Review of The French Connection (1971) by Edith N — 08 Oct 2008

So I've been thinking about it, and I disagree with the entire concept of "movies everyone should see." Oh, I'm still tracking how many of the 1001 I've seen (about a third), but leaving aside the fact that some of them don't appear to be available on DVD, making seeing them unlikely, there are some films that just won't appeal to everyone. I don't like Woody Allen much, for example, so I'm skipping his films. Why should I see them? I'm not going to get what I'm supposed to out of them, because I simply don't think the man is funny. Similarly, [i]The French Connection[/i] is not really my thing. I'm sure other people like it--there's some moron on IMDB trying to get everyone to give it a 10, whether they think it deserves it or not, so it'll get on the Top 250--but I couldn't tell you on a bet what any of the characters are called, which will make the following summary somewhat confused.

Okay, as will the fact that I'm not 100% sure what was going on half the time. As far as I can tell, there's this French guy who is smuggling, or attempting to smuggle, heroin into the US from, well, France. In and of itself, this is not a terribly surprising activity. However, Gene Hackman finds out about it . . . somehow . . . and he and Roy Scheider go after the smugglers. There are a lot of scenes of people being shot/shot at, and there are plenty of scenes of cars chasing trains. There are a surprising number of sequences involving testing heroin for purity, really, since that's not a terribly interesting activity to watch. There's fighting with higher-ups for reasons I don't entirely understand.

Oh, look. I wasn't really paying attention. I stopped caring pretty quickly, but this is the sort of movie I imagine you guys expect me to get through. I don't think it's a guy movie, exactly, though it does have some guy movie aspects. It's the sort of movie about which you have to use the word "gritty." Unfortunately for all of us, I was unable to piece together enough characterization to say if there was any; I was unable to care enough to figure out what the plot was. I feel bad about this; I really do. However, it serves as a good example of a "classic" movie that I just can't get into--and I don't understand why anyone else does, either, which you know is kind of rare for classic movies.

At roughly the same time, Gene Hackman did the excellent [i]The Conversation[/i]. That was gripping, if one may so exploit a cliche. Gene Hackman let us into his character's mind on that one, and we could watch him slowly going crazy. His character in this one is not. He starts out surly and determined, and he ends surly and determined. He's driven to do whatever it is that he's doing, but there is no real suspense there. I listed this movie as a mystery/suspense because I think it's trying to be, and certainly it's closer than most of the other headings we work with here, but I didn't feel any concern or even interest about What Happens Next. This is a failing in any movie, but the more so in a police procedural, which is all about What Happens Next, not necessarily to whom.

I'm glad for those who like this movie, and I'm sorry to those who feel as though I'm dumping all over an excellent movie. I hated the music. I wasn't impressed by the cinematography. I couldn't figure out what was going on from one minute to another, which is why I stopped paying attention. Oh, it won a whole bunch of Oscars, so clearly, there are/were people who really get into it more than I. I'm sorry, fans, but I really can't, for a change, understand [i]why[/i].