Link to Analysed Clip : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1b26BD5KjH0
In 1979 ‘Apocalypse Now’ was nominated for “Best Picture, Best Director, Best Screenplay, Best Art Direction and Best Editing” & won two Oscars for both “Best Sound and Best Cinematography”. It is no surprise then that such a decorated film has such a purposeful, deliberate and thought provoking title sequence. Effortlessly it establishes its particular position in genre as a war drama, with props such as helicopters & guns present throughout. The title sequence for ‘Apocalypse Now’ would therefore take a preferred reading by its target audience, as the on-set props inform the viewers from the start that it is a war film, whilst as it is only the first few minutes of film, provides an opportunity for audience members to decide if it is not the film for them and that the genre does not suit their preferences. However, this type of film brings with it a common narrative trajectory and one where a military conflict is resolved through violence and so most audience member’s narrative expectations are fulfilled in the first three minutes & fifty-five seconds of film. From one minute & forty - nine seconds until the end of the title sequence, however, an extreme concerned face appears, leaving the audience wondering if they had judged the correct tone of the film, and whether ‘Apocalypse Now’ purely is an action filled war film or perhaps something deeper?
Francis Ford Coppola, director of ‘Apocalypse Now’, stated in an interview that films were like bridges, in that “They’re huge projects. They always go over budget”. Considering Coppola’s statement, it’s interesting to consider this film had an estimated budget of thirty - one million dollars and this is reflected in the title sequence alone. One minute and twelve seconds into the film, the audience witnesses’ huge explosions in quick succession, which interrupt the otherwise peaceful establishing, long take, shot of a forest. This serves to engage the attention of the audience, as they are instantly put on edge by the powerful sound and visceral imagery. We then see helicopters passing across the frame, informing the viewer of the text that they are witnessing a war film, which only continue to raise viewer’s excitement as helicopters continue, in great numbers, to pass across the screen. Particularly disturbing to the audience, is that the lighting is created purely on – set by the explosions themselves, alongside the red, hellish - like glow this presents. It could be argued that the strong use of flames and the lighting that is created by them and explosions could be a means of which Coppola could demonstrate ‘Hell on Earth’, and possibly a commentary then on the Vietnamese war itself. Towards the end of the title sequence, a pan shot shows a vast range of widely considered ‘Vices’. The audience is shown (From three minutes & fifteen seconds to three minutes & thirty - five) a bottle of alcohol, a pack of cigarettes and a gun. Some would interpret the presence of these items, as an indicator of the nature of the Vietnamese war and in turn American foreign policy. John Milus, screenwriter for ‘Apocalypse Now’, stated “It was becoming a psychedelic war... you really get the feel that it was a rock ‘n roll war. Things had gone a little further than anyone had realised.” This could be reflected by the objects on screen & that the war was not all for the right reasons.
Written by The Doors, “The end” seems to have been created purely for ‘Apocalypse now’s title sequence because it fits so perfectly. An inspired choice for a non – diegetic soundtrack, ‘the end’ has bass drops and lyrics that are synchronous with on-screen events. For example, when the first explosion of the title sequence occurs one minute and twelve seconds into the film, the song begins at the exact same moment. This is done to create a feeling of awe and astonishment, to match the attention ‘grabbing’ from the on screen explosions. At the start of the title sequence, we hear a quiet but progressively louder, incomprehensible sound echoing against the jet black background on screen. This serves to build tension as the audience is left to determine the source of the ambient sound, or what the tension is leading too. Three minutes and thirty two seconds into the title sequence, we are given a low angle mid shot of a fan on the ceiling, and running in synchronisation is the sound of a helicopter rotor. This leaves the decision of whether the sound is diegetic or non – diegetic, to the audience. This type of enigma tends to leave the audience with a feeling of unease, as they are left confused and unsure of the relationship between sound and picture onscreen.
One of the major uses of editing used by Coppola is the expansion of time. This is reflected with both sound and miss en – scene, with the helicopters and the noise they create both moving slower than in reality, but not slow enough for the situation to become comic. Slowing the helicopters, as well as the explosions and vast pillars of flame erupting, allows for the audience to truly admire and be amazed by the action on screen, and the visual beauty in destruction and war. This could be read by some viewers as an attempt by Coppola to inform the viewer of why certain people enjoy destruction and war, and the beauty they see that no one else can – which would challenge dominant ideology that war is generally not a good thing and barely anyone enjoys it. I personally feel that the production team decide to use slow motion in order to allow the audience time to reflect on what’s taking place on screen, and to give the events taking place some political thought. From twelve seconds in, when we first witness the first frame of the film, to one minute & fifty seconds, a long take can be seen to be used to highlight the destruction as a track shot highlights the destruction caused by this militant force on the jungle. Most viewers would take an oppositional reading to the event of such destruction and nature, as public opinion is generally against damage to any natural resources – including wild jungles. This is an effective technique used by Coppola, as it immediately draws strong emotions of either support for the destruction or opposition, both which serve to engage the viewer in the film through the title sequence. Almost entirely uniquely, ‘Apocalypse Now’(s) title sequence is without credits or titles, a rarity among box office film. The title ‘Apocalypse Now’ can only be seen as graffiti on the steps of the Kurtz compound late in the film, most likely a decision made by Coppola to allow the brutal destruction of the title sequence to allow a more disturbing impression that the title sequence could be reality.
Although both the track shot viewing the destruction of the trees and the zooms highlighting the eruption of fire in the jungle are powerful uses of cinematography to draw a response from the viewer of the text, none seem as powerful as the extreme close up of the American soldier’s face from one minute & thirty nine seconds onwards. The faded in, superimposition close up of the man’s face, allows for the viewer to continue watching the track shot of the jungle, but also take into consideration the emotions seen due to the extremity of the close up that reveals every twitch, quiver and contortion. The use of parallel editing here, forces the viewer to re-think their own ideas on the burning jungle and its connotations, political or not.
Overall, I feel Coppola once again flounces his ability to create outstanding pieces of cinematic film, as the political undertones that run throughout apocalypse now rival even those of ‘The Godfather’. The aim of ‘Apocalypse Now’ was to cause the audience to re-think their beliefs about the Vietnamese War, and the Title sequence does exactly that. The mix of brutal reality, alongside still unmatched editorial ingenuity forces you, the viewer, to reflect on the context of the film: the price of war. Still as significant now as it was in 1979, the title sequence for ‘Apocalypse Now’ allows the viewer to watch three minutes and fifty – five seconds of film and understand the message both Coppola and the production team were trying to portray. In George Lucas’ words the film was “like a quest or a trek or something that would take us through the various aspects of the Vietnam War and allow us to see it for the insanity that it was.” That was the artistic direction the production were allowed to take in the title sequence, and why they were so successful in portraying that with violent explosions, advanced camera movement and expensive props. Yet, with thirty one million as an estimated budget to spend, who could blame them?
No comments:
Post a Comment