Sorcerer (1977); Dir. William Friedkin

14613-1.jpg

The film was pretty much dead on arrival when it opened in 1977. Friedkin had been riding a high wave with The French Connection and The Exorcist – the American auteur thing was spiralling out of control (but damn, it created some damn fine films in that decade) – and Friedkin was one of the biggest examples of the new trend. You see any picture of him in the 70s and he’s wearing Ray Banz and a long silk scarf like he’s some French aesthete strolling through Los Angeles. With Jeanne Moreau, his wife, on his arm.

Sorcerer was filmed on location – insanely. For example: less than 5 minutes of it takes place in Jerusalem – so dammit, they went to Israel. Unbelievable costs escalated. They filmed on location in the jungles of the Dominican Republic – as well as in the streets of New Jersey. There were 2 or 3 scenes that took place in Paris, so of course they all went to France. It was out of control. Also, to make matters worse for the money-men in Hollywood – there was only one “name” in it – Roy Scheider (who was at the top of his game in the 70s). The rest of the actors were foreigners – much of the film is in subtitles. What?? Every step of the way was a fight for Friedkin – who had complete creative control and went nuts with his power. Friedkin had won the Best Director Oscar for French Connection, surprising many – so he basically did what he wanted to do. Hang the budget. Hang the money guys. What do THEY know. The director was king.

Little did Friedkin know that yes, the director WAS king, but a very new kind of director was about to be born. At the very same time his crew was hurtling around the globe filming 2 minute scenes in one country, 3 minute scenes in another … a little geeky dude nobody really thought much of – at least not in comparison to the bigwigs of the day (Peter Fonda, Coppola, Scorsese) – was making a movie up in the Bay Area about robots and some kind of intergalactic war or some such shit. Who knows. Who cares. Robots? Whatever.

Sorcerer was finally completed. Trailers were put together. The money-dudes and the powers-that-be still thought, when they looked at The Sorcerer – what the hell is this. Nobody is gonna want to see this. It rains for 90% of the picture. We have subtitles. No stars except for Scheider. It’s bleak. It ends on a horribly inevitable note.

The little geek from the Bay Area had completed his movie as well, and it was decided to run the initial trailer for The Sorcerer during the first screenings. History was about to change.

In Peter Biskind’s Easy Riders, Raging Bulls: How the Sex-Drugs-and-Rock ‘N’ Roll Generation Saved Hollywood (marvelous book) – Biskind describes what happened during the first screenings of the stupid sci-fi robot movie:

The Sorcerer trailer Bud Smith cut played in front of Star Wars at the Chinese Theatre. Says Smith, “When our trailer faded to black, the curtains closed and opened again, and they kept opening and opening, and you started feeling this huge thing coming over your shoulder overwhelming you, and heard this noise, and you went right off into space. It made our film look like this little, amateurish piece of shit. I told Billy [Friedkin], ‘We’re fucking being blown off the screen. You’ve got to see this.'” …

Friedkin went with his new wife, French actress Jeanne Moreau. Afterward, he fell into conversation with the manager of the theatre. Nodding his head toward the river of humanity cascading through the theater’s doors, the man said, “This film’s doing amazing business.”

“Yeah, and my film’s going in in a week,” replied Billy nervously.

“Well, if it doesn’t work, this one’ll go back in again.”

“Jesus!” Friedkin looked like he had been punched in the stomach. He turned to Moreau, said, “I dunno, little sweet robots and stuff, maybe we’re on the wrong horse.” A week later, Sorcerer did follow Star Wars into the Chinese. Dark and relentless, especially compared to Lucas’s upbeat space opera, it played to an empty house, and was unceremoniously pulled to make room for the return of C3P0 et al.

“Maybe we’re on the wrong horse …”

They were. Sorcerer was an enormous bomb. It was barely seen at all. Star Wars mania swept away everything in its path. The monetary losses were astronomical for Sorcerer. It was over. It would take years for Friedkin to recover.

The thing about Sorcerer is: you must see it outside of that context. Or, it’s interesting to know the context in which it opened – like: TOTALLY wrong time for a movie like that to open. 1972? It might have been a massive hit. But 1977? Not a chance. The pendulum was shifting.

But I happen to think – and I know I’m not alone – that Sorcerer is not only Billy Friedkin’s masterpiece, but it’s a masterpiece in general. Friedkin has a gift ( a GIFT, I tell you) of creating action sequences that feel so real they are almost disorienting. Action sequences just aren’t done like that now. It’s rare, anyway – there are exceptions. I am thinking of the famous car-chasing-train sequence in The French Connection (clip here). And even more astonishing to me – the car chase on the freeway – going the OPPOSITE direction of oncoming traffic – in To Live and Die in LA (you can see snippets of it in the teaser/trailer here) – that’s gotta be one of the greatest action sequences I have ever seen. I find myself whirling into a tailspin when I watch it – thoughts coming fast and furious, making no sense …. “how on earth did they do this … oh fucking SHIT look out … is this really happening? how did they do it? AHHH, look out …” It’s exhilirating. You realize – when you see sequences like that – how much we miss when things are too computerized. I am not anti-technology – but to see that sequence in To Live and Die in LA puts every CGI experience I have had to shame. It’s fucking AWESOME, is what it is.

Friedkin’s sense of reality – however it was he created it – doesn’t just apply to action sequences – although he really can’t be topped in that regard. In general, when things happen in Friedkin’s movies, it looks like they are really happening. For example, there’s a scene in Sorcerer where the workers at the oil field in the nameless Latin American country start to riot – because of the explosion that had happened – and they start to storm one of the military trucks in the area. It is a terrifying scene – there aren’t a lot of cuts – so you really feel like what you are looking at is actually happening. It’s like the big crowd scenes outside the bank in Dog Day Afternoon (clip here). To me, those people don’t feel like extras. They feel like a fucking CROWD. A crowd that could, at any moment, morph into something dangerous and violent. And it’s done in lots of long shots, and helicopter shots … it’s not created in the editing room (or not entirely) – it feels like we are looking at an EVENT.

Sorcerer – even with its implausible moments – always feels like an EVENT. It’s gripping. The acting is uniformly awesome. The action sequences are beyond reproach – so much so that a couple of them are nearly unwatchable. I get too nervous. Roy Scheider is amazing.

It’s a masterpiece. It just came out in the wrong year.

It used to be very hard to find – but now with Netflix, you can get it easily. I can’t recommend it highly enough if you haven’t seen it.

The entire plot circles around 4 guys – on the run from crimes in other countries – who end up in this rainy jungly Latin American country – and they take a job where they have to transport 6 boxes of nitroglycerine through terrible terrain – seriously, if you hit a bump in the road (and there are barely any roads at all in the fictional country) – the whole thing will blow up. So the two trucks set out – to reach their destination … and the journey of the nitro across the country – and all the obstacles and fear and problem-solving and desperation – make up the whole film.

I was watching it last week, and at one point I got up to get a drink or something – and I found myself tiptoeing into my kitchen. I did it without thinking – and tiptoed around getting my glass out of the cupboard and opening the fridge – and it suddenly occurred to me, ‘Why the hell am I tiptoeing?”

And then I realized why: I didn’t want the nitro to blow up.

You know, the nitro that doesn’t really exist because it’s only in a movie. Whatever – I TIPTOED, DAMMIT.

Below – you’ll see not only the most stunning sequence in the film – but one of the most stunning action sequences in any film. EVER. It’s up there with the crowd dragging the boat over the mountain in Fitzcarraldo – where you know you are watching something totally extraordinary, a once in a lifetime event (trailer here). In the scene from Sorcerer below, there are a couple of long shots where it convinces you: they are really doing this.

Basically it’s a monsoon. They’re in a truck. They come to a bridge. They need to cross it. Nitro is in the back of the truck. And just watch what happens – and watch how it is done. No fakery here. We’re looking at something that is really happening. However they ‘did it’, however they made it occur – I don’t know … but the illusion is complete. Unbelievable.


This entry was posted in Directors and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Sorcerer (1977); Dir. William Friedkin

  1. Dan says:

    I agree, it’s a damn fine movie. I went through a mini-Scheider phase this past fall and saw Sorcerer via Netflix. Also criminally overlooked – The Seven Ups – has an awesome car chase (of course!)

  2. Rob says:

    I saw Sorcerer when it first came to cable. It was on late at night and it was just me and my dad in the living room in the dark. It was mesmerizing. More people should have seen it. That bridge scene is unforgettable.

  3. Ken says:

    The summer Sorceror came out, I went to West Germany and environs with one of those high school tour groups. I never did get to see it (something I will remedy…eventually), but I remember thinking, “Cool, Roy Scheider, and was Tangerine Dream did the soundtrack. Neato.” I picked up a two-LP set of Tangerine Dream in Munich.

    …Also, the local paper serialized what I guess must have been the novelization of the silly little robot movie (the shiny guy always worries, you know). My parents diligently clipped it for me while I was gone. :-)

  4. Jay says:

    I’ve never even heard of this movie before. Your description definitey makes me want to see it.

    As far as action scenes, have you ever seen the movie Ronin, the car chase in particular? I love that movie. Great live action stuff.

    I don’t know how stunt drivers do those car chase scenes. Obviously they are extremely professional but they must be absolutely fearless as well. Or at least able to control fear to a degree that ordinary people can’t even conceive.

  5. Westside B says:

    Wow, what a flashback to the 1970’s. I remember seeing it before I caught Star Wars and I can definitely understand that if I had seen it afterwards I would’ve liked it less. I can recall the tension, the fantastic camerawork and the strange score by Tangerine Dream.

    I think time has diminished this film. It still is effective, but it IS also bloated and chaotic. Another of those cocaine driven projects of the period that sounded fantastic and was visually rich, but was short on coherence and a clear-headed vision.

    It is still worth catching, particularly since it is a “forgotten” film. I also think it loses impact compared with the 1953 French film, Wages Of Fear, on which it was based. Have you ever written about the Clouzot film? I’d be curious about your reactions to that one.

  6. I chose to show a clip of the bridge scene for my Scheider memorial on my Synchfish blog because it’s such a great performance by him. I also mentioned that I thought it was better than Wages of Fear if only because the ending works on a much higher level, an inevitable level as you say, than Wages which ends slightly ridiculously.

    And that town! That town they’re in has the feel of destitute desperation to it like no other I’ve seen in a movie.

    Friedkin was famously miffed when the film was re-cut in France to start with the trucks and show the beginning of the film in flashback later. I actually saw this version about twenty years ago and while I think Friedkin’s is superior, I must say the European edited version had a thrilling pace to it. It shows what editing can do. Essentially two different films were made. The Friedkin cut is a methodical study of desperation and the French cut is a suspense thriller.

    But the original Friedkin cut is a masterful piece of filmmaking and one of my favorites of the seventies.

  7. red says:

    Jonathan – wow, cool story about the two different films!!

    I love the end of the clip with the bridge – once they’re over – and Scheider is just going off on the “20,000 … double shares” thing … To me, it pretty much encapsulates how freakin’ awesome he really is.

    It doesn’t look like acting to me.

  8. Brendan says:

    How DARE you restore the comments to your blog??? How DARE YOU????

    Hee hee! Now I have to see both Sorcerer and Fitzcarraldo…always meant to see the latter but will now have to catch the former.

  9. red says:

    I’m still keeping most closed!! But posts about movies and books – where it’s required (by me, anyway) that people stay on topic – that’s okay to have comments. I find them calming. It’s been good for me to have a break. (as much as i love all the comments.)

    I saw Fitzcarraldo on a rainy night in Chicago – it was playing at the Music Box on a huge screen. Maybe 40 people were there. I had never seen it – I had seen Aguirre Wrath of God – but not Fitzcarraldo … and I was just blown away. The whole movie is just … it boggles the mind. You’re looking at something that you can barely believe and it’s all real!!

    Love Klaus Kinski, too. He’s such a maniac.

  10. Brendan says:

    I need to do a Warner Herzog retrospective…those shots are insane.

    Did you read the letter that Ebert wrote to Herzog as a review of his latest film? I bet you did, but it is really interesting.

    Anyhoo, rock on…

  11. red says:

    Bren – I did read that letter. Wonderful. Ebert is the reason I saw Aguirre Wrath of God – his review of it was so powerful I thought: Okay. Gotta see that one!

    And then of course there’s the Timothy Treadwell film – I will always love the memory of you, me and Alex watching that.

Comments are closed.