WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.180 Welcome to the Deep Dive. Today, we are really 00:00:03.180 --> 00:00:05.719 diving deep, tackling the life and work of William 00:00:05.719 --> 00:00:08.980 Friedkin, a filmmaker whose career, well, it 00:00:08.980 --> 00:00:10.500 wasn't just peaks and valleys, was it? It was 00:00:10.500 --> 00:00:13.519 more like a series of massive explosions and 00:00:13.519 --> 00:00:16.899 shockwaves. Absolutely. Friedkin, active from 00:00:16.899 --> 00:00:21.179 1935 right up to 2023. He's absolutely central 00:00:21.179 --> 00:00:24.500 to that new Hollywood wave in the 70s. Director, 00:00:24.879 --> 00:00:27.120 producer, screenwriter. But just calling him 00:00:27.120 --> 00:00:29.100 new Hollywood feels, I don't know, incomplete. 00:00:29.320 --> 00:00:31.960 It misses that wild, almost contradictory nature 00:00:31.960 --> 00:00:34.479 of his career. You called him the agnostic auteur 00:00:34.479 --> 00:00:37.000 of extremes. Exactly, because that's the paradox, 00:00:37.179 --> 00:00:38.759 isn't it? That's what we want to unpack for you 00:00:38.759 --> 00:00:41.259 today. How does one person deliver these world 00:00:41.259 --> 00:00:42.939 -changing hits? I mean, films that didn't just 00:00:42.939 --> 00:00:45.100 succeed, they rewrote the rules. Think The French 00:00:45.100 --> 00:00:47.219 Connection. Think The Exorcist. Right. Absolute 00:00:47.219 --> 00:00:49.240 game changers. And then almost immediately. follow 00:00:49.240 --> 00:00:52.020 them up with these crushing, deeply personal 00:00:52.020 --> 00:00:54.859 failures like Sorcerer. The story behind that 00:00:54.859 --> 00:00:57.320 one is just legendary in its failure. And then 00:00:57.320 --> 00:01:00.740 the kicker, the really unexpected turn, is how 00:01:00.740 --> 00:01:03.700 that whole turbulent ride leads him in the last 00:01:03.700 --> 00:01:06.359 part of his life to become a director of all 00:01:06.359 --> 00:01:09.480 things high end European opera. It's just it's 00:01:09.480 --> 00:01:14.000 a career built on this fierce, uncompromising 00:01:14.000 --> 00:01:16.760 vision. Yeah. Where massive success and like. 00:01:17.049 --> 00:01:18.890 Total catastrophe. We're just flip sides of the 00:01:18.890 --> 00:01:21.290 same coin. Exactly. And that duality, that's 00:01:21.290 --> 00:01:23.290 the real hook here. We're talking about a guy 00:01:23.290 --> 00:01:25.730 who gets the Oscar for Best Director, Best Picture 00:01:25.730 --> 00:01:28.150 for French Connection, gives us The Exorcist, 00:01:28.170 --> 00:01:30.730 which, I mean, you could argue is the greatest 00:01:30.730 --> 00:01:33.450 horror film ever, period. No question. It's always 00:01:33.450 --> 00:01:35.549 in the conversation. And yet decades on, he's 00:01:35.549 --> 00:01:37.849 making these really tight, critically loved films 00:01:37.849 --> 00:01:40.790 based on stage plays like Bug or Killer Joe. 00:01:40.989 --> 00:01:43.390 And his very last film, The Kane Mutiny Court 00:01:43.390 --> 00:01:45.109 Martial, which came out just after he passed, 00:01:45.310 --> 00:01:47.980 fits right into that. late stage pattern, a return 00:01:47.980 --> 00:01:49.980 to that theatrical structure. And his personal 00:01:49.980 --> 00:01:52.219 life seemed just as intense. Two sons, Cedric 00:01:52.219 --> 00:01:54.680 and Jack, married four times. Jean Moreau, the 00:01:54.680 --> 00:01:57.459 iconic actress, was one wife. And Sherry Lansing, 00:01:57.620 --> 00:02:00.019 the producer, was his wife when he died in August 00:02:00.019 --> 00:02:03.420 2023. Heart failure and pneumonia at 87. Yeah, 00:02:03.439 --> 00:02:06.519 he was, by all accounts, engaged and fighting 00:02:06.519 --> 00:02:08.719 right up to the very end, just like his films. 00:02:08.919 --> 00:02:12.159 Okay, so to really get where that ferocious, 00:02:12.219 --> 00:02:14.580 sometimes really unsettling intensity in his 00:02:14.580 --> 00:02:17.139 films comes from. We got to go back, back to 00:02:17.139 --> 00:02:19.099 his beginnings in Chicago. Born there August 00:02:19.099 --> 00:02:23.139 29, 1935. His whole foundation seems built on, 00:02:23.159 --> 00:02:25.419 well, survival and displacement. Yeah, the roots 00:02:25.419 --> 00:02:27.300 are crucial. His parents were Jewish immigrants. 00:02:27.439 --> 00:02:29.099 They came from Ukraine, which was part of the 00:02:29.099 --> 00:02:31.159 Russian Empire back then. And it wasn't just 00:02:31.159 --> 00:02:33.659 casual integration. His family, grandparents 00:02:33.659 --> 00:02:36.020 and parents, they had to flee. There was a really 00:02:36.020 --> 00:02:40.879 horrific anti -Jewish pogrom in 1903. Wow. So 00:02:40.879 --> 00:02:42.780 that's the backdrop. That experience of being 00:02:42.780 --> 00:02:46.150 forced out, of persecution. must seep in. Absolutely. 00:02:46.270 --> 00:02:48.789 That's the bedrock. Resilient, born from terrible 00:02:48.789 --> 00:02:51.330 adversity. He grew up lower middle class. His 00:02:51.330 --> 00:02:53.229 father, Louis, sounds like quite a character 00:02:53.229 --> 00:02:56.050 merchant, seaman, semi -pro softball player, 00:02:56.189 --> 00:02:58.889 sold men's clothes later on. And his mother, 00:02:59.009 --> 00:03:01.330 Rachel, was a nurse. Friedkin apparently called 00:03:01.330 --> 00:03:04.229 her a saint. But the relationship with his father 00:03:04.229 --> 00:03:07.270 sounds like it was complicated. Oh, very much 00:03:07.270 --> 00:03:10.830 so. Complex is the word. You see film historians 00:03:10.830 --> 00:03:13.840 pointing this out. Often Friedkin apparently 00:03:13.840 --> 00:03:17.240 saw his dad with this mix of like affection, 00:03:17.340 --> 00:03:20.919 but also contempt. Contempt because he felt his 00:03:20.919 --> 00:03:23.900 father hadn't made more of himself. OK, that's 00:03:23.900 --> 00:03:25.479 interesting. You can almost see that mix in his 00:03:25.479 --> 00:03:27.280 characters, right? That blend of contradictory 00:03:27.280 --> 00:03:30.830 drives. Popeye Doyle, Father Karras. These guys 00:03:30.830 --> 00:03:33.110 are taunt. Exactly. Like that internal conflict, 00:03:33.169 --> 00:03:35.889 that push -pull, became the engine for so many 00:03:35.889 --> 00:03:38.669 of his protagonists. Often anti -heroes, driven 00:03:38.669 --> 00:03:41.250 by these raw, messy feelings. Maybe it's that 00:03:41.250 --> 00:03:43.810 classic thing, you know, the ambitious son reacting 00:03:43.810 --> 00:03:45.870 to what he saw as his father's lack of drive. 00:03:46.229 --> 00:03:48.870 Makes sense. Though, academically, he wasn't 00:03:48.870 --> 00:03:52.360 exactly setting the world on fire early on. He 00:03:52.360 --> 00:03:54.060 was pretty open about not being a great student. 00:03:54.199 --> 00:03:56.159 No, he was more into basketball, apparently even 00:03:56.159 --> 00:03:58.180 thought about going pro for a bit. But he graduated 00:03:58.180 --> 00:04:01.379 super young at 16. 16. He chalked it up to social 00:04:01.379 --> 00:04:03.639 promotion, basically. They just pushed him through, 00:04:03.819 --> 00:04:06.199 which kind of suggests he moved fast through 00:04:06.199 --> 00:04:09.259 systems he didn't entirely buy into. But that 00:04:09.259 --> 00:04:12.419 lack of focus, it vanished the second he hit 00:04:12.419 --> 00:04:14.439 the working world. Right, because he landed somewhere 00:04:14.439 --> 00:04:18.379 immediately. Mailroom at WBKB TV, straight out 00:04:18.379 --> 00:04:21.480 of high school. Basic entry level stuff. But 00:04:21.480 --> 00:04:25.120 the climb was just meteoric. It's almost unbelievable. 00:04:25.339 --> 00:04:27.459 Within two years. So he's like 18 years old. 00:04:27.519 --> 00:04:29.339 He's not in the mailroom anymore. He's directing 00:04:29.339 --> 00:04:32.220 live TV. He's directing documentaries. 18 directing. 00:04:32.540 --> 00:04:35.240 That's insane. It really is. He clearly had this 00:04:35.240 --> 00:04:37.819 natural instinct for the camera for capturing 00:04:37.819 --> 00:04:40.019 things as they happened. It shows he found his 00:04:40.019 --> 00:04:43.029 calling like instantly. And he poured all that 00:04:43.029 --> 00:04:45.310 intensity into it. And he had a really significant 00:04:45.310 --> 00:04:47.990 early success that kind of foreshadowed his later 00:04:47.990 --> 00:04:50.949 style, didn't he? That 1962 documentary, The 00:04:50.949 --> 00:04:54.350 People vs. Paul Crump. Yes. That film was fascinating 00:04:54.350 --> 00:04:57.910 because it wasn't just, you know, good TV. It 00:04:57.910 --> 00:04:59.930 had real teeth. It actually made a difference. 00:04:59.990 --> 00:05:01.810 It won a big award at the San Francisco Film 00:05:01.810 --> 00:05:04.930 Festival, sure. But the bigger deal was its impact. 00:05:05.329 --> 00:05:08.629 It directly helped get Paul Crump's death sentence 00:05:08.629 --> 00:05:11.819 commuted to life imprisonment. OK, so right there, 00:05:11.899 --> 00:05:15.220 early on, you see the Friedkin signature taking 00:05:15.220 --> 00:05:18.040 brutal reality, showing it without flinching 00:05:18.040 --> 00:05:20.139 and achieving something high stakes, something 00:05:20.139 --> 00:05:23.279 real. Exactly. That success was huge. It gave 00:05:23.279 --> 00:05:25.540 him credibility and it landed him a job with 00:05:25.540 --> 00:05:28.360 a merger documentary producer, David L. Wolper. 00:05:28.500 --> 00:05:30.819 That was the springboard then to Hollywood. That 00:05:30.819 --> 00:05:34.180 was the ticket. So 1965, he heads west, documentary 00:05:34.180 --> 00:05:36.899 skills honed. ready to tackle feature films. 00:05:37.019 --> 00:05:39.860 But first, a little run -in with royalty. Hollywood 00:05:39.860 --> 00:05:41.800 royalty, anyway. Alfred Hitchcock, right. He 00:05:41.800 --> 00:05:43.560 directed an episode of the Alfred Hitchcock Hour. 00:05:43.720 --> 00:05:45.860 One of the last ones, yeah. Off -season in 65. 00:05:46.319 --> 00:05:49.740 And you picture it. Friedkin, the young, scrappy 00:05:49.740 --> 00:05:52.560 documentarian, maybe a bit rebellious. And Hitchcock, 00:05:52.639 --> 00:05:55.699 the absolute master of control, precision, formality. 00:05:56.040 --> 00:05:59.860 Right. And the story goes, Hitchcock basically 00:05:59.860 --> 00:06:03.279 chewed him out. Why? Because Friedkin wasn't 00:06:03.279 --> 00:06:05.769 wearing a tie on set. No tie. That's the big 00:06:05.769 --> 00:06:08.089 crime. For Hitchcock, maybe it was. It's this 00:06:08.089 --> 00:06:10.050 perfect little clash of styles, isn't it? The 00:06:10.050 --> 00:06:13.149 old guard formalist versus the new wave naturalist. 00:06:13.290 --> 00:06:15.670 You can just imagine Friedkin bristling at that, 00:06:15.709 --> 00:06:17.970 maybe filing it away. Yeah, filing it under things 00:06:17.970 --> 00:06:21.050 I will never do. So his first actual feature 00:06:21.050 --> 00:06:24.949 film, not exactly a triumph. No, good times in 00:06:24.949 --> 00:06:29.480 1967 with Sonny and Cher. He called it unwatchable 00:06:29.480 --> 00:06:31.879 later. It seems like one of those jobs you take 00:06:31.879 --> 00:06:33.620 to get your foot in the door, you know? It really 00:06:33.620 --> 00:06:35.660 wasn't his style. So he learned from that. Seems 00:06:35.660 --> 00:06:37.879 like it. He pivoted pretty quickly back towards 00:06:37.879 --> 00:06:40.220 stuff with more substance, often adapted from 00:06:40.220 --> 00:06:41.959 the stage, which is interesting given his later 00:06:41.959 --> 00:06:44.500 career. He did The Birthday Party in 68, based 00:06:44.500 --> 00:06:46.480 on that really unsettling Harold Pinter play. 00:06:47.100 --> 00:06:49.560 Then a musical comedy, The Night They Raided 00:06:49.560 --> 00:06:52.019 Minsky's. Quite a mix. But the one that really 00:06:52.019 --> 00:06:54.720 stands out from that early period, maybe, is 00:06:54.720 --> 00:06:57.500 The Boys in the Band in 1970. Yeah, that one 00:06:57.500 --> 00:07:00.019 was important. Adapted from Mark Crowley's play 00:07:00.019 --> 00:07:02.800 and it's rightly seen as a landmark in queer 00:07:02.800 --> 00:07:06.720 cinema. Tackling that subject matter. Gay life 00:07:06.720 --> 00:07:09.579 in New York. So frankly back then. It showed 00:07:09.579 --> 00:07:12.100 he could bring that documentary immediacy to 00:07:12.100 --> 00:07:15.120 really intimate internal stories too. Stories 00:07:15.120 --> 00:07:16.980 about communities that hadn't really been seen 00:07:16.980 --> 00:07:19.240 that way on screen. So it's this rapid fire start, 00:07:19.360 --> 00:07:22.079 right? Documentaries, TV, Hitchcock telling him 00:07:22.079 --> 00:07:25.480 off, a pop musical flop, Pinter, a groundbreaking 00:07:25.480 --> 00:07:28.180 queer film. It's kind of chaotic. Utterly chaotic. 00:07:28.519 --> 00:07:31.839 Yeah. But maybe... The perfect, volatile Knicks 00:07:31.839 --> 00:07:34.060 needed for what came next. The explosion was 00:07:34.060 --> 00:07:37.399 imminent. Okay, the 70s. New Hollywood. Directors 00:07:37.399 --> 00:07:39.600 taking over. And Friedkin doesn't just join the 00:07:39.600 --> 00:07:41.480 party. He practically kicks the door down in 00:07:41.480 --> 00:07:43.959 1971 with The French Connection. Oh, it was a 00:07:43.959 --> 00:07:45.600 thunderclap. Like you said, instantly massive. 00:07:46.100 --> 00:07:48.180 Critically, commercially, it hit like a bomb. 00:07:48.319 --> 00:07:50.220 And the key was, it didn't feel like a Hollywood 00:07:50.220 --> 00:07:52.579 movie. It felt like something raw, something 00:07:52.579 --> 00:07:54.439 ripped right off the street. The critics all 00:07:54.439 --> 00:07:56.480 picked up on that, right? The documentary style 00:07:56.480 --> 00:07:58.420 saying it was almost too real for Hollywood. 00:07:58.519 --> 00:08:01.339 And that was deliberate. He talked about how 00:08:01.339 --> 00:08:04.100 Costa Gavris' film Z, that political thriller 00:08:04.100 --> 00:08:06.819 from 69, showed him the way. He saw that energy, 00:08:06.939 --> 00:08:09.579 that feeling of catching things on the fly. And 00:08:09.579 --> 00:08:11.980 he wanted that for French Connection. He aimed 00:08:11.980 --> 00:08:14.579 for a style where, quote, the Camry didn't know 00:08:14.579 --> 00:08:16.620 what was going to happen next. Like it was just 00:08:16.620 --> 00:08:18.480 desperately trying to keep up. Which makes the 00:08:18.480 --> 00:08:20.500 audience feel like they're right there in the 00:08:20.500 --> 00:08:23.000 middle of the chaos. Okay. Especially that car 00:08:23.000 --> 00:08:25.819 chase. Oh, the car chase. It's iconic for a reason. 00:08:25.939 --> 00:08:28.759 It felt dangerous because... Well, it often was. 00:08:28.879 --> 00:08:31.240 They were really doing it, speeding through actual 00:08:31.240 --> 00:08:33.419 New York traffic, sometimes without permits, 00:08:33.559 --> 00:08:36.019 just capturing the mayhem. That sense of reality 00:08:36.019 --> 00:08:38.759 wasn't faked. And it worked, big time. Awards 00:08:38.759 --> 00:08:41.399 season was huge for French Connection. Dominated 00:08:41.399 --> 00:08:44.360 it. Five Oscars, including Best Picture and, 00:08:44.379 --> 00:08:46.159 crucially, Best Director for Friedkin himself. 00:08:46.620 --> 00:08:49.759 He also nabbed the Golden Globe, the DGA Award. 00:08:49.879 --> 00:08:52.350 I mean, he was suddenly the guy. An absolute 00:08:52.350 --> 00:08:55.129 powerhouse. So how do you top that? Apparently 00:08:55.129 --> 00:08:57.690 by completely changing gears and revolutionizing 00:08:57.690 --> 00:09:00.870 another genre entirely. Two years later, 1973, 00:09:01.409 --> 00:09:03.970 The Exorcist. Yeah, from gritty street crime 00:09:03.970 --> 00:09:08.649 to supernatural horror based on William Peter 00:09:08.649 --> 00:09:11.350 Blatty's bestseller. And it's still, I mean, 00:09:11.370 --> 00:09:13.629 constantly cited as one of the greatest, if not 00:09:13.629 --> 00:09:15.830 the greatest horror film ever. What made it so 00:09:15.830 --> 00:09:17.490 effective, do you think? Was it applying that 00:09:17.490 --> 00:09:19.710 same documentary approach? I think that was a 00:09:19.710 --> 00:09:22.169 huge part of it. Yeah. He grounds it so much 00:09:22.169 --> 00:09:25.529 in the mundane first, the doctors, the tests, 00:09:25.730 --> 00:09:29.309 the quiet desperation in the house. It all feels 00:09:29.309 --> 00:09:31.629 incredibly real. So when the demonic stuff starts. 00:09:31.690 --> 00:09:33.470 It feels even more shocking because the foundation 00:09:33.470 --> 00:09:36.590 is so solid. Exactly. It feels like an intrusion 00:09:36.590 --> 00:09:39.200 into our world. It was labeled a religious horror 00:09:39.200 --> 00:09:41.940 thriller, and it famously got an X rating initially. 00:09:42.259 --> 00:09:44.960 An X rating for a major studio picture? That's 00:09:44.960 --> 00:09:47.200 wild. It shows you how intense, how visceral 00:09:47.200 --> 00:09:50.139 it was for audiences at the time. Unprecedented, 00:09:50.200 --> 00:09:52.919 really. But the establishment had to take notice. 00:09:53.139 --> 00:09:55.759 Ten Oscar nominations, including Best Director 00:09:55.759 --> 00:09:58.279 again for Friedkin. It won for screenplay and 00:09:58.279 --> 00:10:00.860 sound. So he proved he could bring artistic weight, 00:10:01.000 --> 00:10:03.600 critical acclaim, to even the most controversial 00:10:03.600 --> 00:10:06.100 genre material. Absolutely. He was on top of 00:10:06.100 --> 00:10:07.820 the world. He had all the power, all the creative 00:10:07.820 --> 00:10:10.320 freedom. Which, as we know, can be a dangerous 00:10:10.320 --> 00:10:13.139 thing for an auteur's. What's the classic mistake 00:10:13.139 --> 00:10:15.379 when you have that kind of blank check? You chase 00:10:15.379 --> 00:10:19.559 the dream project. The personal obsession. Interestingly, 00:10:19.840 --> 00:10:23.340 he, Coppola, and Peter Bogdanovich actually tried 00:10:23.340 --> 00:10:25.220 to institutionalize their power around that. 00:10:25.529 --> 00:10:27.870 They formed the director's company at Paramount 00:10:27.870 --> 00:10:30.470 in 73. Right. I remember hearing about that. 00:10:30.509 --> 00:10:32.509 What happened? Well, Coppola made the conversation. 00:10:33.029 --> 00:10:36.549 Bogdanovich did Daisy Miller. But Friedkin, he 00:10:36.549 --> 00:10:38.990 clashed with the others, apparently felt constrained, 00:10:39.090 --> 00:10:42.389 and just walked away. Abruptly. Huh. So much 00:10:42.389 --> 00:10:44.309 for collaboration. Yeah, kind of killed the company. 00:10:44.429 --> 00:10:46.509 It really underscores how much he valued his 00:10:46.509 --> 00:10:49.350 own singular vision above all else. Which leads 00:10:49.350 --> 00:10:52.250 us directly to... The crash. The fall after the 00:10:52.250 --> 00:10:55.909 peak. Sorcerer, 1977. This was the film for him, 00:10:55.950 --> 00:10:58.289 his passion project. He wanted to remake Henri 00:10:58.289 --> 00:11:01.389 -Georges Clouseau's 1953 masterpiece, The Wages 00:11:01.389 --> 00:11:03.710 of Fear. He sighed as this perfect existential 00:11:03.710 --> 00:11:06.769 thriller. And he went all in, no compromise, 00:11:07.070 --> 00:11:09.049 total realism, which meant a hellish production. 00:11:09.490 --> 00:11:11.629 Mostly shot in the Dominican Republic jungles. 00:11:12.110 --> 00:11:15.690 The stories are insane disease, terrible weather, 00:11:15.909 --> 00:11:18.450 trucks falling apart, bridges collapsing, just 00:11:18.450 --> 00:11:21.899 logistical nightmares constantly. He pushed everyone, 00:11:22.220 --> 00:11:24.559 including himself, to the absolute limit. And 00:11:24.559 --> 00:11:26.740 the budget showed it, right? Ballooned like crazy. 00:11:26.940 --> 00:11:30.539 Ended up around $22 million. Now, you have to 00:11:30.539 --> 00:11:34.500 remember, for 1977, that's a fortune. Like, Close 00:11:34.500 --> 00:11:36.539 Encounters cost about $20 million that year. 00:11:36.679 --> 00:11:39.779 This was a gargantuan gamble. That timing. Oh, 00:11:39.820 --> 00:11:42.179 the timing. Could not have been worse. Sorcerer 00:11:42.179 --> 00:11:45.080 opens exactly one week after a little film called 00:11:45.080 --> 00:11:48.210 Star Wars. Ouch. Yeah. Lucas' film just changed 00:11:48.210 --> 00:11:50.210 everything overnight. Suddenly everyone wanted 00:11:50.210 --> 00:11:52.830 upbeat escapist fantasy. And here comes Friedkin 00:11:52.830 --> 00:11:55.029 with his gritty, dark, sweaty existential nightmare 00:11:55.029 --> 00:11:57.710 about desperate men driving nitroglycerin through 00:11:57.710 --> 00:11:59.610 hell. Audiences just weren't having it. Not at 00:11:59.610 --> 00:12:01.610 all. It got completely buried, ignored. It was 00:12:01.610 --> 00:12:04.289 a massive financial disaster. But for Friedkin, 00:12:04.409 --> 00:12:06.490 it was more than that. It was personal, right? 00:12:06.590 --> 00:12:09.289 He considered it his best. He called it his finest 00:12:09.289 --> 00:12:12.049 film. To pour everything into that, to believe 00:12:12.049 --> 00:12:14.429 it's your masterpiece and then have it just evaporate. 00:12:14.779 --> 00:12:17.740 Critically and commercially swallowed by this 00:12:17.740 --> 00:12:20.779 pop culture phenomenon. It must have been utterly 00:12:20.779 --> 00:12:23.200 devastating. Yeah. A soul crushing blow, you 00:12:23.200 --> 00:12:25.600 imagine. And it hurt his career badly. Big time. 00:12:26.019 --> 00:12:28.440 Damaged his reputation, his bankability. He tried 00:12:28.440 --> 00:12:31.360 to bounce back quickly with the Brinks job in 00:12:31.360 --> 00:12:34.240 78. Kind of a crime comedy. Didn't work either. 00:12:34.460 --> 00:12:37.539 Nope. Another commercial disappointment. The 00:12:37.539 --> 00:12:39.840 golden boy of the early 70s had definitely hit 00:12:39.840 --> 00:12:43.360 a rough patch. A very public, very painful stumble. 00:12:43.580 --> 00:12:45.799 So heading into the 80s, Friedkin still got that 00:12:45.799 --> 00:12:48.659 reputation right. Uncompromising. Tenth tense. 00:12:48.919 --> 00:12:51.080 And he dives right back into controversy with 00:12:51.080 --> 00:12:53.659 cruising in 1980. Oh, cruising. Yeah, that was 00:12:53.659 --> 00:12:55.840 that was something else. Based on a Gerald Walker 00:12:55.840 --> 00:12:59.019 crime novel, stars Al Pacino as a cop going undercover 00:12:59.019 --> 00:13:01.879 in New York's gay S &M scene to catch a killer. 00:13:02.019 --> 00:13:05.129 The subject matter alone was just. Incendiary 00:13:05.129 --> 00:13:06.870 for the time. And the reaction was immediate, 00:13:07.009 --> 00:13:09.529 wasn't it? Even during filming. Huge protests, 00:13:09.789 --> 00:13:12.590 mostly from gay rights activists who were really 00:13:12.590 --> 00:13:15.769 concerned, understandably, that the film would 00:13:15.769 --> 00:13:18.049 just reinforce negative stereotypes, link the 00:13:18.049 --> 00:13:20.789 community with violence. It was incredibly contentious. 00:13:21.049 --> 00:13:23.870 And it still is, right? People still debate that 00:13:23.870 --> 00:13:27.889 film fiercely, how it portrays that world, its 00:13:27.889 --> 00:13:30.830 use of identity in a thriller context. Absolutely. 00:13:30.970 --> 00:13:35.009 It remains a really complex, debated film. Critically, 00:13:35.049 --> 00:13:37.169 it got hammered at the time. Commercially, it 00:13:37.169 --> 00:13:40.690 did. Moderate box office. But the critical reception 00:13:40.690 --> 00:13:44.450 was brutal. Which brings us back to that amazing 00:13:44.450 --> 00:13:47.889 Friedkin duality. Extremes again. Exactly. Here's 00:13:47.889 --> 00:13:50.169 the guy with the Oscars, the Golden Globes, and 00:13:50.169 --> 00:13:52.870 for Cruising, he gets Razzie nominations. Worst 00:13:52.870 --> 00:13:55.049 director and worst screenplay. That's incredible. 00:13:55.309 --> 00:13:57.710 The Razzies. How many directors can claim both? 00:13:58.200 --> 00:14:00.220 Best director, Oscar, and worst director, Razzy 00:14:00.220 --> 00:14:02.820 Nom. Not many. It's like the perfect symbol of 00:14:02.820 --> 00:14:04.480 his career, isn't it? Right. Willing to go there, 00:14:04.539 --> 00:14:06.620 to make the film he wanted to make, regardless 00:14:06.620 --> 00:14:08.500 of whether the reaction was acclaim or, you know, 00:14:08.539 --> 00:14:10.600 raspberries. Right after that whole firestorm, 00:14:10.620 --> 00:14:12.259 though, things got serious on a personal level. 00:14:12.419 --> 00:14:15.179 His health? Yeah, the intensity might have finally 00:14:15.179 --> 00:14:17.440 caught up. He had a major heart attack, March 00:14:17.440 --> 00:14:21.320 6, 1981. Turns out it was due to a genetic defect. 00:14:21.820 --> 00:14:24.980 It laid him up for months, required serious rehab, 00:14:25.179 --> 00:14:27.659 a real wake -up call physically. Must have been 00:14:27.659 --> 00:14:30.659 terrifying. After surviving that, did his work 00:14:30.659 --> 00:14:32.940 change? Well, his next film was kind of different 00:14:32.940 --> 00:14:36.139 tonally. Deal of the Century in 1983. It was 00:14:36.139 --> 00:14:38.940 a satire about arms dealing, Chevy Chase and 00:14:38.940 --> 00:14:41.820 Sigourney Weaver. Trying for dark comedy, maybe. 00:14:42.059 --> 00:14:44.200 Didn't quite land with audiences used to his 00:14:44.200 --> 00:14:46.340 thrillers. And then he did something really unexpected 00:14:46.340 --> 00:14:49.440 for an Oscar -winning director back then. music 00:14:49.440 --> 00:14:51.960 videos. Totally unexpected. It's wild to think 00:14:51.960 --> 00:14:54.500 about now. A major filmmaker like him jumping 00:14:54.500 --> 00:14:56.779 into MTV right when it was exploding. He was 00:14:56.779 --> 00:14:58.320 actually one of the first really high profile 00:14:58.320 --> 00:15:00.320 film directors to do it. Which ones did he do? 00:15:00.539 --> 00:15:03.559 Laura Branigan's Self Control in 1984. That video 00:15:03.559 --> 00:15:06.440 is super moody, very atmospheric, very 80s. And 00:15:06.440 --> 00:15:08.480 then he did Barbra Streisand's version of Somewhere 00:15:08.480 --> 00:15:11.500 from West Side Story in 85. It shows adaptability, 00:15:11.580 --> 00:15:14.220 I guess, applying his visual style to this totally 00:15:14.220 --> 00:15:17.070 different commercial format. Definitely. But 00:15:17.070 --> 00:15:18.870 he didn't stay away from his signature genre 00:15:18.870 --> 00:15:21.590 for long. He came roaring back with a really 00:15:21.590 --> 00:15:24.529 strong crime thriller in 85, To Live and Die 00:15:24.529 --> 00:15:28.509 in L .A. Ah, yes. William Peterson, Willem Dafoe. 00:15:28.649 --> 00:15:31.509 That one got great reviews. Huge critical favorite. 00:15:31.970 --> 00:15:34.909 People saw it as a major return to form. Lots 00:15:34.909 --> 00:15:37.429 of comparisons to The French Connection, especially 00:15:37.429 --> 00:15:41.240 because of another. Absolutely insane car chase 00:15:41.240 --> 00:15:43.399 sequence. The one on the freeway going the wrong 00:15:43.399 --> 00:15:45.879 way. That's the one shot against traffic on the 00:15:45.879 --> 00:15:48.299 L .A. freeway. Yeah. Just pure Friedkin adrenaline. 00:15:48.460 --> 00:15:51.440 That raw, chaotic energy was back in full force. 00:15:51.659 --> 00:15:55.759 So the late. 80s into the 90s, he stuck with 00:15:55.759 --> 00:15:58.059 thrillers and horror mostly. Pretty much. He 00:15:58.059 --> 00:16:00.399 did a courtroom thriller called Rampage in 87, 00:16:00.639 --> 00:16:02.720 which Roger Ebert actually gave a thumbs up to. 00:16:02.799 --> 00:16:04.720 Friedkin wrote and produced that one too. Okay. 00:16:04.860 --> 00:16:06.620 Then there was a supernatural horror film, The 00:16:06.620 --> 00:16:08.940 Guardian, in 1990, which has kind of become a 00:16:08.940 --> 00:16:11.299 cult thing. But maybe the most revealing film 00:16:11.299 --> 00:16:14.360 from this period, in terms of his mindset, was 00:16:14.360 --> 00:16:17.799 Jade in 1995. The erotic thriller with David 00:16:17.799 --> 00:16:21.039 Caruso and Linda Fiorentino, that one didn't 00:16:21.039 --> 00:16:23.710 do well, did it? Critically savaged. Audiences 00:16:23.710 --> 00:16:26.809 hated it. A definite dud. But here's the thing. 00:16:27.110 --> 00:16:29.730 Friedkin himself later said Jade was one of his 00:16:29.730 --> 00:16:32.529 favorite films that he directed. Seriously. After 00:16:32.529 --> 00:16:35.009 Fresh Connection and Exorcist, he picks Jade. 00:16:35.230 --> 00:16:37.529 It tells you everything, doesn't it? It shows 00:16:37.529 --> 00:16:40.230 that the... absolute disaster of Sorcerer, that 00:16:40.230 --> 00:16:43.610 critical and commercial rejection, it never broke 00:16:43.610 --> 00:16:46.730 his own internal measure of success. If he felt 00:16:46.730 --> 00:16:49.149 he'd achieved what he set out to do, if it was 00:16:49.149 --> 00:16:51.610 true to his vision, then the external reaction, 00:16:51.870 --> 00:16:53.870 positive or negative, just didn't matter in the 00:16:53.870 --> 00:16:55.990 same way. He kept following his own beat. Okay, 00:16:56.049 --> 00:16:59.009 so moving into the 2000s, the century turns and 00:16:59.009 --> 00:17:01.330 Friedkin gets a nice reminder of his own legacy, 00:17:01.509 --> 00:17:03.710 right? Yeah, The Exorcist gets re -released in 00:17:03.710 --> 00:17:06.369 2000, the version you've never seen, the director's 00:17:06.369 --> 00:17:08.420 cut with extra foot. Okay. And it's a hit all 00:17:08.420 --> 00:17:10.819 over again. It makes like $40 million just in 00:17:10.819 --> 00:17:13.380 the U .S., shows the staying power. And this 00:17:13.380 --> 00:17:15.259 period also marks a really interesting return 00:17:15.259 --> 00:17:18.220 for him stylistically. Back to adapting stage 00:17:18.220 --> 00:17:20.299 plays, kind of a full circle from Birthday Party 00:17:20.299 --> 00:17:22.640 and Boys in the Band. Exactly. And he found a 00:17:22.640 --> 00:17:24.460 perfect collaborator in the playwright, Tracy 00:17:24.460 --> 00:17:27.440 Letts. He directed three films based on Letts' 00:17:27.460 --> 00:17:29.420 work. And they were all really well received 00:17:29.420 --> 00:17:32.059 critically. A definite late career resurgence. 00:17:32.299 --> 00:17:35.819 First one was Bug in 2006 with Ashley Judd and 00:17:35.819 --> 00:17:38.519 Michael Shannon. Right. He saw the play in 2004 00:17:38.519 --> 00:17:40.700 and apparently felt this immediate connection, 00:17:40.799 --> 00:17:43.059 said he felt metaphorically on the same page 00:17:43.059 --> 00:17:45.680 as Letts. He was drawn to that claustrophobic, 00:17:45.720 --> 00:17:49.180 intense, dialogue -heavy story. And it paid off. 00:17:49.690 --> 00:17:52.069 The film won the Fipressi Prize at the Cannes 00:17:52.069 --> 00:17:54.069 Film Festival. Fipressi. That's the International 00:17:54.069 --> 00:17:56.910 Film Critics Award. Yep. A big deal, especially 00:17:56.910 --> 00:17:59.529 at Cannes. It signaled that the serious film 00:17:59.529 --> 00:18:02.690 world was recognizing this as a significant comeback 00:18:02.690 --> 00:18:06.390 artistically. Then came Killer Joe in 2011. Also 00:18:06.390 --> 00:18:08.750 Letts. That one starred Matthew McConaughey in 00:18:08.750 --> 00:18:11.670 a really startling role. Oh, yeah. The McConaissance 00:18:11.670 --> 00:18:13.589 was partly fueled by roles like that. It's a 00:18:13.589 --> 00:18:16.069 super dark comedy. Very shocking. Premiered at 00:18:16.069 --> 00:18:17.990 Venice. It got great reviews again. Critics loved 00:18:17.990 --> 00:18:21.680 it. Commercially. Not so much. Why not? If the 00:18:21.680 --> 00:18:23.500 reviews were good. It got slapped with an NC 00:18:23.500 --> 00:18:26.200 -17 rating. Mostly for violence and some pretty 00:18:26.200 --> 00:18:28.700 graphic sexual content. And, you know, an NC 00:18:28.700 --> 00:18:30.559 -17 is basically the kiss of death commercially. 00:18:31.079 --> 00:18:32.920 Limits advertising. Limits where it can play. 00:18:33.119 --> 00:18:36.299 So, classic Friedkin again. Uncompromising vision, 00:18:36.519 --> 00:18:39.400 even if it hurts the box office. Textbook. He 00:18:39.400 --> 00:18:41.819 clearly wasn't going to soften the material to 00:18:41.819 --> 00:18:45.269 get an R rating. artistic integrity over commercial 00:18:45.269 --> 00:18:48.410 prospects. Even with great reviews, it just couldn't 00:18:48.410 --> 00:18:50.910 find a wide audience. And the final film in that 00:18:50.910 --> 00:18:53.589 Letts trilogy and his last film overall was The 00:18:53.589 --> 00:18:56.250 Kane Mutiny Court Martial, finished just before 00:18:56.250 --> 00:18:59.190 he died, debuted posthumously at Venice in 2023. 00:18:59.690 --> 00:19:02.130 A fitting end to that cycle. Yeah. But it wasn't 00:19:02.130 --> 00:19:03.990 just movies in this late period. He also went 00:19:03.990 --> 00:19:06.410 back to TV, interestingly. Right. He directed 00:19:06.410 --> 00:19:08.710 a couple episodes of CSI. Yeah, the original 00:19:08.710 --> 00:19:11.569 CSI, Crime Scene Investigation. He did one called 00:19:11.569 --> 00:19:14.450 Cockroaches. directed their big 200th episode, 00:19:14.609 --> 00:19:17.430 Mascara, which is cool because it reunited him 00:19:17.430 --> 00:19:19.589 with William Peterson. The star of To Live and 00:19:19.589 --> 00:19:22.450 Die in L .A. Exactly. So you see him comfortable 00:19:22.450 --> 00:19:26.150 revisiting collaborators, revisiting formats 00:19:26.150 --> 00:19:29.869 like TV where he started, applying that intense 00:19:29.869 --> 00:19:33.930 focus style to episodic storytelling. And he 00:19:33.930 --> 00:19:35.910 even went back to documentaries, didn't he? But 00:19:35.910 --> 00:19:39.069 with a very freaking twist. He did. In 2017, 00:19:39.250 --> 00:19:42.240 he released The Devil and Father Amorth. Which 00:19:42.240 --> 00:19:43.980 is just wild when you think about it. How so? 00:19:44.240 --> 00:19:45.920 Well, it's a documentary about Father Gabriel 00:19:45.920 --> 00:19:49.000 Amorth, the Vatican's chief exorcist, performing 00:19:49.000 --> 00:19:51.619 the ninth exorcism on a particular woman in Italy. 00:19:52.180 --> 00:19:54.440 So he's taking the subject matter of his most 00:19:54.440 --> 00:19:56.660 famous movie, The Exorcist. And tackling it for 00:19:56.660 --> 00:19:59.000 real as a documentary. Exactly. Like he did with 00:19:59.000 --> 00:20:01.519 Paul Crump way back when. Applying that objective, 00:20:01.819 --> 00:20:04.680 observational camera to this incredibly charged, 00:20:04.859 --> 00:20:07.640 supernatural subject. Seeking truth in the mystery. 00:20:07.799 --> 00:20:09.880 It's the perfect synthesis of his career extremes. 00:20:10.200 --> 00:20:11.960 But the biggest surprise, the thing nobody saw 00:20:11.960 --> 00:20:14.319 coming, was the opera. He's becoming a major 00:20:14.319 --> 00:20:16.480 opera director. It's genuinely astonishing. And 00:20:16.480 --> 00:20:18.359 this wasn't just like a little side project. 00:20:18.579 --> 00:20:20.819 He directed opera professionally internationally 00:20:20.819 --> 00:20:23.480 from 1998 right up until near the end of his 00:20:23.480 --> 00:20:25.859 life. It was a serious second career. What's 00:20:25.859 --> 00:20:27.859 so surprising about it, though? He worked with 00:20:27.859 --> 00:20:30.440 actors. He understood drama. But think about 00:20:30.440 --> 00:20:33.339 the control. Friedkin's film signature was often 00:20:33.339 --> 00:20:35.859 about capturing chaos, right? That documentary 00:20:35.859 --> 00:20:38.359 feel, unpredictable locations, the camera struggling 00:20:38.359 --> 00:20:42.680 to keep up. Opera is the polar opposite. How 00:20:42.680 --> 00:20:45.259 do you mean? It's total structure. The music 00:20:45.259 --> 00:20:48.279 is set. The libretto is fixed. The timing is 00:20:48.279 --> 00:20:50.819 incredibly precise. There's very little room 00:20:50.819 --> 00:20:53.119 for improvisation in the way he worked on film. 00:20:53.299 --> 00:20:55.920 It's all about interpretation with an incredibly 00:20:55.920 --> 00:20:58.480 rigid constraints. So maybe he found that structure 00:20:58.480 --> 00:21:02.190 freeing. After decades of battling chaos on film 00:21:02.190 --> 00:21:04.029 sets. That's a great way to put it. Maybe he 00:21:04.029 --> 00:21:06.029 needed that discipline, that formality. Yeah. 00:21:06.130 --> 00:21:08.210 And the scale of his opera work shows how serious 00:21:08.210 --> 00:21:10.509 he was. He did Berg's Wuzik in Florence in 98, 00:21:10.809 --> 00:21:13.250 double bill of Bartok's Duke Bluebeard's Castle 00:21:13.250 --> 00:21:15.710 and Puccini's Gianni Scicchi for the L .A. Opera 00:21:15.710 --> 00:21:18.990 in 2002. Strauss's Salome in Munich in 2006. 00:21:19.430 --> 00:21:22.509 Wow. These are major works, major houses. Absolutely. 00:21:22.650 --> 00:21:25.549 And it continued late Verdi's Rigoletto back 00:21:25.549 --> 00:21:29.069 in Florence in 2015. This wasn't dabbling. It 00:21:29.069 --> 00:21:31.190 was a deep dive into a completely different artistic 00:21:31.190 --> 00:21:34.289 world, one defined by tradition and structure, 00:21:34.470 --> 00:21:36.990 standing in stark contrast to the raw energy 00:21:36.990 --> 00:21:39.150 of French connection. It just shows his constant 00:21:39.150 --> 00:21:41.710 need to explore. Different ways of expressing 00:21:41.710 --> 00:21:44.869 himself, I guess. Capturing the moment or interpreting 00:21:44.869 --> 00:21:47.529 the score. Constantly pushing, constantly exploring. 00:21:47.769 --> 00:21:50.009 And alongside all this, he managed to write his 00:21:50.009 --> 00:21:52.529 memoir, The Friedkin Connection, published in 00:21:52.529 --> 00:21:55.289 2013, getting his own story down before that 00:21:55.289 --> 00:21:58.009 final film, K -Mutiny, came out after he was 00:21:58.009 --> 00:22:00.609 gone. So to really understand the guy who could 00:22:00.609 --> 00:22:03.349 make The Exorcist and then direct Salome at the 00:22:03.349 --> 00:22:06.490 opera, we need to touch on his own beliefs, right? 00:22:06.589 --> 00:22:08.470 His philosophy. Yeah, it's pretty key. He was 00:22:08.470 --> 00:22:10.410 raised Jewish, but later in life he described 00:22:10.410 --> 00:22:13.630 himself as an agnostic. Agnostic, meaning unsure 00:22:13.630 --> 00:22:17.150 about God's existence. Essentially, yes. But 00:22:17.150 --> 00:22:19.789 it wasn't a simple dismissive agnosticism. He 00:22:19.789 --> 00:22:23.009 actually clarified it. He said he strongly believed 00:22:23.009 --> 00:22:25.640 in the teachings of Jesus Christ. And he felt 00:22:25.640 --> 00:22:27.400 that while things like God and the soul were 00:22:27.400 --> 00:22:30.319 ultimately unknowable mysteries, anyone who outright 00:22:30.319 --> 00:22:33.099 denied God was being dishonest about what he 00:22:33.099 --> 00:22:35.339 called the mystery of fate. The mystery of fate. 00:22:35.380 --> 00:22:37.859 That feels very relevant to his films. Hugely 00:22:37.859 --> 00:22:40.559 relevant. That sense that life can just be upended 00:22:40.559 --> 00:22:43.000 by random chance, by forces beyond our control. 00:22:43.400 --> 00:22:45.339 That's everywhere in his work. Think about the 00:22:45.339 --> 00:22:47.519 sheer arbitrary cruelty and French connection, 00:22:47.779 --> 00:22:50.599 the random horror of possession in The Exorcist, 00:22:50.599 --> 00:22:53.240 the absolutely doomed nature of The Mission and 00:22:53.240 --> 00:22:55.660 Sorcerer. His characters are always battling 00:22:55.660 --> 00:22:58.460 fate, battling this indifferent, mysterious universe. 00:22:58.680 --> 00:23:00.400 Okay, that makes a lot of sense. What about his 00:23:00.400 --> 00:23:02.740 film influences? Who shaped him? Sounds like 00:23:02.740 --> 00:23:04.359 it wasn't just Hollywood. Definitely not just 00:23:04.359 --> 00:23:06.500 Hollywood, especially early on. He always pointed 00:23:06.500 --> 00:23:09.440 to the great European directors and Kurosawa. 00:23:10.089 --> 00:23:12.869 Jean -Luc Godard, Fellini, Truffaut. Those are 00:23:12.869 --> 00:23:15.130 the names you mentioned. The giants of world 00:23:15.130 --> 00:23:17.289 cinema. Any specific films that were touchstones 00:23:17.289 --> 00:23:19.630 for him? He talked a lot about Henri -Georges 00:23:19.630 --> 00:23:22.089 Clouseau. Not just Wages of Fear, which obviously 00:23:22.089 --> 00:23:24.210 obsessed him enough to remake it as Sorcerer, 00:23:24.250 --> 00:23:27.089 but also Clouseau's other masterpiece, the psychological 00:23:27.089 --> 00:23:30.490 thriller Le Diabolique. That one clearly left 00:23:30.490 --> 00:23:33.210 a mark. And Hitchcock. Besides the Thai incident. 00:23:33.549 --> 00:23:36.329 Oh, Psycho. He said he watched Psycho over and 00:23:36.329 --> 00:23:38.960 over again. studied its construction, its suspense, 00:23:39.180 --> 00:23:41.500 and that documentary influence never faded either. 00:23:41.880 --> 00:23:45.460 He cited Harvest of Shame, that 1960 TV doc about 00:23:45.460 --> 00:23:48.119 migrant workers, as being really fundamental 00:23:48.119 --> 00:23:51.619 to his understanding of how powerful raw, observed 00:23:51.619 --> 00:23:54.180 reality could be on camera. What about Citizen 00:23:54.180 --> 00:23:56.279 Kane? Isn't that the film everyone says inspired 00:23:56.279 --> 00:23:58.789 him as a kid? That's the common story, the myth 00:23:58.789 --> 00:24:01.369 almost. But Friedkin himself actually corrected 00:24:01.369 --> 00:24:03.170 that. He said, no, he didn't see Citizen Kane 00:24:03.170 --> 00:24:06.410 until 1960, when he was already 25. And that's 00:24:06.410 --> 00:24:07.710 when it hit him. That's when he really became 00:24:07.710 --> 00:24:10.250 a serious student of film, a true cineast. Interesting. 00:24:10.329 --> 00:24:12.789 So the conversion came later than people thought. 00:24:12.890 --> 00:24:15.210 And just to circle back on his style, that breakthrough 00:24:15.210 --> 00:24:17.650 with French Connection, it really came down to 00:24:17.650 --> 00:24:19.789 seeing Z. That seems to be the catalyst, yeah. 00:24:20.750 --> 00:24:22.970 Caustic Everest's films showed him how to merge 00:24:22.970 --> 00:24:25.549 that documentary energy, that feeling of immediacy 00:24:25.549 --> 00:24:28.230 with a fictional narrative. That documentary 00:24:28.230 --> 00:24:30.990 -like realism wasn't just style, it was technique. 00:24:31.410 --> 00:24:33.529 It was a conscious choice. He wanted the camera 00:24:33.529 --> 00:24:35.650 to feel like it just stumbled onto the scene, 00:24:35.809 --> 00:24:38.410 you know, capturing things as they happened, 00:24:38.569 --> 00:24:41.130 injecting that feeling of unpredictability, almost 00:24:41.130 --> 00:24:43.529 danger, which he pulled off perfectly in French 00:24:43.529 --> 00:24:45.430 Connection. So when you look at his whole career, 00:24:45.490 --> 00:24:49.589 all the awards, it's just such a story of contrasts. 00:24:49.839 --> 00:24:52.279 Incredible contrast. He got huge honors later 00:24:52.279 --> 00:24:55.480 in life. The Golden Lion for Lifetime Achievement 00:24:55.480 --> 00:24:58.359 at Venice in 2013. Other big awards in Munich, 00:24:58.460 --> 00:25:01.430 Saturn Awards. recognition from the industry 00:25:01.430 --> 00:25:03.950 that he was a major figure, a lasting influence. 00:25:04.309 --> 00:25:06.269 But you always have to mention the other side. 00:25:06.630 --> 00:25:09.309 You have to, because how many filmmakers win 00:25:09.309 --> 00:25:11.809 the Oscar, win Golden Globes, and also get nominated 00:25:11.809 --> 00:25:14.150 for a Razzie for Worst Director? It's almost 00:25:14.150 --> 00:25:16.329 unheard of. He was just completely unwilling 00:25:16.329 --> 00:25:18.690 to bend his vision, whether that led to glory 00:25:18.690 --> 00:25:21.789 or disaster. Okay, so wrapping this all up, what's 00:25:21.789 --> 00:25:23.700 the takeaway on William Friedkin? I think his 00:25:23.700 --> 00:25:26.680 career is just uniquely defined by these incredibly 00:25:26.680 --> 00:25:29.220 sharp turns, these extremes, right? And this 00:25:29.220 --> 00:25:32.119 absolute unwavering commitment to whatever he 00:25:32.119 --> 00:25:35.119 saw as artistic truth. He mastered that blend 00:25:35.119 --> 00:25:38.480 of documentary grit and narrative punch, creating 00:25:38.480 --> 00:25:40.920 films that shook the industry. But that same 00:25:40.920 --> 00:25:44.319 intensity, that refusal to compromise. Led to 00:25:44.319 --> 00:25:47.440 some spectacular flameouts. especially Sorcerer, 00:25:47.460 --> 00:25:49.799 the film he loved most, which became this symbol 00:25:49.799 --> 00:25:52.440 of noble failure. He was this agnostic auteur, 00:25:52.559 --> 00:25:54.519 always digging for something raw, something true, 00:25:54.680 --> 00:25:57.079 whether it was on the streets, in a demonic possession, 00:25:57.319 --> 00:25:59.960 in a tightly wound stage play, or even within 00:25:59.960 --> 00:26:02.559 the rigid structure of grand opera, always searching. 00:26:02.990 --> 00:26:04.730 Which brings us back to that shadow, doesn't 00:26:04.730 --> 00:26:06.730 it? The shadow of Sorcerer. When you have these 00:26:06.730 --> 00:26:08.890 monumental early hits, French Connection, The 00:26:08.890 --> 00:26:11.069 Exorcist films that changed the world, how does 00:26:11.069 --> 00:26:12.890 a failure, that personal, that catastrophic, 00:26:12.970 --> 00:26:14.769 especially for a film you believe is your masterpiece, 00:26:15.109 --> 00:26:18.150 how does that haunt you? How does it shape every 00:26:18.150 --> 00:26:20.190 choice you make for the next, what, 40 years? 00:26:20.470 --> 00:26:23.349 Does it make you play it safer? Or does it just 00:26:23.349 --> 00:26:25.549 make you double down, become even more defiant, 00:26:25.710 --> 00:26:28.730 pushing towards the next risk, the next controversy, 00:26:29.069 --> 00:26:31.630 or maybe seeking refuge in the absolute control 00:26:31.630 --> 00:26:33.829 of something like opera? that's the question 00:26:33.829 --> 00:26:36.069 he leaves us with isn't it the ultimate mystery 00:26:36.069 --> 00:26:39.430 of fate in his own tumultuous brilliant and utterly 00:26:39.430 --> 00:26:40.890 uncompromising career