Blue Chips.

Review #2365: Blue Chips.

Cast: 

Nick Nolte (Coach Pete Bell), Mary McDonnell (Jenny Bell), J. T. Walsh ("Happy" Kuykendahl), Ed O'Neill (Ed Axelby), Alfre Woodard (Lavada McRae), Bob Cousy (Vic Roker), Larry Bird (himself), Matt Nover (Ricky Roe), Shaquille O'Neal (Neon Boudeaux), Anfernee "Penny" Hardaway (Butch McRae), Anthony C. Hall (Tony), Marques Johnson (Mel), Robert Wuhl (Marty), Cylk Cozart ("Slick"), with Jim Beaver (Ricky's Dad), and Louis Gossett Jr. (Father Dawkins) Directed by William Friedkin (#037 - The Exorcist, #1438 - The French Connection, #1477 - To Live and Die in L.A., #2085 - Sorcerer)

Review: 

 “It wasn’t going to be the way coaches have been played in the past—you know, usually as the wise father figure. This guy was a deeply troubled man. That’s how I looked at Bobby, and that’s how I looked at this character. He had this overwhelming desire to win at any cost.”

There is a certain curiosity that comes to this film, really. This was the second of three movies that William Friedkin would direct in the 1990s, which you might remember included such works as The Guardian (1990) and Jade (1995). Oh, but this was a movie produced and written by none other than Ron Shelton, who you might remember was behind the scripts/directing of films such as Bull Durham [1988]* and White Man Can't Jump [1992] (fun fact: one scene in the original script of Blue Chips proved an inspiration for Jump). Apparently, the project had been in development hell since 1981, although it should be mentioned that Tates Locke claimed that the movie actually took inspiration from his 1982 book Caught in the Net (as co-written with Bob Ibach) that had detailed the offenses of Locke as a head coach at Clemson in the late 1970s (ironically, Bob Knight actually was set to write the introduction to the book but rejected it because he took the book as saying "that everybody cheats", which he disagreed with)**. Shelton couldn't direct the movie due to his involvement with Cobb (1994), but Friedkin's love for basketball got him interested in the project (he even got to direct his basketball idol in Bob Cousy). The movie was not a big success with audiences at the time (he was once quoted as saying that he couldn't overcome the difficulty of capturing "the excitement of a real game, with its own unpredictable dramatic structure and suspense"), but time has probably rewarded those who consider that college sports has only recently moved into the "NIL era" in which, well, now college athletes can control and profit from their name, image, and likeness. Timely or not, consider that one of the coaches appearing in the national championship game this year involved a coach in Kelvin Sampson who once endured a show-cause order that meant he couldn't coach in college for five years for a select group of violations committed under his watch.

The game of college basketball has never been particularly squeaky clean, anyway. Amateur athletes in the NCAA had interesting definitions when you consider the guy (Walter Byers) who created the term "student-athlete" also once called a team as doing “ghetto run-and-shoot basketball” (Jerry Tarkanian, coach of said team and justifiably hated Byers, happens to appear in this film)***. Scandals evolved from point shaving to slush funds. Blue Chips (1994) could not foresee the absurdity that arose with scandals involving universities and athletes, in which one school was accused of procuring a madam for athletes (which led to Rick Pitino being fired) and a murder that led to an actual scandal. So here we are with a movie about a man that rips himself apart in a decidedly non-heroic movie. But the movie is honest about where certain people in higher places are in terms of values: in the toilet. Cynicism runs free because the pursuit of the almighty victory (and dollar) has never been more blatant and, well, celebrated. Nolte actually shadowed Bobby Knight and went to practices and games. He pulls off a tremendous performance, riding the line of perceived morals with commitment that isn't just an impersonation or bluster for the sake of it. It happens to be a part with amusement in cynicism, as evidenced by how he says he happens to be a religious type that changes from recruitment to recruitment. By the time he gets to the last game, the juxtaposition of him versus Knight might as well be looking at a mirror (incidentally, Knight is only caught in barely audible dialogue, he apparently was mic'd up but said too many profanities). Walsh is the other highlight, managing to evoke great adversarial power that handles people as if they were commodities (with the exception of the climax, of course). The rest are fine, whether that is an ordinary but committed McDonnell, the delightfully cynical (if not underused) O'Neill or adequate work from actual athletes trying to do both basketball and acting - O'Neal is not in it that much, but he is quite engaging while Cousy plays the "wool over the eyes" just fine. The movie can't exactly capture all the fun and tension from seeing an actual basketball game, but it does leave one with a rush with what they see (particularly for those who recognize cameos such as Dick Vitale). The 108 minute runtime manages to make an effort in seeing the extent one could actually lose (or lie to) themselves in trying to win at all costs. As a whole, it is a committed Friedkin movie in charm and execution that is at least honest enough to prove a watch for the energy drawn out by Nolte in a morality tale that still has a resourceful bite to it. 

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Happy Monday and Go Cougars. If you want to hear more about college basketball movies, try Glory Road (2006).

*See, by having these little notes in the bottom, I save space in the actual review by not referring to Bull Durham as overrated. 

**By that point in time, Bobby Knight had already done such lovely things as hitting a head coach in the back of the head (Joe B. Hall) and choked and punched a sports information director. Never let anyone tell you about the glories of Bobby Knight without saying how much of a miserable human being he was.

***Tarkanian sued the NCAA a few times, fun fact. 

Redux: The Exorcist.

Redux #037: The Exorcist.

Cast: 

Ellen Burstyn (Chris MacNeil), Max von Sydow (Father Lankester Merrin), Lee J. Cobb (Lieutenant William F. Kinderman), Kitty Winn (Sharon Spencer), Jack MacGowran (Burke Dennings), Jason Miller (Father / Dr. Damien Karras, S.J.), Linda Blair (Regan MacNeil; Eileen Dietz as stand-in), Father William O'Malley (Father Joseph Dyer), Barton Heyman (Dr. Samuel Klein), Peter Masterson (Dr. Barringer), with Rudolf Schündler (Karl, House Servant), and Mercedes McCambridge (The Voice of Pazuzu) Directed by William Friedkin.

Review: 

From my review on April 22, 2011: 

To be honest, I found this film to be a little underwhelming. The first hour is just talking, and building up to the Exorcism. It finally comes, and we do see the scariness in the Devil. I felt underwhelmed for the first half, but the second half helped. The acting is decent, with some scare from Regan and special effects that hold up to this day.

"When [William Peter Blatty] wrote this book he knew that I had a background in documentary films as well, and he wanted the story to be filmed as realistically as possible, and so did I. We did not want to make a scary horror film or a fantasy film. At that time as well as today, the public knows very little about exorcism, little to nothing. Everything that is known about it is sensationalized in the public, and certainly the film I made contributed to that; there is no question about it. Because people regarded it as a horror film. But I made the film as a believer." - William Friedkin.

Admittedly, there are a handful of reasons one could do to look back upon The Exorcist in 2023. For one thing, the film (released in late December) is celebrating its 50th anniversary this year. Another thing is that 2023 is also the beckoning of a new "Exorcist film", specifically one that is serving as the first of a new trilogy that follows just the original film, complete with a returning cast member from before that makes its premiere on the very first Friday of October. Another is the fact that it seems appropriate to look back upon the career of its director William Friedkin, who passed away in August. But for me, I think the best reason of all is the fact that Movie Night's very first review of a film in the horror genre way back over a decade ago, was this very film. Granted, it wasn't the first horror film I ever saw, because in addition to those R-rated action films, I watched a few horror films before I was even 15, as one might do, but it certainly was a big film that one can hold up within the horror genre...and I guess I really set it up so highly in my head that it only seemed good enough for an 8/10 rating. The quantity and quality of the review is obvious, so here is a chance to re-write that wrong. The film is adapted from William Peter Blatty's 1971 novel of the same name, which was inspired by events that had allegedly been occurred in 1949 with a boy named only "Roland Doe". Blatty had heard about it when studying at Georgetown University (studying in English, which he also did for a master's degree at George Washington University), but what set him on the path to write it was seeing the film adaptation of Ira Levin's novel in Rosemary's Baby (1968), which pleased him right until the ending involving the resolution of the unborn child. Once a comic novelist and a screenwriter for comedies, the resulting success of the novel was tremendous, to put it lightly, and he got his wish to have William Friedkin serve as director with the success of The French Connection (1972). Friedkin was raised in the Jewish faith, but he found himself more welcoming of the teachings of Jesus as a declared agnostic. As such, when it came to influences, one film cited was Carl Theodor Dreyer's Ordet (1955). As such, Friedkin hired actual priests to appear in the film along with serve as technical advisors. Over four decades later, he would direct a documentary titled The Devil and Father Amorth (2017), which featured Father Gabriele Amorth, an exorcist for the Diocese of Rome that had mentioned Friedkin's film in his first book (An Exorcist Tells His Story). Friedkin worked closely with Blatty on the screenplay (the latter served as both screenwriter and producer). Blatty would write two further novels involving faith with The Ninth Configuration (1978) and Legion (1983), for which the latter served as the sequel to the aforementioned Exorcist; Blatty spearheaded the film adaptations of both novels as director in 1980 for Configuration and 1990 for the now retitled Exorcist III. Forty years after publishing the novel, Blatty did a revising of the novel that added a new chapter.

The original cut of the film lasted 122 minutes after Warner Bros. suggested cuts in order to fit more screenings, which Friedkin did. However, in 2000, a "The Version You've Never Seen" version was released that features a handful of cut sequences from before, most notably with the final scene that seems more in line with the book, which results in a runtime of 132 minutes. The mysteries that matter most to the film, true to Friedkin's word, are ones of faith, goodness, and the one of inexplicability. It is is a carefully built film on intense scale that is best enjoyed with great patience. Calling it the first of anything in horror is perhaps a too bit lofty to use, because of previous great horror films such as Psycho (1960), but I'm sure you can see the importance of a film like this beyond just calling it a film about possession, because it is a film of sacrifice and finding one's faith. The power of that comes with the cast to hold up such tremendous production values, for which I'm sure you would already guess. There were a variety of actors considered for key roles in terms of the desires of Warner Bros., such as asking Audrey Hepburn first about the leading role (she declined, as did a few others) or the late switching of Stacy Keach for Jason Miller (playwright of That Championship Season). Both Burstyn and Miller were big on doing these roles (the former was quoted as believing it to be destiny to play the role and the latter, who had studied for the priesthood, felt that he was Karras). Friedkin got his way with the casting of both actors and the rest eventually fell into place, which even included a critic of the book in O'Malley. Each of the core cast succeed in drawing a film of dread within atmosphere that is homed in realism as much as one can expect when seeing vomit or a cerebral angiography or whatever strikes a nerve in the realm of anxiety, moral or otherwise. The film is as much Miller's film as it is one of Burstyn & Blair when it comes to the driving point because of how he draws you with such intensity that comes from a great array of guilt and wavering spirit. Don't get me wrong though, Burstyn and Blair do just as well, with the former's sense of fear for her loved one shining through with the scattered innocence/corruption of Blair providing great terror. True, there is a certain voice quality in dubbing that can only come from an Academy Award winner in McCambridge and a minimal use of a double for intense scenes, but I think you know what I mean when I say that Blair went through the whirlwind and survived with a useful performance. Von Sydow and Cobb provide grizzled support that you greet for those familiar with those actors or voices (the former in aged makeup, of course). It is a film that builds in the terror of what enfold before you get to that exorcism, and it probably stands to reason that any film since this one involving exorcisms or possession has considerable ground to cover when it comes to trying to play distinct from this one. None have probably stokes half of the controversy that comes with its tone of haunting qualities or religious fervor, for better or worse. The sacrifice made at the end, now combined with the revised ending, makes it all the more involving as a film fit for its age and genre, a useful lesson for horror through and through.

In the end, what is about The Exorcist that makes it endure so vividly in reputation? There are a variety of factors, but the most important is that Friedkin and company had the faith required to craft a film as straight to the line as they wished to do that struck a nerve within the viewer of the time that works just as well now because it respected its viewer with patience and craftsmanship to make for a worthy unsettling time. It is probably hard to figure just which Friedkin film ranks among his best, but it is perhaps The Exorcist that endures most when it comes to the realm of looking forward to the season of horror or perhaps the time to look upon one's faith, and that is perhaps worth more than anything in the material sense.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Well, the clock is soon to strike 12 on October, so why not get a head start? October will be quite the showcase to show a wide variety of horror films from the past such as The Monster to the current year within The Exorcist: Believer. We shall see how many films get a spotlight here and what finds its way for the first week of November.

Sorcerer.

Review #2085: Sorcerer.

Cast: 

Roy Scheider (Jackie Scanlon / Juan Dominguez), Bruno Cremer (Victor Manzon / Serrano), Francisco Rabal (Nilo), Amidou (Kassem / Martinez), Ramon Bieri (Corlette), Karl John (Marquez), Peter Capell (Lartigue), Anne-Marie Deschodt (Blanche), and Friedrich von Ledebur (Carlos) Produced and Directed by William Friedkin (#037 - The Exorcist, #1438 - The French Connection, #1477 - To Live and Die in L.A.)

Review: 

"It occurred to me at that time, this was in the middle ’70s, when America had just come through a national nervous breakdown, after the assassinations, the Vietnam war, and it seemed to me—I guess it’s always ever thus—that the world was full of strangers who hated one another, but if they didn’t cooperate, if they didn’t work together in some way, they would blow up. And this film seemed to me to be a metaphor for that idea, which I thought was a valid theme then, and now. I think it’s possibly worse now, with so many countries have weapons of mass destruction. And so, it was the theme that attracted me."

In 1950, French writer Georges Arnaud wrote Le Salaire de la peur. Three years later, it was adapted into The Wages of Fear by director Henri-Georges Clouzot, a multi-language production that starred Yves Montand (this is reflected with Sorcerer, which features subtitles for its non-English vignettes that start the film). After the release of The Exorcist in 1973, William Friedkin was thinking about what he should do next, and he came along with doing a new version of the Arnaud novel (i.e. not a remake), but he approached Clouzot by saying that he would "only use the basic premise and your theme" (which he felt was really a theme of brotherhood) while noting that he tried to get the older film re-released in theaters but no one bought on to it. He then asked Arnaud for the rights to the novel, which were accepted (after Arnaud noted that he actually didn't like Clouzot's film). Friedkin brought in Walon Green (most notably the writer of The Wild Bunch) to serve as writer; creating the outline together, the script by Green was done in a number of months. Believe it or not, the script was written for Steve McQueen. However, Friedkin balked at the idea of writing a role for McQueen's new wife Ali MacGraw (or even making her an associate producer rather than giving her a part) and filming it in America (as opposed to the primary location in the Dominican Republic). The failure of the film distressed Friedkin, which he later called "the only film I've made that I can still watch" while also musing that looking back, he would've probably done what he would have had to do to land McQueen for the lead role. While the film did have a bit of a video release, Friedkin sued Paramount and Universal, who had each claimed they didn't know who owned the film when he asked about it when the former had made a new print for a showing (they had formed a joint corporation to do the aforementioned film that folded long ago, as related by Friedkin in interviews such as this) when it came to wanting to restore a print that could be put on DVD and Blu-ray. Friedkin got his wish and served as one of the supervisors on a restored print (as financed by Warner Bros. with distinctly split distribution rights between Paramount, Warner, and Universal) that came out in 2014. His films afterwards were of varying quality that nevertheless were quite watchable, as evidenced by stuff such as Cruising (1980), To Live and Die in L.A. (1985), and Bug (2006); Friedkin died in August of 2023, just a month before the festival premiere of his last feature with The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial (2023).

It is easy to see where the end of the line came for films like this came with its release on June 24, 1977...because of the film that came out just a month before (well, you may know it in Star Wars, and the irony is that Friedkin was handed the script when it was making the studio rounds of rejection and he had doubts about it being made). In the end, no one is just anything, and the sorcerer for this film is (as Friedkin put it) fate. It is undoubtedly a wonderful film in tension, filled with such rough and tumble characters that fits now more than ever with such gritty passion. It is captured with the feeling of a documentary, one that happens to have Tangerine Dream (a German electronic band) compose the music to worthwhile effect for a film that is more than just a trail through the jungle with nitroglycerin on the mind. These four people that we are entrusted to view in the prism of the jungle that they inhabit might as well serve as hell. Schneider seemingly reflects the ideas that Green wanted to show in a "desperately human" role, which namely involves a roughly shaped face and voice that you believe could be your mirror image in the bounds of viewing hell itself. The other players in the games (an assassin, a Palestinian militant, a former banker, and an Irish mobster) that play in fate prove just as well interesting in serving as pawns to toil in the passages of wages and fear. Undoubtedly, the bridge sequence is the showstopper to focus on, not because it serves as the climax or anything, but because of how wonderfully executed and tense it is (the events of how the bridge sequence was staged, which included moving the bridge set piece to Mexico and weird production stories about getting the whole thing done in a matter of months can be found here). It is a sequence that lasts just a bit over ten minutes in an already grimy two-hour runtime but by God does it dominate your attention. If there was any sequence you had to show of the film to try and get someone to at least consider the film, showing even two minutes of it would be more than enough. The sequence right after it, involving a seemingly too tall tree and a good laugh makes for a solid second in the array of interesting sequences of human terror. By the time the film closes off its delirium, you have found a film that has justified its entire reason for being as one filled with edge and style about the dangers that can come with fractured brotherhood on a ticking clock that can fall prey to the whims of fate that reflects how they had set people to their own fate before they reached their reckoning in Columbia. One can only see and hear the ending for what it reflects in what fate means to those who have to endure the choices made (and not made) by oneself. Whether one has seen The Wages of Fear or not when it comes to adaptations of the novel, Sorcerer is a gem you have to experience for yourself with a deep breath and deep admiration for the craftsmanship that is readily apparent in a year that had plenty to go around.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

To Live and Die in L.A.

Review #1477:  To Live and Die in L.A.

Cast:
William Petersen (Richard Chance), Willem Dafoe (Eric "Rick" Masters), John Pankow (John Vukovich), Debra Feuer (Bianca Torres), John Turturro (Carl Cody), Darlanne Fluegel (Ruth Lanier), Dean Stockwell (Bob Grimes), Steve James (Jeff Rice), Robert Downey Sr. (Thomas Bateman), Michael Greene (Jimmy Hart), and Jack Hoar (Jack) Directed by William Friedkin (#037 - The Exorcist and #1438 - The French Connection)

Review: 
"The greatest thing that ever happened to me in terms of my acting was the audition for To Live and Die in L.A. After I read, William Friedkin put down the script and said, "You got the part". I really thought it was a joke. I went back to my hotel room and took a bath and they called and wanted to make a deal. I still didn't believe it."

"Weirdness is not my game. I'm just a square boy from Wisconsin."

My, my, my, what a cast. It may not have had the most prominent cast upon first release 35 years ago, but time has been more friendly to this film more than most when it comes to its staying power that is drawn from its primary cast. It wasn't his most profitable film of the decade for him (that was the controversial Cruising in 1980), but it definitely has found a place for itself as a fine piece in Friedkin's body of work. It was the first breakthrough in film in terms of starring roles for both Petersen and Pankow (since Friedkin wanted unknowns and was making a cheap film), who each had been known primarily on the stage and would both find key roles on television in subsequent years. Dafoe was a founding member of the Wooster Group, an experimental theater company in New York formed in 1980 (after five years of evolving from The Performance Group) before he jumped into film in the 1980s with films such as The Loveless (1982), Streets of Fire (1984), and Roadhouse 66 (1985), and this proved a breakthrough for the actor.

It was adapted from the novel of the same name that had been written by Gerald Petievich, an agent in the U.S. Secret Service (the organization was originally created to deal with counterfeit currency), with a mix of Friedkin and Petievich scenes being woven in (the former added scenes such as the car chase and the opening scene while the latter wrote parts of dialogue) - regardless of who may have done more or less, both were credited with the screenplay (supposedly this led to a lawsuit from Michael Mann for seeming similar to Miami Vice). Tough, wiry, and not afraid to show itself with professionalism, this proves to be a worthwhile and efficient experience as a triumph for its main cast alongside Friedkin as an film laced with energy and thrills within a 116-minute run-time that captures a captivating atmosphere of tension and capability with a Wang Chung soundtrack to draw things together. It isn't surprising to see how clear it all looks when it comes to conviction, since they actually hired a real counterfeiter on set alongside real authorities in Petievich and an LA cop in Jack Hoar (who each make small appearances in the film). Petersen and Pankow make for an interesting pair together, always on the edge with the pursuit but also with each other as well, with the former being fascinating in his hot dog brashness and the latter being a fair audience surrogate. Dafoe proves a gripping adversary, calm but entertaining in brazen nature without needing to be so prominent to make it count. Others follow along in capability to fit its neo-noir edges, such as an elusive Feuer or a curious Turturro and a stealthily slimy Stockwell. The car chase scene is pretty well-handled, staging its trek through live traffic with fine finesse from a director who already had one great chase in him to begin with. I enjoy the film's resilient nature to making a procedural with a pursuit worth viewing with plenty of murky characters twisting in the wind on both sides of the law that has a resounding and daring climax. There is quite enough hustle and bustle in a rough but sharp procedural with a good cast and Friedkin at the helm to make a solid movie worth viewing at least once as a film on the edge.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

The French Connection.

Review #1438: The French Connection.

Cast: 
Gene Hackman (Det. Jimmy "Popeye" Doyle), Fernando Rey (Alain "Frog One" Charnier), Roy Scheider (Det. Buddy "Cloudy" Russo), Tony Lo Bianco (Salvatore "Sal" Boca), Marcel Bozzuffi (Pierre Nicoli), Frédéric de Pasquale (Henri Devereaux), and Bill Hickman (Bill Mulderig) Directed by William Friedkin (#037 - The Exorcist)

Review: 
"If you're going to make a film or an album of music or a painting, you cannot afford to stop and think what other people will think of it. You've got to take into consideration what your editor thinks, if, say, you're a writer. But I don't have anyone to answer to. I make a film because I want to. Sometimes they're successful, sometimes they're not, but the way I think about my films is always very personal." - William Friedkin

"Acting was something I wanted to do since I was 10 and saw my first movie, I was so captured by the action guys. Jimmy Cagney was my favorite. Without realizing it, I could see he had tremendous timing and vitality." - Gene Hackman

All decades could be studied for their grittiness, but perhaps no decade had it more interesting than the 1970s. After a decade of shifting in Hollywood and within the culture, it only figures that some of the best films from this era would be ones with tinges of moral ambiguity and raw disenchantment of the angry young man, where law and order was a catchphrase rather than a show. Accordingly, it should only make sense that the first R-rated film to win an Academy Award for Best Picture would be The French Connection, based on the non-fiction book by Robin Moore released two years prior. Produced by 20th Century Fox, it featured the pursuit by two detectives (inspired by actual detectives Eddie Egan and Sonny Grosso, who both served as technical advisors in the film) of the New York Police Department of a substance smuggler in New York City. It should prove fitting that such a frank and urgent film came from a director with humble backgrounds in William Friedkin. The Chicago native was the son of a salesman and nurse that grew into becoming interested in films in his teenage years, viewing films such as Les Diaboliques, Psycho, and Citizen Kane (the last being the one to cement his love for the cinema). He went from working in the WGN-TV mail room to directing live TV shows and documentaries when he was 18, starting with The People vs. Paul Crump (1962). Incidentally, one documentary that Friedkin directed was The Thin Blue Line (1966), which focused on the police force and problems of combating increased crime. He started his feature film career with Good Times (1967), which featured Sonny and Cher in a comedy musical western. Of his first four films, only The Night They Raided Minsky's (1968) proved any success with audiences or critics. And yet here he is, directing a film under the production of Philip D'Antoni, who had previously produced Bullitt (1968) for Fox only after several rejections and a small budget of $1.8 million dollars. There were a few follow-ups to this film of sorts. The Seven-Ups (1973) was directed by D'Antoni  while having Scheider as the main star as a tough-guy cop with Grosso as technical advisor and Bill Hickman back as stunt coordinator. French Connection II (1975) was a fictional sequel directed by John Frankenheimer that had Hackman and Rey return to their roles that was a mild success.

Of all the unlikely things, Hackman not being the first, second or even third choice must rank high up the list. Famed newspaper columnist Jimmy Breslin was actually in the running at one point in time (he would lose out in light of his inability to drive), while Jackie Gleason was thought to be bad for box office with the failure of Gigot (1962), and Peter Boyle disapproved of the violent themes. Hackman, who was known for supporting roles such as Bonnie and Clyde (1967) and I Never Sang for My Father (1970) after going from the Pasadena Playhouse to doorman-between-acting, was found at the last moment. Similarly, Scheider had just a few small roles to his credit before this film (along with Klute) helped rise him to stardom. To have the actors get a feel for the cops they would portray, they patrolled with Egan and Grosso for a month. One can see that this proved effective in making for tremendous performances from Hackman and Scheider in how grizzled and hard-edged they prove for a film that serves as a key point for police procedural films for its era. Hackman proves especially great in showing the maniacal drive and act that one seems to need to have to be on the beat to take a criminal down on and off the clock with intensity, while Scheider follows along with measured conviction; probably the best sequence with the two is their first, with them chasing a criminal down the street that turns into questioning with offbeat fervor from Hackman ("Did you ever pick your feet in Poughkeepsie?") in a Santa suit. Rey (who came into international status with collaborations with Orson Welles and Luis Bunuel films in the 1960s and 1970s) is elegantly devious to fit this cat-and-mouse game of cops and drug kingpins without trouble. Boca and the others (including Egan and Grosso in brief roles) fill in the gritted atmosphere of thrills and action fitting to be talked about as a neo noir. Perhaps having Shaft writer Ernest Tidyman behind this screenplay helps in making this 104-minute film really tick with tension and competence. It might seem quaint to the eyes of those who have encountered plenty of procedurals in the near half century since release, but one has to start somewhere with grimy gripping films like this. The chase sequence (which had a mix of Hackman and stunt driver Hickman driving) is excellent to see play out in real traffic between a car and a train with careful angles and a poster-worthy showdown moment to boot. By the time it gets to its bittersweet finale, one knows they have watched an interesting film with plenty of looks and sounds of New York City from an era long ago with documentary-style filming from Friedkin that serves the film well in driving one up the wall and never letting things go too easily. As a whole, This is a film with a controlled obsession of sordid realism that makes for a classic of the age that had people like Hackman and Friedkin deservingly reap the rewards of for the rest of the era.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.