Book vs. Film: HEART OF DARKNESS vs. APOCALYPSE NOW

Book, not close.

Apocalypse Now isn't even better than HeartS of Darkness, the documentary Coppola's wife made about Coppola making the movie.

nah

alex in sf otm on both counts

nah

though I haven't seen Hearts of Darkness

neither

Duvall's scenes are worth 100 Hearts of Darkness documentaries.

Alex OTM

yeah MA, then Duvall goes away after 45 mins

So hard. In my early 20s, back when I could still comfortably name favourites, I used to think this was my top novel (I wrote my undergrad dissertation on Conrad) and top movie. Their virtues are so different: the book's great for its deadly precision and the film for its crazed excess.

Insufficient helicopters in one.

find it hard to believe that this is really 'not close' but maybe a lot of ppl really would rather slog through conrad's 10,000 iterations of 'i contemplated the murkiness of the mysteriousness of the bleakness of the blackness as the darkness grew all around me' than watch one of the 2-3 best films of its decade.

ppl have been whining about the ending of 'an' ever since it came out and they're still wrong.

Ending is still garbage whichever one you are talking about (what are we up to now? Four? Five?)

"than watch one of the 2-3 best films of its decade"

It's not even one of the two or three best films that Coppola directed in its decade either.

One of Conrad's worst books.

at least the book lacks Brando and Hopper at their most annoying

I was gonna talk about how completely fucking awesome both book and movie are (the movie is best experienced starting no earlier than 11:30 PM after a hard day of work, so by the time Willard finally reaches Kurtz's compound you're as bleary and exhausted as he is), and how this really is a difficult decision, but it appears I'd be swimming against the tide. Which only means that all of you are 100% wrong and should really never be trusted about any matters relating to art ever (especially those of you who actually compare Apocalypse unfavorably to the fucking Godfather movies, which are some of the worst soap-opera tripe ever shat out by a desperate studio), but still, I'll see myself out.

Bye.

HoD is not my favorite Conrad either (although calling it his WORST book seems kinda trolling. He wrote near 40 novels, I think. I somehow doubt all if them were classics.)

More accurate to say "the worst of his novels I've read," and I've read an awful lot, even The Shadow-Line (although Chance is bad too).

to a newbie I'd recommend The Secret Angel, Under Western Eyes, Youth, Nostromo before even thinking of HoD.

I'd add Nigger of the Narcissus to that list too. Assuming you meant the Secret Agent too.

haha yes. Good call on NotN.

Excellent thread: TS Heavy Hitters: Powerhouses of Prose #1: Conrad vs. Faulkner

Never read Under Western Eyes though myself. I should put that on my list.

I had to read the book in 10th grade, fighting it every step of the way. I saw the movie in college (after seeing the doc) and wanted to love it from the first scene. So really I can't say which is better cuz that's not a fair fight.

So many classics were ruined for me by high school teachers who couldn't for the life of them explain why you might ENJOY reading them.

There's some great stuff in HoD, but it definitely feels like homework.

The maddening part of HOD's canonization is if high school teachers assigned "Youth" or "Typhoon" they'd think Conrad was as good an adventure writer as Stevenson.

Ok, someone tell me what it is that ppl hate about the ending of AN...

that Capt. Willard and Kurtz don't boogie to "You Make Me Feel Like Dancing."

considering it involves The Doors and animal mutilation, dislike is hard to begrudge

heart of darkness common hs assigned reading due to length right? same as death of ivan ilyich, the metamorphosis, the old man and the sea, etc?

plus big obv themes even hs students can pick up on doesn't hurt

The maddening part of HOD's canonization is if high school teachers assigned "Youth" or "Typhoon" they'd think Conrad was as good an adventure writer as Stevenson.

We read Typhoon and HOD in high school and I loved both. He writes so beautifully, I've enjoyed everything I've read since, too.

Oh, and on topic, I like Apocalypse Now just fine, but voted (obviously) for Heart of Darkness.

The book for me, though the movie is good too. And so is the documentary about it's making.

can we vote for Orson Welles' radio version?

heart of darkness pretty big influence on kane right?

still wish we could've seen welles's proposed film version -- simon callow describes it in his book in some detail iirc.

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

Chose film over book. Like I do.

Automatic thread bump. This poll's results are now in.

Mistah Kurtz, he tied.

perfect.

"One of the very few cinematic adaptations of classic literature where this is a plausible question?"

challops: The Grapes of Wrath better on film

that's not challops

The Magnificent Ambersons also better on film

The Portrait of a Lady :)

Berlin Alexanderplatz? (The rare instance where I can say I've actually read the novel.)

The Shining

The Leopard.
(though the book is still better.)

(xpost Stretching def of classic literature, admittedly.)

Blade Runner

the last chapter of The Leopard that Visconti left out is amazing.

'the loneliness of the long-distance runner.'

The Bible

u have not seen The Bible

(which is subtitled In the Beginning, prepared for 57 sequels they were)

haven't seen it either, but i'm willing to bet that any movie where john huston is the voice of god AND noah is more fun than reading the bible

doubt it...The Bible is a lot of fun if you skip the rules 'n' regulations.

Poll results otm