Sorcerer (1977)

William Friedkin's colossal money-draining box office failure follow-up to the astronomical success of 'The Exorcist' is actually not that bad. The film is a muddied, confusing, macho affair that condenses a three-hour film into two, but fits comfortably alongside other tense, post-Vietnam films of the period, such as 'The Deer Hunter' and 'Apocalypse Now' (both of which are far superior, admittedly) -- all of them dealing with a damaged, fearful American psyche, reeling from feverish foreign defeat.The story is predictable (there are two jeeps, so one of them is getting blown up, and we know it won't be the one with American Roy Scheider at the wheel) and it's hard to like any of the characters, but as visual spectacle, the film feels authentic and powerful, and at times it is eerily beautiful in its tense malignancy. Tangerine Dream provide the synthy, proto-80s action/horror film soundtrack, which is enjoyable.

Critics can get a hard rap, but prime British film critic Mark Kermode has been recently championing this mostly forgotten film for its anniversary. Granted it has the benefit of being by the director of his favourite film (The Exorcist), but still it piqued my interest, and I'm glad it did.What we have is a very harsh film, where the characters and story lack empathy, as we watch the central group of men go through their Heart of Darkness moments. We have an American mob man, a Middle Eastern bomber and a French banking fraudster (no this is not the start of a joke) who are thrown together after their world collapse and they have to escape their looming punishments.Forced by circumstance to win a job that will see them have to cross the Central American jungle in clapped out trucks with highly volatile explosives in the back, they are on a journey to nowhere to win the purse and passports needed to survive.I don't want to spoil anything at all here, as there are some great suspenseful scenes here which will have your heart in your mouth. It's got the full direction and style that those who loved The Exorcist will understand, and again sound is a major part of the movie and the clincher. Wonderful soundtrack and sound effects, and on a big screen it all comes together.I can't think of how they could have got better than our leads in the film, with Roy Schneider being the most recognisable, who finds this job from hell one he has to finish but at what cost? The only question is how was this gem forgotten for so long? Wonderful tough viewing, but really original and something that is a great 70s contemporary snapshot of great filming of the era, a true golden age of cinema movies.Crank up your motors and go traipse through whatever growth you have to get to watch this, recommended viewing.

I was not expecting to love this film as much as I did. The last 'sleeper hit' I hunted down was Even Horizon which was undoubtedly one of the most paper thin horror films I'd ever wasted my time on.Sorcerer was without a doubt the biggest surprises for me in recent memory. The only explanation for this film slipping under the radar for so many years would be a handful of explanations: Star Wars had come out around the same year introducing the corporate franchise cinema to the big screen becoming an almost industry standard, the fact that the film was mistaken to be a remake of the Wages of Fear film and not the novel, which at the time had many loyal fans, and the absolute travesty that was The Exorcist II: The Heretic that had come out the same year, making people feel burnt out on anything Exorcist related; even though the affiliation was absent. The moral integrity of the film is blurry and deliberately so. The location these criminal refugees have taken shelter to is located somewhere in the damp and miserably hot depths of the South American jungle. It shows a glimpse of outsourced labor for big corporations and how vulnerable it affects the area. The second half gives us a background of the characters who have to go on these 50/50 death missions. Thieves, con artists, assassins, and embezzlers; criminals who don't give a damn about anything but making money to get out of dodge and are willing to do anything to achieve it. Without a doubt the best action movie I've ever seen, I hope that the public can get a special BluRay release.

I don't think I'll be able to review William Friedkin's 'Sorcerer' without comparing it to Henri-Georges Clouzot's 'The Wages of Fear' since both are adaptations of Georges Arnaud's novel. Both the films are similar in structure. They are both divided into two respective halves. In the first half we get to know about the characters and in the second half we follow them in their thrilling adventure. However there is a marked difference in the way the two filmmakers make us familiar with the characters. Clouzot's film starts off with all the characters already in exile in the South American country and we get to know about them through their interactions with each other. Friedkin takes a different route. In 'Sorcerer' we get extended individual flashbacks of the major characters to convey the reasons behind their exile in an unknown country which actually works very well. Friedkin also does very well to capture the morbid and monotonous nature of life that the primary group of characters have to lead in Porvenir. Then the second half commences and the differences in directorial styles become even more apparent. Although the theme of desperate men willing to go to any lengths to achieve freedom from their present pointless existence is present in both films, but the style of execution of the set-pieces in the two films differ. There is a surgical precision to Clouzot's set-pieces. He uses meticulous editing to create Hitchcock-esque tension as we watch the characters solve problems and overcome obstacles with deduction, logical planning and presence of mind. Friedkin stays true to his creative roots and quite akin to 'The French Connection' and 'The Exorcist', what we get in the second half of 'Sorcerer' is unflinchingly visceral. Instead of prioritising tension and suspense, Friedkin makes the group's mission a 'Man versus Nature' struggle. The set- pieces are not about tension, but about showing these men getting constantly beaten down by nature's forces. Their only ally is perseverance and mental strength. One can't help but get reminded of Werner Herzog(and especially 'Aguirre: The Wrath of God' due to the jungle setting) because of Friedkin's choice to showcase nature in its most merciless, brutal and unforgiving light. Roy Scheider's character could easily be a protagonist in a Herzog film because of his unflinching persistence in trying to overcome nature at all cost and this persistence leads to hysterical paranoia which is again not uncommon in Herzog's protagonists. 'Sorcerer' retains the darkly humorous irony of 'The Wages of Fear'. I have to say that both the films are equally good in their respective ways and deserve recognition.If there is anything wrong in 'Sorcerer', it's that the transition from one mood/tone to another at times is a bit abrupt and clumsy. But in the overall context, it is a very minor complaint. Highly recommended.