No. Just no.
1 Like
3 Likes
On a side note - it’s incredible that a celebrity can be treated for cancer for 6 years and it doesn’t leak out.
All the doctors and nurses and lab techs and receptionists… Other patients around him with cell phones… Assistants and agents and friends or family members who might want to make a buck…
6 Likes
4 Likes
5 Likes
I had an in memoriam screening last night of SORCERER for Friedkin, which he considered his best film, and I think he is right.
I also think it is a film that one must know well before it reveals its riches. Though he was adept at adapting plays, e.g., THE BOYS IN THE BAND; THE BIRTHDAY PARTY; BUG, Friedkin is strongest in his documentary mode.
SORCERER meets the minimum needed to claim that it has a plot, and while more than types, his characters are not psychological portraits. His addition of backstories for the four drivers, which on a first viewing seemed padding to me (SORCERER’s model THE WAGES OF FEAR starts out in South America), work well once a viewer knows how things will play out. SORCERER’s drivers are more than down-on-their-luck blokes as they are in TWOF. They are criminals fleeing from prior acts, and the moments when their pasts lives are evoked on the journey to the well, sometimes fleetingly/indirectly, are among the most powerful. Also, the score by Tangerine Dream has aged particularly well. Lastly, an all-practical-effects film.
Friedkin was first out of the gate with his 1970’s auteur-goes-to-the-jungle-to-make-a-movie epic, and had its producing studios not abandoned it, and STAR WARS not opened a month before it, it might not have taken 40 years for SORCERER to earn its just acclaim.
5 Likes
I saw SORCERER in the theater on its initial 1977 release at the age of 15. It was disturbing in a way that I couldn’t put into words at the time. Over the years and many subsequent viewings I have peeled its layers and would have to agree that it is Friedkin’s masterpiece. It truly is a shame that it never found its audience during its theatrical release. It has such a constant forward drive while sustaining its genuinely surreal nightmarish qualities, all contained within a cinéma vérité documentarian-style.
5 Likes
I’d never heard of this film but, after reading your thoughts, found it on Apple for 6 quid and gave it a go. Great film that I thoroughly enjoyed, especially the bridge crossing which really was a nerve shredder. Thanks for pointing me in its direction!
3 Likes
Exactly! And made all the more so because of it all being done with in-camera practical effects and stunt work versus CGI.
3 Likes
Well put. That is how I felt with this viewing. The maligned opening vignettes make perfect sense now. Without them, the film would be devoid of pathos, and actually be the nihilist document it is often mistaken for. Knowing the backstories allows for
Summary
-
the poignancy of Manzon telling Kassem about the watch from his wife, and them both being killed because of a tire blowout seconds later–immediately after a moment when the mask of “driver” was allowed to slip.
-
the final hallucinations of Scanlon as he carries one case of nitroglycerin across what feels like a finish line.
On this viewing I also realized that the four drivers are not anti-heroes–a common trope in 1970’s cinema, nor is their story one of redemption from the Scorsese/Shrader school of salvific cinema. The film has a unique take on the world.
that makes use of a Walon Green script (there are echoes of THE WILD BUNCH, sans Peckinpah nostalgia/sentiment), and John Box production design–certainly a first in Hollywood cinema, and never repeated as far as I can tell. The overused term, sui generis, truly applies to SORCERER.
4 Likes
I wonder which films considered failures right now will emerge as masterpieces 20 years from now.
I don’t know if I’d use the word masterpiece but “The Fablemans”($45mil worldwide) and “Nightmare Alley” ($39mil worldwide) were the first 2 that came to mind…
3 Likes
The reviews, however, were quite positive for both.
Reviews for „Sorcerer“, as I recall, were lukewarm at best or even condescending.
Ah - when you said “failures” I read that to mean “box office”.
I will have to re-think…
2 Likes
I think, Blonde and Amsterdam will be reappraised over the years and be considered masterpieces.
Spectre too
2 Likes
Daring choices.
1 Like
Indeed.
How about Warren Beatty‘s „Rules don’t apply“?
2 Likes
I’m still waiting for Bullworths reappraisal
2 Likes
https://www.cbr.com/johnny-hardwick-king-of-the-hill-star-dead/
That’s a shame, Dale Gribble is one of my favorite cartoon characters.
I think this should get its own thread: Underrated movies which should get reevaluated.
2 Likes