Has anyone else seen Apocalypse Now: Final Cut? This is the only version I've seen...

Coppola should have removed the plantation scene and kept the playmate sequences
but
>FRANCIS FORD COPPOLA: Since I had these three women, and they were all uniquely talented and had their own stories, I shot three additional sequences in this scene—which would now be extremely bad in the #MeToo movement—where Bill Graham sort of trades the girl for fuel. This is not something that would go over very well in today’s political climate. The point I was trying to make was that in a way the abuse of sending a 17-year-old boy to Vietnam to drop napalm on people is as immoral as what is done to these young, beautiful girls at 17. That was a symbol of abuse—what we do to the young men, we also do to the young girls in our so-called civilization.

playboy.com/read/apocalypse-then

>the final cut has everything except the second playboy bunny sequence
Coppola became such a fag, it was probably a woman's idea. That scene was great to show the madness in that place.

I knew it. Old people should be euthanized.

nine times out of ten when actors read "on location shooting" most will pass or bail. Because fuck leaving the US for anything but a mountain of cocaine and pussy. "on location" shooting also massively inflates a budget and almost always results in budget overruns. This applies exponentially when sets need to be built on location.

There has only been a very small number of occasions when someone has the proper levels of madness and drive to jam through all of the bullshit and make something great.

It was fantastic, shame they didn't bomb Kurtz's compound though

New Hollywood of the 70's gave directors like Coppola, Friedkin and Scorsese near complete control of their films, which is why this one feels like a true work of art.
After movies like Heaven's Gate failed in the early 80's, the studio system returned and few directors outside of the independent circuit got that taste of freedom again.

In the trailer there's a shot where Colleen Camp's centerfold appears and it's digitally altered to cover her breasts.
I haven't seen this cut yet. I hope that was just for the trailer and it's not that way in the fucking movie.

the bunny-whoring sequence is really just a ridiculously dated treatise on how weird porn is, and the fact its such a dated scene is enough to warrant it's removal, and what coppella is saying is just long-winded bullshit to have to keep from admitting he was out of touch then and is now.

also the plantation scene is completely critical to the narrative.

not to mention george lucas basically proving complete creative control is a really fucking bad thing

Just saw it in Imax. Shit was amazing.
Definitely a more streamlined version of Redux

i wanted to see this but it was only showing one night like an hour and a half away from me

It's missing the scene where Kurtz lets Willard out of the trailer cell and stands by the door talking to him? Or did I get up to use the restroom around then?

Just looked it up and you're not wrong. Unbelievable how he just showed up and nailed Kurtz

Like ol David Lynch

It was a time when films like The Godfather, Rocky and Saturday Night Fever were the highest grossing movies at the box office. Apocalypse Now's adjusted box office is around 600 million.

Something that would never happen nowadays

Also spielberg and Lucas started the infantile blockbuster revolution. Just look at top grossing films before and after 1977.
Logically a studio will start to gib much more to blockbuster projects then author’s films.

Bluepilled af. Not watching his new cut.

>coppella
kys

Attached: 1452304010909.png (500x338, 44K)

the original script is pretty much entirely retarded as well. which is kinda funny.

scripts often sound retarded

>only a handful of good movies have ever been made
True, after wasting too much time of my life wasting shit flicks. I would say only around 300 movies deserve to be seen.

this. screenplays are the most ineffective form of writing.

SUZIE Q BABY I LOVE YOU

its retarded because originally kurtz was just kilgore 2.0, instead of something completely different and all but incomprehensible.

Watch the documentary on the making of the film -- Heart of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse. It's really fantastic and will make you appreciate the movie even more.

I can't blame them man, Jaws is too fucking good to be lumped together with other blockbuster trash.
It just had the extreme fortune of making an assload of money during the perfect time.

who's kilgore?

Sorcerer was robbed

Was this scene in the final cut?

Attached: MV5BYzBkZjlhNjktZTNlYS00M2RmLWJkODEtODFlZDQxZGZjZjhlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjUwNzk3NDc@._V1_.jpg (1117x464, 52K)

got a link, user?

At least it's become more appreciated in recent years, it's definitely a favorite of mine now.

Attached: 174232f581ad1ddce5c5290f44e5cdc3.jpg (800x419, 29K)

oh gotcha. haven't seen the film in a while.

I’ve always like redux except the plantation scene

Sorry m8 couldn't find a torrent and ended up watching it on some shitty streaming site a while back. Just had a quick search but couldn't come up with anything except one with a Spanish dub lol

Attached: Extreme .jpg (1600x802, 113K)

The sound mix was terrible in my theatre. I literally couldn't understand half of the dialogue.

based spooky spook

Zoomer here, convince me to watch this movie.

It's more kino than any capeshit/mainstream movie made from 2000 to present

It has the guy who played Han Solo in it

It has a lot of flashing lights and lens flares to keep your ADD addled mind occupied.

>3+ hours long
hope this is the kino version

watch the shortest version

They don't want to addapt books anymore.

We don't know what's in this movie. It's the final cut, and it's 15 minutes shorter than the redux.

why?

That's the Redux. It has it's own merits but if you can't sit through 3 hours, do this I actually watched that first years back and assumed that was the movie. It still retained much of what makes the original movie kino

I would recommend watching this version because it's Coppola's final vision. Skip the redux because it's pacing is horrible.

redux has terrible pacing. theatrical was nominated for best editing.

everything it adds is the worst part of the movie

we do know, they talked about it
plantation scene is in, playmates stranded in the helicopter is out
most of the other Redux additions stay

Did Kilgore get more scenes in the Final Cut? I've never seen Redux, and it's been a while since I've seen the original.

The only movie even close to that today is Once Upon A Time in Hollywood and even that isn't really all that similar. But it's not making anywhere near as much as the Lion KANGZ remake, even though the reviews are terrible and it's literally a movie everyone has already seen. It's really sad what has happened to movie culture in this country.

More like entertainment and art in general

Postmodernism has invaded more than just art. Now it's infected politics, family structure, life in general. The past was unironically far superior.

Was it a fake IMAX? The sound is trash in them.

theatrical was a CIA planted movie built around being "america fuck yea." redux, the original story, is about a descent into hell/madness, and without the plantation, a final bastion of peace/sanity, willard joins kurtz same as all the others sent after kurtz, as there is nothing to remind willard why kurtz is wrong.

the best one

You get stuck in a culture loop too. I’ve noticed from talking to these high school kids that work in a coffee shop I visit that Friends is popular with their age bracket. I remember thinking that show was pushing abnormal living situations and cohabitation like it was an answer to family problems and not part of the problem. Family’s don’t even exist anymore because no one gets married and they use contraceptives. I’m sick of the modern world and it doesn’t end with the garbage art culture we have today. Apocalypse Now was made with love and a vision. Literally no one you or I will bump into tomorrow has that drive. It’s “get up, traffic, work/school, eat, come home, shit, play on phone, watch tv, bed. Shit sucks

whats fucked all of human society is the fact we're not working towards anything, which means all anyone wants to do is make enough money so they won't have to work.

It’s the pleasure principle. Do what feels good now. Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die. Frivolity is a frequent companion to pessimism. I’m over the nihilist bullshit existence. Kurtz was right. IF you’re gonna fucking do something go all the way and own it. Our leaders in society are cowards.

never seen it, have tickets for it this month at alamo drafthouse kinoplex. it is the "Final Cut" edition.

what am I in for? is starting with the final cut a good idea?

but our leaders are doing something, and owning the fuck out of it. they believe in "fuck you got mine," so they're fucking you and getting theirs.

Kurtz was wrong, the entire concept of the vietnam war was wrong. "Winning" vietnam would've been easy, but the goal wasn't to win, it was to make vietnam more american. But you can't bomb people into being more free, more civilized, more peaceful. So Kurtz's reaction is to ignore the concept of bringing civilization to the region, going full savage, and just killing everyone in region. To turn the entire place into hell, and then plant an american flag on it. Because you can't fight an ideological war with napalm.

Nobody ever worked towards anything except in times of war, you idiota

old apolitical sitcoms are popular again because they're apolitical. its comforting to watch things where the biggest problem people have is some trivial bullshit that's resolved in the course of an episode.

I think you absolutely can bomb people into being more American. We did it to Japan, Germany, and the British colonies.

only difference i could see between this and redux is they took out the camp with the heavy rain and the second playboy bunny scene , no idea why they left the french people part in which is the worst part of the film

was still awesome seeing it on the big screen

>how does it smell to you, soldier?

I don't remember implying otherwise.

>no idea why they left the french people part in which is the worst part of the film
because like any non-retard will tell you, the narrative doesn't work without it.

i have this photo as a 3'x4' portrait above my mantle.
is that weird, Yea Forums?

Attached: 1876783632.jpg (336x500, 64K)

those are all countries that had strong civilizations before getting bombed/defeated.

vietnam had literally nothing and the US was setting it all on fire.

you're suffering from a civilizational ennui.
many of us are.

Attached: 1987985763.jpg (1980x2499, 1.04M)

I've already seen the Dolby Surround version, ask me anything.

ennui is the idea that everything is great but you're still miserable. everything isn't great and people have every right to be unhappy with the current course of society.

You guys really need to read up on the war. France colonized Indochina and brought hospitals, schools and the Catholic faith to the country in the late 1800s. Set up their Michelin tire factories in south Indochina in 1925. 30,000 acres of rubber trees. Near Saigon. Frances military was exhausted after WWII and it wasn’t until Ho Chi Minh got backing from China (whom they hated) and Soviet Russia that America had to make a move on stopping them. Wars aren’t fought to impress ideas upon people kids. It’s for resources. Rubber was Vietnam’s. In 1977, two years after the fall of Saigon, communist Vietnam nationalized the rubber industry. Connect the fuckin dots.

Of course today the Soviet Union has fallen and Vietnam is more capitalist than ever. War became redundant once capitalism became a more efficient way to compete for resources. Thanks capitalism!

That's nice. It doesn't change the idea the US was in vietnam to make it a capitalist vassal state and to empower the totally despised capitalist minority. Thus meaning the only way to have "won" that war would've been to set all the poor people (read: people who like communism, generally) on fire.

Yet the system brought to their savage asses was the one left by the west. They wouldn’t have any of the infrastructure if not for France. So the mean old capitalists were expelled and the communists and their re-education camps march through the south. Ever hear of the boat people? Millions of Vietnamese fled communist rule there. How many fled when the French were running the show?

I'm not having an ideological debate with you, my dimwitted friend. Vietnam was an ideological war that the US was attempting to fight with napalm.

>also the plantation scene is completely critical to the narrative.
It really isn't at all, it's a thuddingly dull literalization of themes that are already more than adequately conveyed throughout the rest of the film, and it brings the pacing to a grinding halt at the worst possible time. At least it does in Redux, I haven't seen the Final Cut yet.

It's the greatest war movie ever made. Nothing compares

You lose.

Is there any cooler shot than Wilard rising out of the muddy water?

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 96K)

willard is a man who's lost all sense of what civilization/peace mean. the trip up the river has only worsened this. the plantation is that bastion of peace/sanity in a sea of madness, situated at the edge of the pit. without it, kurtz is the only one speaking anything resembling "sense." so without the plantation, without that reminder of what wars are fought for, kurtz wins.

QRD? never seen it

The good one. Redux.

friend, you can quibble about resources and infrastructure till you're blue in the face, it doesn't change the fact people are what determine how those things are used, and the issue in vietnam is the majority of the vietnamese no longer wanted those resources used by or for a tiny minority of rich capitalists. The US could have just kept building shit there, but the soviets would've just keep telling the poor of the region that everything was just more capitalist oppression. Thus the only way to have "won" was to have killed most of the people in vietnam.

Thus isn't an ideological debate. All you're doing is quibbling and displaying a profound lack of cognitive ability.

THE YELLOW STAYS, THE WHITE LEAVES

Based patrician.

Sorcerer is great in many aspects, but the original Wages of Fear is superior as a whole

Attached: 58af1c585da702ee7a34737d3805a58b.jpg (488x735, 74K)

>you just now realize Lawrence fishburne was innit

Attached: F1BFD971-E272-4762-80B3-2155A429E3FF.jpg (1136x473, 72K)

there's only like 5 true 70mm imax theaters left in the US

The first time I saw this film, I made it about 2 thirds of the way though before I had a moment of clarity and said out loud “this is the greatest film ever made”. Pretty cringe, desu, but prolific nonetheless.

Attached: 0403E214-4F1A-47DA-972B-E907AF311254.jpg (557x605, 48K)

Are you in Ohio too?

Yes I saw it tonight. It is very good and looks the best visually and sounds the best thanks to the 4k remaster. In terms of comparing to the orginal and redux it keeps the best cut scene of the French plantation while removing the Playboy Bunnies in their tent scene and the scene where Kurtz reads some news clips to Willard in captivity. If they had to pick one scene to stay in that wasn't in the original cut, I'm glad it was the French plantation scene. There may have been another scene or two that was in Redux and not the Final Cut that I forgot though.

That was Redux. Though they kept that scene in Final Cut.
We do know because it was shown tonight in American theaters, lol. It's still in the Final Cut.
He doesn't have to wait because it was released tonight in the U.S.

Such a pointless release, that's the only scene that's controversial among viewers so it would've made more sense to have an extended version without it, then plantationfags could always just watch Redux.

the plantation is a legitimate pleb filter, my filtered friend.

kellys heroes is better

>always loved the plantation scene
>never liked the second bunny scene
indochads win again

Attached: Les Centurions.jpg (323x499, 52K)

>no idea why they left the french people part in which is the worst part of the film
>Such a pointless release, that's the only scene that's controversial among viewers so it would've made more sense to have an extended version without it, then plantationfags could always just watch Redux.
It's so easy for that scene to filter you plebs. And if they didn't add it then the cut would be no different than the original besides having a 4k remaster and IMAX sound. Which would still be great, but it wouldn't be the "Final Cut".

Attached: 1532819790073.jpg (638x558, 64K)

It's shit. Clean's funeral is the corniest scene Coppola shot in the 70s, the sex scene is like some concoction a studio exec came up with after a test screening, and the plodding dinner conversation lays the all of the themes right out on the table, so to speak.

>theatrical was a CIA planted movie built around being "america fuck yea."
Based schizo poster. The war had already been over for 4 years so there was no need for a propaganda film. It was still very much about a descent into hell/madness and Kurtz was still the centerpiece of the film.

Based and Apocalypse Now-pilled

Cold war, my dimwitted friend.

Yeah, no shit my schizoid friend. Of course the Cold War was still going on. But what, you think it was supposed to raise support against the Russians who are only mentioned once by the French in the film? This was a work of art, not a CIA plant. Is every film that shows the American military killing people or winning a CIA plant then?

so how come his daughter is bad at making movies?

>daughter
There you go

the theatrical cut is about how even in the face of insanity, murica prevails. that the US was ultimately correct (and victorious) for pulling out of vietnam.

because the only thing making money these days is capeshit. people have changed for the worse

Brando was fucking awesome

Well that is one interpretation but I believe it is far deeper than that. Especially if you take the source material, Heart of Darkness, into account.

>Apocalypse Now
is by far the most overrated film of all time.

Got so much lame IMDB hype.

Should I watch this in Imax? also was it shot at n 70mm? cause the internet says 35mm but there is a 70mmm master so....

without the plantation, the parallels to heart of darkness are inert and meaningless, as even heart of darkness (and dante's inferno) have the bastion of sanity/peace at the edge of pure madness/hell.

The theatrical cut isn't about a descent into hell/insanity, its about how american ideals always prevail. How insanity isn't something one can descend into, but a fixed and separate entity, far away from all that is right and good (read: capitalist).

I think it still works without the plantation scene and parallels the novella well. You have a man going down a river to find another man who has gone insane. The core theme of madness is still there. The whole story doesn't rest on whether or not there is one good place left before the last evil place.
You're starting to just sound like some kind of anti-imperialist marxist in the second paragraph claiming it is a film propping up American capitalism. It'a not. It actually shows the American military in a fairly negative light, killing Vietnamese civilians and generally being unorganized.

The theatrical cut is about america going in and excising the core of a tumor of insanity from vietnam. For its built around the idea all of the insanity of the war is kurtz's fault, and once he is killed vietnam is healed. "We had to burn the village to save it." Willard isn't moving away from something (civilization/sanity/peace) the further up the river he goes, he's moving into something (insanity/war/hell), then getting rid of kurtz undoes all the insanity of the region, as if kurtz is a head vampire and the entire war is his ghoul.

The theatrical cut is a monster movie and willard is the hero, who saves the day, fixing the mistake that was vietnam, and it'll never happen again. It's basically on par with the rambo movies. America fixes PTSD, then fixes vietnam, then fixes the middle east. America, fuck yea.

>IMDb top 250 bad!
How to spot a contrarian

well, you're not only wrong, you're stupid.

this is correct
this is the dumbest take I have ever seen

Willard is mentally unhinged in his first scene because of the war and kills Kurtz by becoming insane like him which he literally has a vision of when he's drunk in his room, crying.

I don't have much a problem with the first paragraph. And there are similarities to horror films. But implying that it's about America always coming out on top just sounds asinine to me. He's killing another American who went rogue for Christ's sake. That's one of the biggest flaws in your argument. It's not about beating the Vietnamese, it's about taking out one of their own who went off the rails.

You don't understand, if Wilard didn't see the french people larping he would become a bad guy!

You're not only stupid, but you're also a Marxist schizo
Thanks man
Kek

>It's not about beating the Vietnamese
Didn't say it was. Try reading.

Hey look, cia shills.

kurtz's insanity was believing the war could be won. Kurtz's proposed means to win the war (and all wars) was to sacrifice literally everything worth going to war to protect.

>America fixes Vietnam
To "fix" Vietnam they would have to defeat the Vietnamese. Try proofreading.
>Muh CIA
Hey look, the schizo is still here

fix "vietnam" as in the mistakes that lead to the war in the first place.

You keep proving you really shouldn't be commenting on movies, much less literature.

>fix "vietnam" as in the mistakes that lead to the war in the first place.
That this is a fucking cope lol

Nice moving the goalposts. You're just proving you shouldn't be writing your ideas down if you can't properly express them in the first place.

What was the purpose of the plantation? What were those people doing there? I forget that.

moving goalposts would mean I changed something about my core argument. We're talking about vietnam, the war, not the country. The movie we're talking about is about the war, not the country. Just about any time someone mentions "vietnam" they're talking about the war.

But hey, you don't have any arguments, but you still feel the need to reply. Gotta say something, right?

Read the thread. It isn't that long.

yes, the theatrical cut was a long CIA pushed cope.

>moving goalposts would mean I changed something about my core argument. We're talking about vietnam, the war, not the country.
Then you should have specified that instead of leaving it up for interpretation.
>But hey, you don't have any arguments, but you still feel the need to reply. Gotta say something, right?
I have solid arguments, you're just deflecting and tryting to cope for the fact your's don't make sense. Then I have to reply to explain why you're wrong.
Seethe harder. The CIA won't come and get you for that, I promise.

Friend, you're quibbling because you don't have any actual arguments.

How is the theoretical cut a CIA pushed cope?

>we (america) went a little crazy, we're better now
>t. the CIA on vietnam, via the theatrical cut of apocalypse now

Oh no. I've been accused of quibbling. All my arguments are immediately destroyed.

But if you wanted to actually read my arguments friend, all of them are already posted in the thread.

Where's the argument or point?

>stop making arguments
>get called on it
>get upset

You stopped making arguments a while ago. Hell, for about half an hour you've harping on a reference to first blood part II, which literally was about "fixing" the entire country of vietnam by exploding all the communists. But because you can barely read, you confused that for a reference to the theatrical cut of apocalypse now.

see

So your interpretation of the film somehow proves that the CIA interfered with the edit? Got a single fact to back that up?

>Maks bad arguments
>Arguments get debated
>Accuss me of being a CIA shill cause he have no other arguments left

I was saying that it was so much more than just "America fuck yeah" because that is such a shallow perspective of the film. It's not about going in and defeating an enemy or fixing an entire nation or conflict as you day, it about going on a mission to eliminate a fellow American soldier who has gone rogue. And along the way it explores the same themes of madness that were present in Heart of Darkness. If you can't comprehend that by now then you are the one with a reading or possibly mental disability.

The CIA has it's hands in moves movies, my dimwitted friend. But I didn't know you wanted proof, as if you had somehow only just recently been given life. You have to go back pretty far to find the actual proof, back when the CIA was a little more belligerent about such things.

I CAN'T GET NO

So you have no proof, great job looking like a fucking retard

Friend, really, read . Everything in the last line is about the rambo franchise. Also stop trying to act like you understood anything about heart of darkness. Even the title gives away the idea that hell/insanity isn't a presence, but an absence, of light/goodness/peace/civilization/etc. Dancing around the idea that good and evil aren't equal and opposites, but presence vs absence, light and shadow, etc.

The theatrical cut takes the interpretation that evil/insanity/hell is quantifiable. That it isn't simply the absence of all things good. And that being exposed to evil/insanity/hell is something that can be resisted. Hell the "vision" you mentioned earlier changes the opening scene from willard struggling with the fact there's nothing good in his life to struggling against the spreading infection of kurtz's insanity.

The theatrical cut is basically the story of lancing a boil.

There's proof, I just don't feel like spoonfeeding a person who's acting like a cretin. You could go watch inherent vice.

So I should do the research to prove your point?

I don't really care what you do. You either know the CIA has influenced hollywood narratives for almost as long as hollywood as existed or you're just ignorant.

>Even the title gives away the idea that hell/insanity isn't a presence, but an absence, of light/goodness/peace/civilization/etc. Dancing around the idea that good and evil aren't equal and opposites, but presence vs absence, light and shadow, etc.

I'll admit that that is about the most meaningful thing you've said in this thread. But I do understand Heart of Darkness, I even wrote a paper on it. It is actually more about just insanity but is also a commentary on imperialism. Which kind of connects to what you keep saying, but in a completely different way.

I saw last month in aus, but at a pretty ordinary cinema which a bit disappointing. It is halfway between the original and redux. I prefer the original myself.

>I even wrote a paper on it.
I guess that proves you didn't understand it.

when it comes down to it you just don't like the correct interpretation of the theatrical cut, so you don't want to understand it. You don't like the plantation scene so you don't want to entertain any interpretation that justifies it's existence. You just want your simple story of america triumphing over quantifiable evil. You'll quibble about how that isn't what happens because kurtz was american, once, which is continually referenced as meaningless by all the cuts.

You can't actually refute anything I'm saying, but you keep replying, often on points that only exist because of your incredibly poor reading comprehension, just to validate your like of the duplo version of apocalypse now.

Probably
>when it comes down to it you just don't like the correct interpretation of the theatrical cut
LMAO, implying this is an objective thing. Your subjective take on the film is just as shit as any other, trust me.
>You don't like the plantation scene
Oh but I do. I even called it a pleb filter earlier in the thread. I just don't think it is as essential to the film's underlying meaning as you do.

There is only one possible interpretation of the theatrical cut, and it is most certainly not modern heart of darkness. Didn't stop people from trying to force the connection, but it incredibly weak and thin until redux dropped.

Redux is about . The theatrical cut is a much simpler and comforting tale of good vs evil.

Everything you just said is stupid bullshit.

feel free to elaborate

>There is only one possible interpretation of the theatrical cut
Stopped reading there. Your opinion isn't the only right one. Good night.

You are wrong. Sleep well.

The average viewer of average intelligence cannot comprehend the above average tragedy of the French scene and how it tragically maintains the sense of continuing darkness of the river of madness.

based 85 iq pseudo retard

theyd have to fix barbarism. and your low iq. impossible, unfortunately...

>It's good because like... the darkness in the river is like... continued with the french... tragedy

Jaws is good, though.

>also the plantation scene is completely critical to the narrative.
No it isn't. Tell the story visually and through events, not lectures.

Kek

Redux is my favorite. Final Cut is the most gorgeous but removed some good scenes while keeping the fucking French plantation (why)

>I don't understand what a metaphor is so no one does

>Thinking I misunderstood
You really are a dumb dumb

The bridge scene much earlier in the movie is far shorter, far more interesting both visually and in terms of dialogue, and is a wonderful metaphor as basically a microcosm of the entire Vietnam War in general.

French Plantation scene is a boring 30 minute long mess with awful dialogue and soap opera level visuals of flat shots of a wooden house.

SATISFACTION

That's not at all the point of the plantation, and the film makes no attempt to posit that wars are fought for any one reason, let alone a good one.

>But you can't bomb people into being more free, more civilized, more peaceful.
Worked in Korea. Vietnam was just a rerun of the Korean War except here the West lost. Malaysia, Indonesia and the Phillipines also killed their communist insurgecnies and were better for it. Vietnam was entirely winnable.

How was Vietnam at all different to Korea except the Communists won?

Redux is shit and a mistake.

How do you think the Korean war was won?
How was the Pacific War against Japan won?
How did Indonesia defeat their communist insurgency?

Kurtz is right, you are wrong.

Attached: nuke cities.jpg (1100x619, 104K)

>The theatrical cut is a much simpler and comforting tale of good vs evil.
Terrible post.

Redux is and will always be the best version.

Capeshit watching Yea Forums brainlets who check their phones at 15 minute intervals will never appreciate or understand it.

>>>/hallmarkchannel/

Don't worry the movie isn't censored. If it was, they would cut out the water buffalo sequence.

I don't know what that means. This board is full of shameless plebs who won't watch anything longer than 150 minutes.

There is no definitive version until he puts this bit of kino back in.

youtu.be/K9UYb-TDsa8?t=238

Redux is saccharine soap opera. The Hallmark Channel Vietnam War movie. Original release is the only good version.

Yeah, it's basically a LieMAX theatre. I hardly ever have problems with other IMAX movies, though.
Nah, Ontario.

Are there any other official cuts? Because I see people saying "oh, great, ANOTHER cut" like having a previous extended cut was too much.
TV cuts don't count.

youtube.com/watch?v=9l-ViOOFH-s

I really enjoyed it and wish I could buy a poster size of the pic in OP

What the fuck, I feel like I hear about some new cut scene every so often. I know they kept thorough archives but damn did they shoot a lot

imagine watching a jewish war propaganda movie without at least skipping through half the scenes

if you want something done right do it yourself
every film I watch is the Minimally-Jewed Edit

>braindead filler that means absolutely nothing to the central theme of the plot, which is badly defined enough as is
as far as movies go this is fine
but its a really badly told story by a jew who doesn't understand the concept and who has outright malice for the viewer

>go home GI... to Africa!
How the hell did Coppola get away with this?

Woah based AND nietzchepilled
youtube.com/watch?v=EFA0wZWivEk