I'm about to watch pic related for the first time. My question is: Redux or original?
Popular opinion is that the original has much better pacing and is ultimately the better film. However, I've come across many people stating that while perhaps pacing suffers from the plantation scene, the Redux completes the story a makes AN a true masterpiece.
Unless I absolutely love the film, I don't plan to watch both versions, so I want to know which cut should be watched first, or which is considered the true form of the film.
>>70106776
The extended director's edition is the only way to watch it you pleb.
Can't even watch the original now with how badly they fucked up Kurtz.
I prefer Redux. The extra length doesn't bring it down for me to be honest
mfw I can only find redux on torrents, not interested in a 3 hour borefest
Watch the original first. GREAT ENDING.
The redux has new scenes that are fun to see, but damn it lags in places. And they ruined the ending sequence.
Triva: Watch for my image in the film, it's pretty quick.
>>70106895
See, I'm fine with the length so long as its actually the best version of the film to see
Bump because I'd really like to know if I'm ruining the experience by watching the redux first. It's now what I plan to do, I just want to make sure I'm not lessening the impact of mt first viewing of such a renowned movie
>>70106829
this. only plebs complain about pacing
>>70107133
In most cases me too, but that's not the case for this movie, according to most people.
>>70107230
I've heard Ebert say the ending is way worse in the Redux. I'd go for the original. It's such a monumental classic you'll probably really dig it. I haven't seen Redux, but I don't really feel the need.
>>70107383
most people are plebs. don't be a pleb. watch redux.
watch the original and then watch the redux in a few months
The correct answer is Redux but skip the plantation scene.
>>70106776
The acclaimed version is the original. It's the only way to experience it the first time.
>>70107480
This is what I was wondering if I should do. Seems for the most part you can't go wrong with either cut, but the plantation scene is generally conceded as a killer, even to those that prefer the redux.
Would you argue then that the redux doesn't ruin Kilgore's character?
>>70107480
the plantations scene has tits. never skip tits.
Watch the original first. There are extra scenes in Redux that you will find enjoyable only after you've seen the original (like easter eggs or expanded scenes of good moments).
>>70106906
I can't find the original anywhere.
>>70107547
Plantation scene is great. The only problem is that it's too long. You will enjoy the plantation scene more IF you see the original first ans read a little about the french involvement in the war.
>>70107732
he'd enjoy the plantation scene if he didn't already know about the 'plantation scene is bad' meme that is perpetuated on this board. it's exactly like the 'wedding scene is bad' meme in deer hunter that exists here. it's simple plebeians who need straight forward shoot em up war movies like platoon who can't deal with redux because of muh pacing.
and since when is a director's cut of a movie seen as inferior to a studio cut (excluding oliver stone of course)?
>>70107973
>wedding scene is bad
It's not very subtle with the spilling the wine. The Redux has always been considered inferior.
https://kat.cr/apocalypse-now-1979-original-version-bdrip-1080p-h264-ita-dts-eng-ac3-5-1-sub-ita-eng-by-fratposa-t12471892.html
here's the non redux
>>70108257
how many seeds?
>>70108342
20 or so. I'm getting 2MB/s download, ETA ~1 hour
>>70107665
This. Please do this OP
>>70108098
okay good luck. stay pleb and keep watching capeshit.
Watch Heart of Darkness first. Puts the whole movie in a new light.
>>70108820
i read the book, and i know this is a kind of adaption or play on it. is it enough, or is it best if i watch the movie?
Hearts of Darkness is better
>>70109937
He's referring to the documentary about the making of Apocalypse Now.
>>70110149
dang, ok!
I know the quality is utterly dire for it, but anyone ever see the six hour cut of apocalypse now? By that I mean the workprint version, even just skimming it to see scenes that didn't make it into either of the other two cuts.
>>70106776
ORIGINAL
The Redux version is horrible
redux is shit.
>>70111364
>>70111456
Damn, really? I'm about an hour and a half into the redux, am I ruining my experience with the film? Is it too late to change course? I'm really digging it so far
>>70111517
Don't listen to them, Redux is the best version.
>>70111517
>hour and a half into a 3 hour movie
>posting on /tv/
just fucking kill yourself you child.
>>70111517
Go watch the movie and stop posting, you fucking child
>>70106776
Original is literal perfection. Changing anything will make it less than perfect which is what the Redux did. It added more scenes and lines which alters pacing.
Original is the version to watch first. Redux is still the same amazing movie but with more stuff to enjoy.
>>70111517
If you're posting on /tv/ right now, you don't deserve either.
reminder that coppola didn't like the plantation scene
>>70111707
>Redux is still the same amazing movie but with more stuff to enjoy.
more stuff to annoy
not one added scene was any good
the scenes were cut for a reason
Redux was just a sad money grab that some of you brain-dead plebs evidently fell for
