Other characters in the novel and the movie were similar and yet, some were mentioned in one and not in the other. In the movie the man that greeted Willard when the docked at the station was an American photographer. In the novel the man was “a white man” and he looked like a “harlequin” (pg. 126). Both were the men that escorted Willard/Marlow to Kurtz. The savages were represented in both by black people who followed Kurtz every word. Another common character was the helmsman and Chief. In both the movie and the fill, this was the man that was killed by an arrow will they were under attack by the savages (pg. 118). Although there were more sailors on the ship with Willard than were mentioned with Marlow, the other above-mentioned characters were the ones that were the same but had different names
“Apocalypse Now” and Heart of Darkness were not similar in their plot lines. “Apocalypse Now” took place during the Vietnam War. In the beginning of the movie Willard is in Saigon, wishing to leave. He wants a mission, anything, and he wants to wake up back in the jungle. He is eager to go on this mission, but he states that “after this mission, he never wants another.” After he receives the mission, the story takes place in Vietnam and in Cambodia, along the Nung River. Willard is a Captain in the army and he is sent to Cambodia to kill Colonel Kurtz. The assassination of Kurtz is called because he murdered 4 Vietnamese intelligence agents. Willard doesn’t seem too fond of the people on the boat with him and he just wants to go and get Kurtz. When he meets Kurtz, he kills him and then works his way back home. Heart of Darkness took place in Africa, when it was not fully inhabited or known. Marlow is eager to go on a mission, to go sailing, to steer a steamboat (pgs. 70-71). Marlow was on a steamboat for the Trading Company in search for Kurtz, to rescue him. Marlow becomes attached to people on his ship and he displays this when the helmsman dies (pg. 118). In both Kurtz, in the end, dies, but his words are not forgotten.
Both the novel and the movie have symbols that they share and have different. In both, the river is the journey to one’s inner self. It is the path that is taken to see what one really is (pg. 71). Another shared symbol is Kurtz. Kurtz is omniscient, a god. He is looked up to, as if he is a higher being that must be worshipped (pg. 127). Africa and Vietnam, although different places, represent the same thing in the movie and the novel. They represent darkness, horror, and the things that are unknown, that everyone is afraid of (pg. 67). There were symbols that the novel had and the movie did not. Ivory in the novel stood for greed. It showed just how greedy a person can be and that the white, European people, thought about what they wanted and not about other people (pg. 84). Although there were few appearances or references of greed in the movie, it did not really prove to be a symbol for anything. Also, the white men represented European ideas, technology. The white men’s dreams were what were wanted to be passed to the savages, but it was not always able to happen (pg. 67). A symbol in the movie and not in the novel was the tiger. The tiger was hidden, and unknown. It represented darkness and anything that can hid and lurk around to scare people. It was people’s fears. Another symbol in the movie was the cow. As the cow was being slaughtered, Willard was killing Kurtz. The cow represents the point where people kill and death.
Both the “Apocalypse Now” and Heart of Darkness represented the same themes. One theme was that every man has a breaking point. In the novel, Kurtz showed this while he was in the jungle with the savages for a long time and he started to turn like them. He saw what he really was and that destroyed him. Kurtz also showed this in the movie. It was said that he was insane, therefore he had reached his breaking point. This was also shown because Kurtz’ last words were “The horror! The horror!” (pg. 147). This showed how Kurtz was insane because it displayed how a person acts on their deathbed when they are not in certain conditions. The theme that there is conflict in every human heart was also displayed in the novel and the film. This was portrayed through Kurtz in the film. It was stated that “good doesn’t always triumph.” Kurtz had a conflict in his heart as to whether or not he should do the right thing and according to the American Generals, bad triumphed and Kurtz had turned evil. This was also displayed through Kurtz in the novel because Kurtz was in charge of the savages. He showed that bad triumphed because he ended up killing people and he displayed the heads (pg. 132).
The main characters from the novel The Stranger, by Albert Camus, can also be intertwined with Willard and Marlow because of similarities and differences. In both the novel and the book, it seems as if Marlow wants to get his journey over with. Meursault would portray this because he didn’t want to do anything that did not fully concern him, as he showed with his mother’s funeral (s: pg. 2). Meursault would have acted differently then the Marlow in the novel because Marlow went to Kurtz’ wife and spoke with her (pg. 153). Meursault would not have done this because he does have that much concern and he is not that sympathetic.
In the situation that Willard and Marlow were put in, Meursault would have acted differently, but yet the same. Willard did not show as much emotion or attachment in the movie as Marlow did in the book. Willard wanted to go and find Kurtz right away with no stops. When they were at the boat with the Vietnamese people and Willard killed the wounded woman, I believe that Meursault would have acted the same way. He would have wanted to get the mission over as soon as he could and any stops would make him irritated and he’d do whatever he would have to do to make things go along. When the helmsman/Chief was killed, Marlow cared and showed affection. He wanted to bury him. Willard seemed as if he wanted nothing to do with him and the surfer on the ship was the one that buried him. Meursault would not have cared that the man died, especially since he showed no emotion when his own mother died (s: pg. 2). I believe that Meursault would have listened to Kurtz as did Willard and Marlow. Meursault wouldn’t really care about what was being said, but he would have listened some. As Kurtz’ words ended up haunting Willard and Marlow, I believe that that would not happen to Meursault. Meursault is an existentialist who only showed that he cared about himself. He wouldn’t let someone else’s words affect him.
The novel Heart of Darkness ,by Joseph Conrad, and the movie “Apocalypse Now” are similar in most of the characterization, themes and symbols, but it differs in plot. Although the authors display the same message throughout both, there are differences that can be pointed out. The main characters from the novel and the book can be compared with Meursault from The Stranger. It can be believed that Meursault would have acted the same as these characters in some situations but differently in others. These two books and the film are inter-linked by the main characters by their similarities and their differences.