Film Vs. Coppola's Apocalypse Now

1410 Words3 Pages

Characters within a movie can have similarities, but what if they are identical? Not in the sense of appearances, but in the way that they act and think. While it is common for characters to have similar ideas and motives when it comes to the plot, developing the ideologies of another character is an interesting juxtaposition. In Apocalypse Now, a film from 1979, this is the case for its protagonist, Captain Willard. Willard is tasked with a mission to exterminate a rogue colonel by the name of Colonel Kurtz. However, as his mission progresses, Willard begins his own transformation into that of a rogue soldier. Through both stylistic and narrative elements in the movie, the hunter (Willard) becomes more like his prey (Kurtz) until both have …show more content…

By the end of the film, each man has mentally left the army even though they are both still physically in it. As Willard says, the two are “not in their army anymore” (Coppola 1979). Even further, Kurtz and Willard stories are intertwined as Willard says that he “’need[s] to tell his story to tell my own’” (Coppola 1979). Each man has held different roles within in the army, yet in a way they have the same end goal, to follow commands, and kill. This is additionally explained with the cyclical judgement that occurs in the film as Willard interestingly follows Kurtz’s footsteps into madness. Also, in the narrative Kurtz and Willard share similar plot points. For example, Lev states that “we cannot believe in Colonel Kurtz, the charismatic leader gone mad, and this throws us back to the incoherent experience of the ordinary soldier” (126). Willard experiences this first hand as he and the team travel to Do Lung Bridge in hopes of finding aid. However, Willard and the rest onboard the boat come across men that instead are trying to board their boat begging them to get them out of Vietnam. Meanwhile, other “American soldiers fight Charlie every night at the Do Lung bridges, and Willard learns that ‘No one is in command’” (Lev 117). This relates back to Lev’s idea of the experience of the ordinary soldier, as with the leader gone mad, the rest of the unit has also fallen into madness as no one is there to guide them. The structure of the military is based purely on leadership and the chain of command, without either in place, the soldiers at Do Lung are essentially helpless and have no means of getting out. Circling back to Kurtz and Willard’s main objective in the military, to kill, each is responsible for a number of deaths. What got Kurtz in trouble to begin with was his execution of Vietnamese people he believed to have been double agents. As this act displeased

Open Document