There were two things that struck me as wildly different in the movie than in the book. For one Kurtz was a military man who forced his way back into Vietnam but without a purpose really. The second difference was the end scene of Kurtz's death.
In the book HOD Kurtz had a purpose, he was extracting ivory. However his ways were a bit unorthodox to the people around him. Not only was he extracting the most ivory from the surroundings but he was also killing the least amount of natives. And his passion was his ivory. In the movie Kurtz didn't seem to have a purpose for being in Vietnam. While matching the book Kurtz is treated and revered as a god he isn't taking advantage of the natives. He isn't even in Vietnam anymore he is in Cambodia. So it is strange to me that they chose for that to be a plot of the film.
As for the end, Willard kills Kurtz by his own will. How can someone who holds a man so highly kill him? In HOD Marlow was effected by the death of Kurtz he would never dream of killing him, he wanted him to live. Marlow wanted to hear about his plans and his techniques; not let them die in the grave with him. Willard is now revered as the new god like figure however Marlow would have been killed by the natives had he pulled such a stunt.
Of course the entire movie was different but those two huge plot changes did not settle well with alluding to the book at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment