Rating: 
Summary: Unusual,tense, and rexciting, stylish in the Miami Vice noir
Review: Leonard Maltin's review is off base regarding this movie. A must see. Before the Usual Suspects, this movie set the tone for the Anti-hero, heroes.Roy Scheider gives a great performance and the supporting cast fill in the shadows of what is a taught, action thriller about four fugitives given a lasst chance at redemption. Explosive!
Rating: 
Summary: Extraordinary Adventure Film
Review: William Friedkin's remake of "Wages of Fear," a story about four anonymous fugitives who transport dangerously unstable explosives across the treacherous roads of a third-world south American country to pay for their escape to a better life. "Sorcerer" is a very good film (though the original version is now a Criterion edition) and deserves more recognition than it received when originally released in 1977. Friedkin's previous movie was the well-known "The Exorcist," and the title "Sorcerer" may have misled audiences' expectations of what this film was about; de-railing Friedkin's success for a quality remake of a classic. Nonetheless, the story is gritty as four criminals come together in an ad hoc team to accomplish a near-suicidal job, transporting ancient TNT, dripping nitro-glycerin, across impossible roads and jungle terrain. The study of the four men and their ability to overcome stacked odds will keep you on the edge of your seat and the musical score by Tangerine Dream adds an eerie atmosphere to the setting. While "Wages of Fear" broke ground on this type of genre, "Sorcerer" is equally as good and I think it has a better ending. I own both on DVD and enjoy them despite the same storyline.
Rating:
Summary: THERE IS NO WIDESCREEN DEBATE ON THIS FILM.
Review: THIS IS NOT THE INTENDED VERSION!!The Spotlite review by ZENCIRCUS is WRONG!! Yes, William Friedkin was a television director. And yes, he has been quoted as saying he hates widescreen formatting. But this version HAS BEEN MODIFIED to fit a standard TV screen at 1.33:1. When you play this DVD version; IT STATES THIS at the beginning of the film. This underrated masterpiece was SHOT in a ratio aspect of 1.66:1. What that means for those of you who don't understand: if your screen was 1 foot high it would be 1.66 feet wide. This version is only 1.33 feet wide as it is 1 foot high. So, this version is NOT as wide as it was originally shot. Some of the image on the sides HAS been lost. Although, when you look at the ratio, not much is being lost. But to a real film purist, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE. YOUR WRONG ZENCIRCUS!! Another version of this classic DOES EXIST. Get your facts straight. And don't hold strong opinions about things you don't understand. Anyone who really loves film, should go to GOOGLE, type in "UNDERSTANDING ASPECT RATIOS," and learn about it. I did. Apparently ZENCIRCUS didn't do his homework. Unless William Friedkin chimes in here to correct me, his review is WRONG and should be removed from the Spotlite.
Rating:
Summary: A masterpiece, pure and simple
Review: Clouzot's "Wages of Fear" is a fine piece of French existentialism - well worth seeing. But Friedkin's "Sorcerer" is a much greater film in every respect. The "backstory" segments, where we get to see how each of the men ends up in his desperate situation, are absolutely astonishing - the grittiest and most convincing examples of "documentary" realism in fictional film-making that I've ever seen. No joke: these scenes make Sidney Lumet seem like Baz Luhrman. The truck journey is simply punishing - probably the most intense cinematic suspense ever filmed. And the ending is unforgettable - a shattering experience. I'm not sure why this film and Friedkin's other overlooked gem, "To Live and Die in L.A.", have yet to receive the acclaim they deserve. (That Friedkin is, by his own admission, a prize jerk may have something to do with it.) But you owe it to yourself to see this movie. It's one of the great ones.
Rating:
Summary: Oh, It's the Name of the Truck
Review: The first time I saw "Sorcerer" I made an unfavorable comparison of it to the original film version, "The Wages of Fear". On further viewing I now find this comparison unfair because "Sorcerer" stands up as a work unto itself. Blotting out all recall of "The Wages of Fear" I found myself caught up in this edge-of-your-seat tale of desperate men transporting nitro in squalid Latin America to put out a refinery fire. Director William Friedkin crisply paces his story for maximum impact. The editing and cinematography also enhance the story. Roy Scheider and the international actors here acquit themselves well. What was most striking to me was the production design of John Box. Awards are not given out for designing squalor. The jungle locales with all their pitfalls is also a major character here. "Sorcerer" is definitely a film to be discovered or in some cases rediscovered.
Rating:
Summary: THERE IS NO WIDESCREEN DEBATE ON THIS FILM
Review: THIS IS NOT THE INTENDED VERSION!!The Spotlight review by ZENCIRCUS is WRONG!! Yes, William Friedkin was a television director. And yes, he has been quoted as saying he hates widescreen formatting. But this version HAS BEEN MODIFIED to fit a standard TV screen at 1.33:1. When you play this DVD version; IT STATES THIS at the beginning of the film. This underrated masterpiece was SHOT in a ratio aspect of 1.66:1. What that means for those of you who don't understand: if your screen was 1 foot high it would be 1.66 feet wide. This version is only 1.33 feet wide as it is 1 foot high. So, this version is NOT as wide as it was originally shot. Some of the image on the sides HAS been lost. Although, when you look at the ratio, not much is being lost. But to a real film purist, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE.
YOUR WRONG ZENCIRCUS!! Another version of this classic DOES EXIST. Get your facts straight. And don't hold strong opinions about things you don't understand. Anyone who really loves film, should go to GOOGLE, type in "UNDERSTANDING ASPECT RATIOS," and learn about it. I did. Apparently ZENCIRCUS didn't do his homework. Unless William Friedkin chimes in here to correct me, his review is WRONG and should be removed from the Spotlight.
Rating:
Summary: Don't Overlook This One
Review: Everything that has been previously written about SORCERER touches on all the points I myself would make, save one: I was fortunate enough to see this in 1977 when it was first released in theatres. I was interested in Friedkin's work, and anxious to see what this new movie was. It was a Saturday evening show, but the theatre was populated by myself, a friend, and maybe a dozen other people, several of whom walked out. They should have stayed--they missed a truly great film! We were riveted to our seats for the full two hours, gripping the seat arms and each other, praying that at least one man would make it out of this Hell alive. And a few months later, when our local revival house played a double bill of SORCERER and THE WAGES OF FEAR, you bet we were there to compare and contrast and enjoy! Two very fine films which deserve more wide attention. Most people didn't know what kind of a movie SORCERER was: the poster showed a still from the unbelievably treacherous river crossing over that now-iconic rope and wood bridge, with the words "A William Friedkin Film" and "SORCERER" prominent. If they hadn't seen a trailer beforehand, many thought they were going to see a fantasy film. The film ran only a few weeks, and did poorly at the boxoffice. (I've always felt that every film released during the summer 0f 1977 -- except two -- suffered greatly because of the monstrous success of STAR WARS; that film eclipsed everything else except SMOKEY AND THE BANDIT and the latest James Bond film, THE SPY WHO LOVED ME. Go figure.) Universal hasn't booked it a lot on cable over the years, so it has remained a bit of an enigma, except to the privileged few who have been able to see it. I can't recommend this film any higher. Please see it: as long as you have an open mind and do not fall victim to preconceptions, it will enthrall you. And see the original Clouzot film as well: they each have their great strengths.
One bone of contention: the score by Tangerine Dream is perfect! An orchestral score was not neccessary. Friedkin has made it known that after discovering the Dream when finishing off THE EXORCIST, he wanted to have them score an entire feature for him. This is a genuine marriage of film and score, each complimenting and enhancing the other.
One last thing: While true that SORCERER wasn't a widescreen (2:35 to 1) release, I believe that it was 1:85 to 1, so maybe Universal will see fit to repackage the DVD with the original artwork in this ratio. It would be cool.
|
