MovieChat Forums > Sorcerer (1977) Discussion > Anybody agree with Friedkin?

Anybody agree with Friedkin?

posted 16 years ago by prohibited-name-2541
51 replies | jump to latest

In the trivia it says that he thinks that Roy Scheider was wrong for his role as Scanlon, saying; "Roy Scheider in the lead was the worst casting decision he has ever made. Although he felt Scheider is a good actor who did a great job he is only interesting in a film as a "second or third banana, he's not a star." Though i love and respect Friedkins ability and cannon of work, i think that this is a real point of contention.

I think that Scheider is amazing in this role as well as several others throughout his career. Thoughts?

[–] a_l_i_e_n 10 years ago

I can see how maybe Sean Connery or Clint Eastwood could bring something more in the way of movie star presence to that role, but I doubt the film's lack of success was due to Scheider's casting. It just wasn't what the studio ad campaign made you think you were getting. It is a good movie, but it's pretty grim, too.

[–] Edward_de_Vere 10 years ago

Although he felt Scheider is a good actor who did a great job he is only interesting in a film as a "second or third banana, he's not a star." Though i love and respect Friedkins ability and cannon of work, i think that this is a real point of contention

I remember reading that Friedkin got along fine with Scheider during the filming of The French Connection, but that he felt that Scheider became something of a prima dona after Jaws made him famous.

Most likely, Friedkin was just venting his anger and frustrating with Scheider as a person when he called him "second banana" material, since it's clear from his many lead roles that Roy Scheider can more than carry a film on his own.

[–] Slattermill 10 years ago

Nah, Scheider was great as usual.

Considering the ending and Friedkin's comments, I get the impression that he had grandiose ideas about turning this into a franchise to some degree. He should have been happy he ended up merely with such an epic film.

******

I don't think we're in CONUS anymore, Toto...

[–] Edward_de_Vere 10 years ago

I get the impression that he had grandiose ideas about turning this into a franchise to some degree.

I'm glad that didn't happen, first because the open-ended closing scene makes the film more interesting than a resolution would have, second, because (with rare exceptions) sequels to great films are almost always a disappointment.

With film franchises, what starts as art becomes a business which then becomes a racket.

[–] DonQuichotte 9 years ago

Also somewhere in the trivia it is mentioned, that Friedkin didn't want to make it obvious, which character is the star of the movie. Most of the actors, that are mentioned as preferred cast for the role (especially McQueen at that time), would somehow spoil the outcome.

Roy Scheider fits perfectly and at no point he was acting like being the center of attention.

[–] Mat-37 9 years ago

I have to disagree with Mr Firiedkin here. I think that not only Sheider is a wonderful actor, but also he outdoes himself in this movie.

- A point in every direction is the same as no point at all.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cultfilmfreaksdotcom 8 years ago

I did a writeup on the movie and used the IMDB quote or whatever, trivia about Friedkin knocking Schieder's performance, or rather, more like, his presence lacking whatever it is to make a movie make money, which SORCERER, despite its strong cult following through the years, failed to do, unlike FRENCH CONN and EXORCIST, which were, as we know, not only "hits" but classics, even then...

I do think Steve McQueen would bring something fresh to the role since he always does. He's not as good an actor as Roy but he just has that "something" but... This movie is an ensemble piece. The French guy and the Arab are far more sympathetic characters (the latter through expressions, not his terrorism backstory; the first through the fact he had a loving wife, and didn't kill anyone... not like he was an angel)...

Anyhow, I cannot see this movie starring McQueen because it would then be a "Steve McQueen Movie" and that's that, end of story... Scheider, though, was perfect because he didn't need to compete with the others, who were almost equal to the main player... Everyone stood their own practically equal ground....

Anyhow, I put it all here:

http://www.cultfilmfreaks.com/2016/10/Sorcerer.html

All Movie Reviews www.cultfilmfreaks.com

[–] Jc1305us (25) 6 years ago

Friedkin is wrong. The movie works because of its characters and their desperation, not because of one actor. The movie is as good as any thriller I’ve ever seen, and had stood the test of time!

[–] TheArgentinian (6447) 4 years ago

WF wanted to cast stars and THAT would have been a wrong approach for a film like this. The only reason I cared about the main character was because of Roy.