MovieChat Forums > Sorcerer (1977) Discussion > Finally saw this, had some issues with t...

Finally saw this, had some issues with the plot


I put off watching this for a looong time. I guess I felt like maybe it wouldn't live up to the hype, because on paper it sounds like my cup of tea, but its obscurity -- given its pedigree -- wasn't exactly inspiring.

First off, I really liked it from the start. The first hour, showing why the characters ended up in their shared situation, was great. Friedkin at his best, like in the Iraqi segment of The Exorcist, can really capture the spirit of a place and set a uniquely uneasy atmosphere.

I like Scheider a lot -- just watched Jaws again last week -- and the other actors were also excellent. I dug both the score and cinematography.

So why didn't like Sorcerer *a lot*?

I felt like the writers threw motivation out the window in the second half. Maybe there are good explanations for these questions, but they really undermined the movie for me:

1. These guys all escaped to this little *beep* of a town because they were hiding for their lives. So why are they all suddenly willing to risk death to get out of it? Because it's a tough place to live, and they're being shaken down by corrupt cops? Where do they think they're going to go hide that will be better than this?

2. For some reason this big oil company keeps its nitroglycerine in an neglected, unsupervised, poorly maintained shack in the jungle 218 miles away from its drilling site, even though it's an important tool they may need have on hand in an emergency.

3. This big oil company calls in a helicopter and asks the pilot to transport unstable nitro that would be unsafe to handle, but never thinks to ask the helicopter pilot to bring with him some stable explosives that they can use right away. Was it more cost-effective to pay 40000 pesos (plus supplying two large trucks and apparently a bunch of additional new auto parts) and risk a 218-mile land journey than it would have been to just fly in some new explosives?

4. Not only are these 4 guys in the middle of nowhere great drivers, but apparently they are also skilled auto mechanics, including the effette French banker who pissed away his family fortune. Who would have guessed he would be such a convincing handyman?

5. On the journey, there are a few times when characters make complete 180-degree changes in attitude in a second for no reason. The guy from Jerusalem doesn't want to drive, but the French guy mumbles something, and then he does it without protesting any longer. The Mexican guy starts running away, but Jackie gets him to come back with no effort at persuasion -- even though this guy is clearly crazy and seems content to murder anyone inconvenient to him. These moments felt like the writers wanted to put more conflict in some scenes, but didn't want to think of actual conflicts or then trouble themselves with resolving the conflicts.

6. Not a plot problem, but I did not like Jackie's hallucination scene at all. It was the most poorly done, ineffective and surely the most (only?) dated part of the movie.

7. So apparently they only needed one crate of nitro, which means that both trucks were risking the explosion of two additional crates each. Why not minimize the risk by only each carrying one crate? Is there a logistic reason for this?

8. Through the movie people are carrying the crates with utmost care even though they can withstand almost 2 miles of drunken-like, delirious staggering.

9. What's the deal with dancing with the cleaning lady at the end? That didn't work for me. It felt like something out of a different movie, something cheesier and sentimental. I thought he was going to go over to those extortionist cops and punch one of them or something, but instead it went for a forced (and maybe condescending) "moment."

reply

You raise some interesting points, especially the ones about the characters' confusing motivation and the off-beat ending with the cleaning lady. Sorcerer sort of disappointed me mostly because the plot in the first hour was way too scrambled and disorienting. The second half is somewhat better for having more thrills and suspense but it went on for too long, the hallucination scene didn't really do that much for me, and to top it off, Victor's death was very predictable (once he started talking about his family and life in Paris, you knew he was gonna get it).

The good parts include Tangerine Dream's excellent soundtrack, references to Pazuzu from The Exorcist (I don't understand why they were there but it was a nice little easter egg), and excellent performances from everyone involved. I'll probably get to seeing the 1953 version soon so I can compare them.

Sorcerer gets a 7,5/10 from me.

reply

Both dudes above me are wrong, the hallucination sequence is great, really well done. The ending, with Schneider just KNOWING he is dead no matter what he does next, is incredibly classy and well executed.

I can understand minor quibbles over character motivation. Other than that, the film is a 99% masterpiece. Anyone who comes away from it for the first time not amazed is missing it. It is reprehensible for a person to see that movie and proceed right to a message board and talk *beep* about it.

"Nobody knows anybody, not that well..." - Miller's Crossing

reply

I think the OP is needlessly nitpicking a film that is open-ended and intentionally murky. There are many things in the periphery that are never shown i.e. the size, budget and logistical capabilities of the drilling firm and the bar scene. And I think when it comes to point one, he missed the beautiful irony of the main setting. Here there were these disparate individuals who had escaped from the peril of their crimes. Crimes which obviously would have landed them in prison for the rest of their natural lives. This jungle was chosen as a location by the director because it was like a "prison without walls". So in effect the main characters never "escaped" their punishments after all. A case could be made that this really is a prison film.

As for the fourth point, c'mon, that is really really nitpicking. It's in no way a stretch to imagine that an ex-investment banker is smart enough to rebuild an engine. Again, despite the background info given in the beginning of the movie, there is much we do not know about the characters. Maybe he once had some sort of automotive background experience in his youth and those old trucks after all are hardly complicated automobiles. He was an especially astute educated European man who had to have also had some street smarts to make it out and survive as long as he did in that sh*thole.

reply

There's a difference between what is possible and what is plausible, and writers need to pay close attention to the latter. While it's possible that our fancy French business man is also a top-notch mechanic capable of the specific specialized rigging required in this unique situation, it's not very plausible.

Typically, a writer will solve this type of issue by planting a seed early in the script that gets paid off later, but even then it's a extremely convenient contrivance which stretches at the suspension of disbelief.

reply

why is it necessary for the French banker to be a master mechanic? He could have easily been assisting or following orders of another person in the group.

reply

Most of these did not bug me, but my number one complaint is in agreement with #2. Why not just blow the worthless stuff, and buy some good dynamite!? Why keep it SO far away? Heck for the price of the gas for the helicopter, plus the 40,000 pesos (originally 20,000) why couldn't the boss just buy new dynamite. Weird.

reply

that crossed my mind whole watching the film too

reply

#4: I disagree that Manzon was "effete" in any way. Also, his "skills" in mechanics can be explained by the fact that he came from a blue-collar/working class background...remember in the fancy French restaurant, Manzon's wife tells her galpal that "Victor's father was a fisherman". So in reality, he's going back to his roots in some grotesque way.

[whitecat]
Tuco Benedicto Pacifico Juan Maria Ramirez

reply

I saw it for the first time today and i have to say sorcerer is over the top in the second half of the movie. The end of the movie happens too fast. And i don't believe in roy sheider character, i agree he is considered as a miscast.

Bruno Cremer was one of the finest french actor and in this movie his talent is not shown the way he deserves
the other character played by Amidou is even worst lol

the hallucination scene is a complete joke, ridiculous.

One other thing really, really was a problem for this movie : make up !!, it got me out of the movie......close-ups on the faces made the actors just look fake :(


well, it is a lot for this sorcerer movie and of course i think clouzot wages of fear is way waaaay better, there is not even a fight between the two of them.

reply

I must say that I personally liked the second half better. But you have some valid points, why you hated it, and I want to try to answer to these points!

to 1.
I didn't pay too much attention at the beginning of the movie, but I thought, they wanted a passport, so they could stay in the country - not to flee. As for the little village/town/something: In my opinion they couldn't get a job there and were stuck.

to 2.
The nitro was old and poorly maintained. That's why I thought it was from an older drilling location. It felt abandoned.

to 3.
I never thought, the company was "big" in a global way. Just the local big thing. I didn't know that the helicopter came a long way and thought it was already close by. Even without nitro the flight might have been dangerous though, concerning the weather conditions.
It still remains a question, if you could easily acquire nitro in the country at that time. No mobile phones, no internet and some hints through the movie that the country is in chaos.

to 4.
It didn't look like many locals are actually capable of driving at all. Also you can see that the skills are different between the main characters, but you are right though, that their overall skill is strangely impressive. When they start the journey however, the fear of exploding might have forced them to best their best.

to 5.
I actually didn't notice too much strange behaviour and character turns. The scene with the Mexican you described perfectly displayed the fear in him.

to 6.
A matter of taste. I didn't think it was poorly done, but I admit that it is some sort of an oddity.

to 7.
That one was annoying. However keep in mind, that they couldn't have cleared the way without additional nitro. It was a big let down, that 1 crate was enough in the end.

to 8.
Besides all their mechanic/driving skills they simply don't seem to be experts for explosives :D
They just don't know how much the crates can take. The drunken-like delirious staggering was the first time, somebody handled a crate with less care. It shows how frightfull everybody was before.

to 9.
My take on the ending: I can't find the quote, but Friedkin somewhere said that the name "sorcerer" derives from the evil wizard that represents fate. He also said that "fate" and the things you cannot control (like birth and death) are something he is devoted to. This is somewhat expressed in the last scenes.
It could be over at any time and you don't have control over it. When he drinks the whiskey he is reminded of that. He is so terribly afraid that his life could end in a splitsecond (which definatly is a sideeffect from the constant fear of exploding) and he wants to make the best of the very seconds by dancing with even the ugly cleaning lady. But when he finally calms down, gets distracted and his fear vanishes, the assassins arrive. The fear had kept him alive so far.

reply

Just one thing about point #4 (i think): the French banker is no pussy; it is hinted during the exposition part that he's a tough guy when he tells his right-arm man: "We could both go to prison! You wouldn't survive there, I would, but not you."


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

reply

i thought he was saying to the guy, "Your father would let me go to prison, but not you." Meaning the partner was the heir/blood relative of the business owner, and Serrano was just married in (probably from a poor background).

reply

correct

reply

But you have some valid points, why you hated it, and I want to try to answer to these points!


I never said I hated it. I said I liked it, but had some problems that kept me from liking it more.

reply

First let me say I am glad I do not go to the movies with you. Talk about sucking the life out of what is supposed to be an entertaining experience. I saw this movie in a theater when it first came out and searched diligently for a video tape copy every year until I finally got one in 1990 or 1991. I have the DVD and several digital copies now and watch this movie 2 or 3 times a year. I often watch this movie back to back with Le Salaire de la peur.
Most of your criticisms fall into the category "I do not have any imagination". Movies do not have to literally explain everything. You are supposed to be able to add something of your own, making the film a personal experience.
Questions should come to mind as you watch the movie such as:
Could I ever be so desperate, so afraid, that I could do something like this?
Have I ever felt so alone that suicide was an alternative?
Have I ever been in a place so foreign, so alien, surrounded by people but disconnected from reality?
This film combines so many elements, so perfectly that I feel all those emotions and even physical effects of those emotions every time I watch it.
The cinematography is stunning. The soundtrack augments and builds and builds to an almost hypnotic point.
The locations push the feeling of isolation and reinforce the theme of one man fighting for a chance at another day, albeit another day in hell.
I could go over your "issues" with this film, but I know that my explanations will never give you an imagination.

reply