Skip to main content

The Criterion Channel Presents: Sorcerer (1977)

William Friedkin’s Sorcerer has a subtle but powerful reputation among cinephiles. A relatively little-known movie from the director of The French Connection and The Exorcist that flopped hard at the box office (to be fair, it was overshadowed by the mania that was Star Wars just a month earlier)  and with critics of the time; but those who have seen it in the years since have sung its praises so adamantly and so often that it’s hard for even fairly casual movie-literate fans not to have heard of it by now. The film is particularly noted for its suspense, and for its eye-catching poster depicting a truck weighing down a precarious rope bridge in the middle of a jungle. On a slightly more obscure level it’s known for a chaotic production in the Dominican Republic that could almost rival Apocalypse Now. Sorcerer is mostly a remake of Henri-Georges Clouzot’s The Wages of Fear -itself of course a world cinema classic- and this too was weighed against the movie when it came out. But it perhaps has more in common, both in production and theme, with Werner Herzog’s Aguirre, the Wrath of God (as well as perhaps more curiously, Fitzcarraldo -which would come out several years later).
Needless to say it is the most ambitious movie the late Friedkin ever attempted -with its international cast of characters brought to Colombia, each escaping criminal consequences in their home countries, united in a tense and deadly journey through uncompromising wilderness. The four protagonists are tasked with transporting extremely volatile dynamite to an exploded oil well across hundreds of kilometres of dense jungle terrain. Even the most minor of accidents could cause it to go off and kill any or all of them.
Each has their own backstory. The main American Jackie is played by Roy Scheider as a riff on Humphrey Bogart’s character in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre -a desperate and melancholy mob goon in hiding from a rival gang after a botched hit in New Jersey and an accident that left him the only surviving perpetrator. Bruno Cremer’s Victor is a French businessman on the hook for massive fraud, who escaped to South America after seemingly running out of financial safeguards. Amidou’s Kassem is a Palestinian militant, who like Jackie is in hiding from the IDF after they killed or apprehended all of his colleagues for a bombing in Jerusalem. And Francisco Rabal’s Nilo is just a mysterious Mexican contract killer.
Theirs are additionally a powder-keg of personalities through this endeavour, always threatening to boil over alongside the nitroglycerin. And Friedkin illustrates well each man's casual distrust of the others -the animosity Kassem bears towards Nilo for killing a friend (a likely Nazi in hiding), or Jackie's determined control of the vehicle over Nilo. It exacerbates the stakes of the mission, much as the environment may do the bulk of that. Establishing shots of dense, impenetrable rainforest give way to excruciating obstacles. The big one is of course that rotted rope bridge the trucks have to get across in pouring rain -and one has to admire the practical filmmaking techniques of the 1970s (or just Friedkin's personal insanity) for making such a sequence real, and without stuntmen for the actors. Later, the need to get rid of a tree in their path evokes similar tension -especially in the choice to break out some of the unstable dynamite to blow it up. A lot of things blow up in this movie, in some of the great firestorm explosions I've seen on-screen.
The eerie music that accompanies much of this by Tangerine Dream contributes a lot to the effect as well. The title is a bit nebulous (and ultimately proved a big marketing hurdle), but that score really does relate a preternatural grimness that such a title and its chaotic font evokes. The natural elements are bearing down in provocation on these man-made tools of devastation -something's got to give. And that is what Friedkin most succeeds at getting across through his subtle mastery of tone.
It's a very dim movie, as many of Friedkin's are, this theme on a kind of fateful natural power rising over and eventually beating any human resilience. On at least some level Friedkin hates all four of his protagonists -when death comes for a couple of them it does so in a mocking way, disrupting a single beat of sentiment in rejection of any modicum of sympathy. They are all ethically dubious people and yet they are also all victims of chance, though Jackie especially. And nothing will ever go right for them even as they push through impossible circumstances. This is a cold movie that posits an innately cruel and arbitrarily vengeful world -by his own admission Friedkin's view of the world.
In that sense, Sorcerer may be the overarching personal statement for its auteur director -and whether you see it as brutally earnest or cynically overwrought, it is still conveyed compellingly. 

Criterion Recommendation: Lost Horizon (1937)
Under-discussed I feel as both a Hollywood adventure classic and a Frank Capra movie, Lost Horizon is one of the great truly escapist movies of its era. In that it literally presents a fantasy of escaping the world to a sequestered ageless utopia. The first and best adaptation of the novel by James Hilton, which introduced the paradisical realm of Shangri-La deep in the Himalayan mountains, it follows a group of men recently engaged with a war surviving a plane crash and being rescued by the denizens of the secret valley, wherein of course the main figure, a diplomat played by Ronald Colman, also falls in love with a local teacher played by Jane Wyatt. Capra regulars Thomas Mitchell and H.B. Warner also feature, as well as Sam Jaffe as Shangri-La’s leader. Fitting the mould wonderfully of the classic adventure story that spurs the imagination, it is a very fun movie that Capra puts a lot of energy into -in fact it went over-budget, and much like Sorcerer failed to initially earn back its high cost (it eventually evened out on re-releases). It’s world is delightfully realized though, in mood as well as aesthetics -Capra conveying a real otherworldly and emotional power of place he never got to in any of his other films. An overlooked gem of the classic era, and one that I think Criterion should really check out.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
1 comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
14 comments
Read more

A Stylish and Charmingly Reinvented David Copperfield

The Personal History, Adventures, Experience and Observation of David Copperfield the Younger of Blunderstone Rookery (Which He Never Meant to Publish on Any Account)  is the most important book Charles Dickens ever wrote. It is not the most famous or influential by any means (that would of course be A Christmas Carol ), but it is the book that is the purest expression of the authors’ style, identity, and worldview. It is his most personal work, semi-autobiographical in its story of the chronology from infancy to adulthood of a character who overcomes great loss and hardships to find a fulfilling life as a writer. To read David Copperfield  is to understand Dickens himself. Armando Iannucci knew this when he decided to make a new adaptation of the novel for a twenty-first century audience. He also knew that Dickens adaptations are ubiquitous at this point. Films are a bit rarer, but every few years a new television adaptation rears its head to keep the authors’ unique world an...
Post a Comment
Read more