. America is sending off a bunch of poor kids to fight a war they don't give a fuck about. he meets a colonel that storms a tiny village simply because he wants to surf with Lance.

then the whole film shows what a complete fucking mess the war is, because, again, poor kids who don't give a fuck about fighting communism or the vietnamese. the playboy the show, the completely destitute little base they end up on, the bridge that keeps being rebuilt and blown up, etc etc

then Willard meets Kurtz, who basically feeds you this message with his story about being in spec ops and witnessing rebels cutting off kids arms because they were vaccinated. they had no morality, only their resolve: to win. he wants 10 divisions of these men because he knows they would get the job done. that's why the Vietnamese won. they were fighting with passion, ideology and brutality. the American kids sent to fight just wanted light beer.

>>83880158
The book is like 75 pages. It's not like it's a novel or anything moron. Also given the context of the time it came out and most people's general lack of knowledge of the world outside their home nations, adventure and colonialism was still very much romanticized, like Marlo did at the beginning of the story, including the ideology that it was European's duty to civilize the world i.e. The White Man's Burden.

TL;DR: You're a fucking retard

>>83880262
Maybe i expected more because i watched the redux which was quite long and grueling.
But yes you're right, a movie doesn't have to have a deep message to be good.
>>83880413
I understand the whole Ritt der Walküren anti war aspect of the movie but the novel wasn't about vietnam, i was more confused about the ending and what Kurtz did and what it wanted to tell me with that.
>>83880452
>TL;DR: You're a fucking retard
Thank you.
See i wasn't born in the 1800s and didn't know much about their mindset, thank you for enlightening me.

>>83880413
What's life like being clinically retarded, anon? Is it hard for you?

>>83880562
that comes down to speculation, really. Kurtz knew he was far removed from normal society and could no longer go back. he wanted Willard to kill him in the end, to end his suffering so to speak.

i havent read the book in a very long time, but Apocalypse Now is without a doubt my favourite film of all time and ive seen it 100+ times (not kidding). i definitely like Redux more, but that's personal preference.

>>83880562
>But yes you're right, a movie doesn't have to have a deep message to be good.
You have a very narrow view of art if you think depth is simply having a message.

>>83880413

This is generally a good post but you've completely misinterpreted what is going on and what Kurtz means about the Pile Of Little Arms. But you were so close to it with the thrust of the rest of your post.

If you're a young American kid (or in this case, you) and you hear that part of the movie, you think "oh those mean North Vietnamese we were just helping". And then from that, Kurtz understands how to be really violent, or something. That is absolutely not the point of the anecdote. And what's agonizing about this is that you're so close to its real purpose in the rest of your post.

The point of the anecdote is the Vietnamese soldiers did what they did because they feared, very reasonably, that the Americans might be poisoning their children. And so, the arms come off. Quite the opposite, as Kurtz realized, these soldiers /are/ moral (he literally says this!) and have resolve, as you said.

The Vietnamese were prepared to do what. ever. it. takes. And the Americans were not, as you correctly juxtapose in the rest of your post. You just misread the Little Arms.

>>83881005
You are probably right, i consume stuff to enjoy it not for any message, but i was still curious in the end. I guess i'm just a pleb.