Sorcerer (1977)
 |
Review #1,069 |
Director: William Friedkin
Cast: Roy Scheider, Bruno Cremer, Francisco Rabal, Amidou
Plot: Four unfortunate men from different parts of the globe agree to risk their lives transporting gallons of nitroglycerin across dangerous South American jungle.
Genre: Adventure / Drama / Thriller
Awards: Nom. for 1 Oscar - Best Sound
Runtime: 121min
Rating: PG13 for intense sequences.
IN RETROSPECT (Spoilers: NO)
“When the money's up, I'm just as
good as any of you.”
Crushed
by big-budgeted sci-fi movies in Lucas' Star Wars and Spielberg's Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Sorcerer finds
no solace and space in the energized, changing Hollywood market of 1977. Recently restored from its varying butchered
editions, William Friedkin's haunting piece is deserving of a
re-appreciation. It ought to be
re-appreciated not because it is an outstanding movie (it isn't), but rather as
a passionate, personal creation, borne through untold amounts of sweat and
blood.
Sorcerer's
troubled production, ballooning budget and unwell cast and crew is nothing like
the physical hell of Coppola's Apocalypse Now (1979) that was released two years later, but remains the kind of film
that could only possibly be done by a filmmaker singularly fixated on achieving
an obsession of ambition, no matter what it takes.
As
I watched Sorcerer, I was reminded of
Herzog's miraculous feat that was Fitzcarraldo
(1982), about a man who tries to haul an enormous river boat across a small
mountain. There were no special effects,
and everything was done for real and to scale.
Friedkin shows ample shades of a fearless Herzog in Sorcerer, an adaptation of Georges Arnaud’s
novel that was previously made by Clouzot called The Wages of Fear (1953).
Friedkin
has repeatedly stressed that Sorcerer
is a re-interpretation of the book, rather than a remake of the original French
masterpiece. Not that it matters,
because it is only natural to compare both movies. There's no doubt that Clouzot's film is far
more superior in areas of storytelling, character development and suspense, but
Sorcerer despite its flaws contains
some of the most relentless and intense scenes in American cinema.
It
is at its most nail-biting during the two famous bridge-crossing sequences,
where the trucks have to cross a river via a swaying wooden bridge in
torrential rain. Through the use of
vivid sounds and a stupendous commitment to realism, Friedkin depicts an almost
otherworldly scenario right deep in the heart of a hostile South American
jungle.
The
premise is simple: four men volunteer as truck drivers to transport six
motion-sensitive nitro-explosives across 218 miles of inhospitable terrain so
that those in need could blow up a fiery, out-of-control oil well. In return, they get paid highly, or as aptly
titled the book was, the wages of fear.
Yet
structurally, the film unnecessarily begins with a few of these characters
separately in Paris, New Jersey and Israel.
It is a lethargic start, and doesn't quite make us empathize with the
characters any more than if they first appeared where the actual story
begins. While the pacing builds up more
consistently when the trucks start moving, one can’t help but feel that Sorcerer could have benefitted without
the first half-hour or so.
I
suggest you see The Wages of Fear first
if you haven’t, then if you like, go see Sorcerer.
Verdict: Pales in comparison to Clouzot’s
masterpiece, yet containing some of the most relentless and intense scenes in
American cinema.
GRADE: B-
TRAILER:
OST:
Comments