Thursday, 1 September 2016

Why I'm Okay With William Friedkin's "Sorcerer"

Directed by: William Friedkin
Written by: Walon Green
Starring: Roy Scheider
               Bruno Cremer
                 Francisco Rabal
    Amidou
Release date: June 24 1977

Deep in the jungles of Chile, in the outskirts of Porvenir. There lived three fugitives, Jackie "Juan Dominguez" Scanlon (Scheider), Victor "Serrano" Manzon (Cremer) and Kaseem "Martinez" (Amidou). They all have one thing in common, they longed to get back to their home town but their meager salaries and notoriety prevented them to do so. That is until an oil well over 200 miles (320 km) away explodes, and the only way to extinguish the fire is to use dynamite. Since the only available dynamite has been improperly stored in a remote depot, the nitroglycerin contained inside has become highly unstable; the faintest vibration could cause an explosion. With all other means ruled out, the only way to transport it is to use trucks. The company seeks four drivers to man two of the vehicles. Kassem, Victor, Jackie and 'Marquez' are offered the job, but they have to assemble the trucks using scrap parts. Shortly before their departure, Nilo kills and replaces 'Marquez', which angers Kassem. The four drivers embark upon a perilous journey of over 200 miles, facing many hazards and internal conflicts. Despite their differences, they are forced to co-operate. 

The film, when initially released, received mixed to negative reviews. Leslie Halliwell went as far as saying the following : "Why anyone would want to spend 20 million dollars on a remake of The Wages of Fear, do it badly, and give it a misleading title is anybody's guess. The result is dire." Its box office income is meager, grossing only $9 million over an estimated budget of  $22 million.

The film is also responsible for putting the Friedkin in the director's jail before making his comeback with 1985's "To Live and Die In L.A." Even after it enjoyed a critical re-evaluation, it is still not as popular as the director's other efforts such as "The Exorcist" and "The French Connection".

My opinion regarding the film? I enjoy it. Sure, it's no masterpiece by any means but to be completely honest, the moment the movie's title appeared on the screen, I was hooked. One of the advantages that the film had is that it took its time to develop the characters. I clearly understand their reasoning behind their exile and their reasoning to return to their lives. I also find the pacing brisk, and fast. Which is both a blessing to the film. I love the fact that they took a much faster pace than the Henri-Georges Clouzot's film. The action scenes are especially astounding and benefits from the tightness of the editing but at the same time  I felt like they are rushed, cutting short on a few moments and the film somewhat lost its gravitas. The journey alone should have taken a large chunk of the film's runtime, developing character conflict and tension as it is supposed to be a descent to Hell.

But what the film excels best is setting up the tone. The film felt dirty and real and grounded. One of my biggest gripe with the Clouzot version is that it felt romantic at times. It felt a little too glamourous. That is a bit of a smudge on a story that is meant to be relentless and gritty. Friedkin's version nailed the tone. It is just the right amount of cinematic and documentary-like tone.

In conclusion, despite its flaws. I enjoyed the movie as a whole. This is easily one of Friedkin's weakest effort but I can feel the love in every single frame. It is not an easy film to watch, but it is still enjoyable and I will certainly watch this film again.

No comments:

Post a Comment