christopher-underwood This begins so well. Even the titles are eye-catching in that day-glow red and green. Actions is immediately confusing but dazzling with wonderful photography. A great sense of excitement is established in the first half hour but it is slightly concerning that with so many interested parties and police it is never absolutely clear what is going on. Then all becomes clear but the stunning visuals disappear and the action becomes almost laughable. It is then that I began to notice the inconsistent acting, due presumably to an element of improvisation encouraged by Friedkin. Matters are satisfactorily resolved in the end but that feeling of disengagement was never made good and it would discourage me from a second viewing despite all that fantastic early footage.

Aleksandar Sarkic I really love William Friedkin movies, i have enjoyed Sorcerer and The French Connection, and especially Cruising which is not so popular among the critics (how are they wrong). So after these three movies i wanted to watch more from Friedkin and have choosed To Live and Die in L.A as next. I suppose i choosed these one because of the title, and because it is from the 80's which is one of my favorite decades. I have expected some good thriller/crime in the vein of magnificent The French Connection but i was totally wrong, these movie is totally cheesy from start to finish. The plot is nothing special, the movie just goes but nothing happens at all till the end. Than we go to the main reason i didn't like these one, it is the acting. Except phenomenal Williem Defoe other cast is just disastrous. Williem Petersen and John Pankow are the pair of your dreams ha-ha i am kidding, they are so out of charisma, unoticable, boring and cheesy, especially the acting of Williem Petersen it is on the level of B-movies actors. Other supportive cast is also not worth mentioning. And on all of that just add the soundtrack of British band Wang Chung, i really like 80s music and soundtracks, but these soundtrack is not going well with the movie and even gives more b-movie atmosphere. I just give this movie 5 from 10 because of great charismatic acting by Williem Defoe, and phenomenal car chase near the end of the movie, but my advice is to skip this one, you will not regret, and you will save your precious time.

rooee "I'm getting too old for this s**t," one character utters early on in this stylish 1985 thriller from the formidable William Friedkin. The veteran director doesn't bring much of his recent black humour to this hard-boiled cop thriller, but the brutal cynicism is present and correct. After the questionable Cruising and the forgotten comedy Deal of the Century, this was Friedkin back on Sorcerer form. William Peterson, who would smoulder even more intensely the following year in Michael Mann's Manhunter, plays Secret Service agent Richard Chance. And boy does he take chances. A thrill-seeker who spends his spare time bungee-jumping off bridges, when his soon- to-retire partner is gunned down he goes after the culprit with reckless abandon. His prey is Rick Masters (Willem Dafoe), a completely amoral counterfeiter who slaughters with a smile. Chance is paired with a by-the-book agent named Vukovich (John Pankow), who's dragged deeper into this violent mess thanks to a ruthless code of honour. What ensues is an action thriller somewhere between the rawness of Friedkin's own The French Connection and the glossy buddy thrillers that were soon to become a Hollywood staple. There are shoot outs, intricate car chases, fist fights, and a conspicuous amount of ball-kicking. You can forgive some of the film's flaws for their pay-off. Sure, Chance might blunder into situations with face-palming recklessness, but that's consistent with his character. Similarly, even when the storytelling is stripped down to the point of being nonsensical (characters leap about locations in the space of a jump cut), you accept it for the thrilling briskness and the efficiency of storytelling.You won't be surprised that Peterson excels at glowering and Dafoe revels in his menace. Chance isn't a complex character but he does take us on a journey, from sympathy to something like repulsion. He exploits others and ignores the rule of law to get the job done – so, is he so different from the villain he's preying upon?Par for the genre, women are sidelined as strippers or victims, although in Friedkin's defence the ample nudity is generous to both genders. Plus, in a thematic sense, one could see the film as one big critique of the single-minded alpha male. If there are winners in the end, it's not who you'd expect. On the whole, however, expectations are satisfied more than they are defied. Cliché follows cliché, but it's all done with great energy and style. L.A. is perennially clad in orange sunset, and the saucy 80s rock soundtrack (from British new-wavers Wang Chung) locks the film in time. Mann would remake his own 80s effort with Heat in 1995, providing the final word on the L.A. neo-noir genre. But in To Live and Die we see its overture: a relocated Miami Vice writ large. It's nasty, dated, and fun.

avik-basu1889 It's always been hit or miss for me with William Freidkin. I love The Exorcist and The French Connection. I also like Cruising which most people don't. But there a lot of his films that I am not at all fond of. Unfortunately "To Live and Die in L.A." falls in the latter category. Let's get the positives out of the way first. The cinematography is good. The opening credit sequence with the damaged cars and the seedy roadside low-lives perfectly sets the mood by throwing light on the dark side of the city. There are a number of interesting themes that are explored here like how far an individual can go to do the thing he thinks is right, can the supposedly moral always uphold his morality, questionable actions can reverse the tale and the hunter can become the hunted, how individuals are influenced by the filth that surrounds them in their own city, how everyone is playing a specific role to survive in the city,etc. Lastly the car chase is absolutely riveting as you would expect from a Freidkin film. Now let's talk about the flaws. The style of storytelling and the screenplay is very poor. With the interesting themes that are explored, this could have been a much better film with a better screenplay. But unfortunately this isn't the case. The cheesy 80s pop music trivialises everything that happens. The dialogues are very contrived and forced and the script involves too may unrealistic conveniences. Then there is the acting which is amateurish. I generally like Willlem Dafoe, but even he can't make up for the lack of acting from the rest of the cast and with dubbed over lines, the situation just gets worse. The film's themes had potential but unfortunately it fizzled out in the end.