> which was regarded as a critique of the Belgian exploitation of (and atrocities in) the Congo region at the end of the 19th century >> Apocalypse Now’ is an

> which was regarded as a critique of the Belgian exploitation of (and atrocities in) the Congo region at the end of the 19th century >> Apocalypse Now’ is an exceptional film. It is also an average American film of the post-Vietnam era. >>> We are accustomed to look upon the shackled form of a conquered monster, but there—there you could look at a thing monstrous and free. >>>> It's judgement that defeats us. I think Serge Daney, and whomever those regarders were, are missing the point and being somewhat contradictory. There are a number of Viet Nam era Viet Nam war films (from the 1970's alone: The Losers, Limbo, Forced Entry, Coming Home, Tracks, Search and Destroy, The Visitors, etc.), and Apocalypse Now is atypical to all of them. The film is a retelling of Hearts of Darkness. The War in Viet Nam is just the setting, the backdrop or stage for Apocalypse Now, but the film is not about that war. What is central to both Coppola and Conrad, what they are saying, quite simply and even cynically, is that there is no difference between the savages and the civilized. We can segue that into theses on racism, but the ultimate message (of both the novel and the film) is that civilization is an illusion; there are only savages.