BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

TeenzTen An action-packed slog

Jonah Abbott There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

christopher-underwood This is a good looking film with many varied scenes and set-ups designed to create interest and sustain suspense. The main problem is those mini biographical prologues, apparently taken out of most European release prints. In a wonderful, almost feature length interview on the Blu-ray release Friedkin and Nicolas Winding Refn both enthuse over these anti-hero participants. Trouble is, for the casual viewer, the lack of involvement with these 'bad men' may reduce the stress of the suspense scenes but without it those long stretches of endeavour can become wearing. There are odd inconsistencies throughout the film regarding financial payments, routes to be taken and effects of their efforts and occasional uncomfortable jump cuts but the Tangerine Dream music sustains us, just about.

sunheadbowed William Friedkin's colossal money-draining box office failure follow-up to the astronomical success of 'The Exorcist' is actually not that bad. The film is a muddied, confusing, macho affair that condenses a three-hour film into two, but fits comfortably alongside other tense, post-Vietnam films of the period, such as 'The Deer Hunter' and 'Apocalypse Now' (both of which are far superior, admittedly) -- all of them dealing with a damaged, fearful American psyche, reeling from feverish foreign defeat.The story is predictable (there are two jeeps, so one of them is getting blown up, and we know it won't be the one with American Roy Scheider at the wheel) and it's hard to like any of the characters, but as visual spectacle, the film feels authentic and powerful, and at times it is eerily beautiful in its tense malignancy. Tangerine Dream provide the synthy, proto-80s action/horror film soundtrack, which is enjoyable.

Leofwine_draca SORCERER is one of the toughest films I've ever seen, and I've seen plenty over the years. It's a film by William Friedkin which marks the last and best of his 1970s trilogy of incredible filmmaking that began with THE FRENCH CONNECTION and THE EXORCIST. The story is a remake of the French hit THE WAGES OF FEAR and involves a quartet of mercenaries who are hired to transport a quantity of volatile nitroglycerine through an unnamed South American country. It's a simple premise, but this is a film made for those who love film, with every aspect of cinema perfectly conveyed: the remorseless direction, the incredibly tough characters and tougher performances from the actors who play them (particularly Roy Scheider, who should have been an Oscar winner after this and JAWS), the eerie Tangerine Dream soundtrack, the refusal to give up a moment's suspense. The first hour is all slow build up but nonetheless full of the appropriate tension, while the last hour is as good as cinema gets and that bridge set-piece one of the best I've ever seen. A technical masterpiece, this one.

gavin6942 Four unfortunate men from different parts of the globe agree to risk their lives transporting gallons of nitroglycerin across dangerous South American jungle.As others have noticed, this film suffers from having a strange title. The original book is "The Wages of Fear", and the film was released under this title in some territories. I suspect that if it had this title today, it might be better remembered. A name like "Sorcerer" clearly suggests a fantasy film, which this is not.That major hurdle aside, it is a good movie and a very ambitious one. With four different prologues, a casual viewer might gt lost or bored or just not know what to think. It pays off as the story progresses, however, and we get a film that is a war movie, a mob movie, an action thriller... it has a little something for everyone.