
TCM was profiling director William Friedkin last night. I found that out after the closing credits rolled on the The French Connection (1971). Not being a particularly knowledgeable film buff, I’d had no idea who the director was, or that it had won Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actor. I don’t know “good movies”, I just know what I like.
So when Ben Mankiewicz got through with that segment’s chat with Friedkin and the opening credits began to roll for To Live and Die in LA, I sat straight up. I have a pretty good eye for talent. Don’t know why. But I had just left The French Connection, a film that had always given me the vibe of “this is a serious film”. Gene Hackman, Roy Scheider, the streets of New York, they can give you that impression.
The opening credits for this movie gave me the same impression. I had never heard of To Live and Die in LA back in ’85. I suppose a lot of that was I was overseas in the service at the time. It might be ‘one world’ now, but it certainly wasn’t back then. I just love a location film, and I could see it was going to be one of those. 80’s super villain Willem Dafoe was in it, I’ve always liked him. The star was William Petersen, who for me is one of those guys who you go “I know him, where is he from?”
The first thought I had was this is Miami Vice in LA! Turns out the creator of Miami Vice (Michael Mann) had thought so too and had sued Friedkin (he lost the case). I checked the IMDB ranking for both films (Connection & Die in LA), 7.7 & 7.3 respectively. That makes sense. I started noticing some holes in this new movie. It would never win the ‘big three’ Academy Awards that French Connection would. Friedkin made that one when he was a young and hungry 35. He made LA when he was 50.
The counterfeiting sequences in To Live and Die in LA are amazing. The old school artistry was incredible. Friedkin shot it in such a way that made a boring subject just fascinating. Dafoe as the master counterfeiter really helps create the aura. William Petersen as Secret Service agent ‘Richard Chance’ does a good job, but its clear after awhile why Gene Hackman’s name is a household word, and his isn’t. Its interesting Friedkin worked with Petersen numerous times, but had to be convinced about Hackman.
But this post is about the director’s career, not just one movie. Which is funny because I generally say directors have just one movie in them, they just keep remaking it in different ways. Much like authors and their one book. 3 repeating themes with Friedkin are a morally compromised ‘hero’, obsession, and a really great car chase scene. The first and last embody Friedkin in his real life. IMDB says Friedkin did parts of the car chase in French Connection on the streets of New York amongst regular drivers and pedestrians.
If true, that’s just criminal. Just like its said he would fire a gun near an actors head or slap them to get the reaction he wanted. That’s sick. You’re just playacting here, there’s absolutely no reason to harm or put people at risk. The other is the middle theme, his heroes obsession with “getting their man”. Obsession also plays a role in Friedkin’s formative movie growing up, Citizen Kane. I noticed during the interview with Ben Mankiewicz that Friedkin liked to “put on airs”. I’ve noticed that a lot with artistic people, I suppose that is necessary to create the persona of ‘genius’ or whatever.
It reminded me of a contemporary of his that TCM also profiled, director Peter Bogdanovich, who also seemed more likable as a person. Part of that I’m sure is I’m much more a fan of The Last Picture Show (Cybill Shepherd naked), What’s Up, Doc? (funny as hell) and Paper Moon (Ryan and Tatum O’Neill), than I am of serious murder death stuff. But to be fair, Friedkin in his personal life is said to have a wonderful sense of humor, it just doesn’t show up in his movies. I thought this closing little story from Forward dot com was illustrative:
If his sense of humor comes as a surprise, so does his apparent lack of sentimentality. I ask if he’s ever nostalgic. “Not really, no,” he begins. “Only for certain restaurant I used to like. There was a particular hamburger that I used to love that I used to get in a drugstore when I was a kid. Never found that taste of that hamburger since. And I still remember it. I don’t know how they did it.”
[I guess I’m a sucker for film and television that has a surface “cool factor”. Maybe everyone has a different idea what that is. For me its shows like Miami Vice, La Femme Nikita and to a lesser degree CSI Miami. Which is why I really wanted to like To Live and Die in LA, even if it turned out to be fairly cheesy. It explains why even though I watch the old movie channels, it doesn’t get played. Just kind of interesting how the same guy can go from making The Exorcist and The French Connection, to some of his later stuff, and employing Dean Stockwell.]

I am a big fan of To Live and Die in L.A. too! Have you ever read the novel it is based on? Very different vibe, as the movie takes scenes from the novel but scrambles them up. That’s not a complaint about the movie, just saying that the book and movie are VERY different – even more than books and the movies based on them usually are.
No I haven’t read the book. That might be interesting. I’ve had it go both ways. The examples that came to mind were with The Wizard of Oz I prefer the movie. With Lord of the Rings I prefer the books. You know its crazy, but the thought that came to me just now was that when you get old and cynical, its nearly impossible to lose yourself in a book. You just don’t have the ability to believe like when you’re young.
That’s interesting because with me it’s the opposite. I can’t lose myself in movies anymore but I still can with books.