Read on Twitter
I've heard people talking recently about Friedkin's SORCERER, a movie I'd never even heard of until about 2 days ago. So, I'm going to watch it now and then scornfully laugh at people tomorrow who've never heard of it. "What, you've not seen SORCERER? Call yourself a movie fan?"
I've been watching this for about an hour and the plot hasn't actually started yet.
But it's been a fantastic first hour.
But it's been a fantastic first hour.
I loved that. It looked incredible. More locations and explosions than a bloody Bond movie. A long buildup taking about an hour just to basically say "Here's 4 guys who are 'bad' guys" taking about an hour until the actual plot starts up. But it was a great buildup.
And when we get going properly it was intense. A relatively slow truck drive through the jungle, but damn, does everything get thrown at them. Cliffs, torrential rain, bridges in worse condition than Temple Of Doom. And more explosions.
Yeah, I loved it. It's probably supposed to be a 'people who have eachother having to work together to overcome' film, but that never really works because there's not enough time with these guys together for them to get any bad-blood. But that really doesn't matter.
The 1970s was probably the last decade a film like this could be made. No CG, somewhat lax health and safety laws, a 'fuck it, we'll just do it live' attitude to filmmaking. And a director that really knew how to make the most of his cast, crew and locations. Great movie.
As standard, I posted this thread as my Letterboxd review, but at least I can correct the spelling and grammar there :
My ★★★★½ review of Sorcerer on Letterboxd https://boxd.it/18X4T3
My ★★★★½ review of Sorcerer on Letterboxd https://boxd.it/18X4T3
