The_Film_That_Changed_My_Life

Apocalypse Now
37
for me. And I think that’s because my attachment to the film is clearly set in
stone. I didn’t find the changes in it—the extensions—I didn’t find they really
did anything for me. I sort of feel the film is perfect, despite what other people
say about it and I wouldn’t change it for anything.
When I watched it a couple weeks ago, I didn’t watch the Redux version.
I watched my original version, which I have on LaserDisc. I bought it on
LaserDisc. [laughs]
[laughs] And, you know, that’s part of my fear, is that the original will
go away.
Boyle: Oh, I don’t think it will. I think the Redux will go away.
I hope so, but the marketing forces usually accept the newer version of
the film.
Boyle: Well, for something like this, this has its apostles everywhere.
My response was that the additions don’t seem to add anything. You
end up with three female characters, all of whom end up topless and
babbling, and Coppola tries to shoehorn in a love scene in an existential
war movie.
Boyle: The whole point of the experience of this film is that you trust the
madness that Coppola was in while editing it. And supposedly, he was literally
holding editors ransom at the end, forcing them to try things. And
from a cool, rational perspective, you would think, “Surely it’s a good idea
to let Francis have a relook at a film and think how he might want to change
things.” But no, the whole point about it, when you see it, when you see it
at the end of—what was it?—a three- to four-year journey to make it, that’s
what you see. What you don’t want to see is a reexamination of it from a
more leisurely perspective. The fact that it’s edited from inside the storm,
that’s where you want to see it edited from. You don’t want to see it edited
in a proper, rational, professional way. You want to see it edited by someone
who is insane or going insane.
Do you identify at all with that temptation as a filmmaker? To maybe
some day go back and recut and enhance a film in some way?