To Live and Die in L.A. opens with a gunshot and ends in fire.
And all the bits of drama and action in between simmer like the heat up off the Los Angeles sidewalks.
Based on the novel of the same name by Gerald Petievich, a former Secret Service Agent, the film was directed by William Friedkin – director of The French Connection and no stranger to law and lawbreakers’ drama.
Critics generally praised the film, especially its cinematography and authenticity. Famous critic Roger Ebert hailed it as Friedkin’s comeback, giving the movie four-out-of-four stars.
And made on a modest $6 million budget, the movie reportedly cleared $17.3 million at the box office – a sum you’d imagine made it a quiet success.
But ask the internet’s movie buffs about the picture today, and you’d think it was one of the 1980’s biggest smashes. Another film on those “so underrated” lists that grow like weeds online.
Friedkin said it’s one of his movies that most closely came out the way he had envisioned it in his mind – which is another way of saying one of his top works. And it’s not hard to see why.
The film’s tantalizing poster hints at its cinematic riches – a hazy retro sunset and a suave anti-hero obscured in shadow with aviator sunglasses, a drawn pistol, and something in that briefcase.
Oozing with style and bopping to Wang Chung’s pulsing soundtrack, morally ambiguous characters of 1980’s neo-noir clash together against the backdrop of a selfish-ass Los Angeles.
And the film’s standout set piece, a thrilling car chase, readily ranks on “all-time best car chase” lists.
So enough hype. Let’s get down and dirty with this rough-around-the-edges picture.
Is To Live and Die in L.A. a good movie?
The Plot of To Live and Die in L.A.:
Secret Service agents Richard Chance (William Petersen) and Jim Hart (Michael Greene) stop an assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan.
Soon, they are re-assigned as counterfeiting investigators in Los Angeles.
Agent Hart investigates a warehouse he believes is a base of operations for artist-turned-counterfeiter Eric “Rick” Masters (Willem Dafoe). But Masters and his bodyguard, Jack (Jack Hoar), are on to Hart, shooting him dead.
With his partner killed, Chance vows to do whatever it takes to bring Masters down – rules and protocols be damned. Chance’s methods clash with the by-the-book nature of his new partner, John Vukovich (John Pankow).
As he pursues Masters, Chance turns to informant Ruth Lanier (Darlanne Fluegel) for intelligence and a sexual relationship, no doubt against Agency protocol.
Can Chance and Vukovich get close to Masters and take him down?
The Rest of the Main Cast Includes:
- Debra Feuer as Bianca Torres
- John Turturro as Carl Cody
- Dean Stockwell as Bob Grimes
- Steve James as Jeff Rice
- Robert Downey Sr. as Thomas Bateman (as Robert Downey)
- Christopher Allport as Max Waxman
- Valentin de Vargas as Judge Filo Cedillo (as Val DeVargas)
What’s Working Well Here:
Cinematics, +2 Points
Like a visual overture, the film’s intro is all you need to see camera and editing skills popping off in this movie.
There are shots of Los Angeles and its many industrial zones. It slips in little pieces to give you a visual taste of what’s to come, like flashes of villain Rick Masters’s art or his girlfriend in repose.
It’s a city of industry and smog but with a provocative and sexy underbelly.
The montage starts with firing a revolver in close-up and a flash to the ultimate LA retro sunrise: hazy red and the wind sweeping over the palms (like on the soundtrack’s cover).
We continue with the blocky-ass red and green letters for the cast names and title cards. Silly but fitting for the era.
There’s a cheap blood splatter effect, and the editing flashes to a woman in heavy black-and-white makeup. It’s a moment taken from a performance art scene later in the movie, but brought forward here, gives you a sense of the glamor that goes along with the film’s grind.
And then, once Wang Chung’s bass riding theme song comes in, you’re hooked.
Soon, it’s a flurry of money changing hands, which initially didn’t seem relevant. But when you learn the movie is a counterfeiting caper, you get it. Money is everywhere, and some of this could be Masters’s dupes.
You see the bills flowing all over Los Angeles, exchanged or counted by hand, funneling through its shops and city streets.
And then it’s a few snapshots, close-ups of photos from what is probably the Secret Service investigation into Masters, with handwritten notes scribbled on them.
Yeah, Buddy. This is 1985 L.A., all right. And you’re in for one hell of a tour through it.
I couldn’t find a YouTube clip of this cinematic intro where I was confident the channel had the copyright to show the clip. But if you want to seek it out, I bet it’s there.
The “Unknown” Cast of Memorable Characters, +3 Points
On release, the movie was criticized for its cast’s lack of accomplished celebrities.
And that’s funny because you may have to count all the actors you recognize on two hands when you watch it back now.
The venerable Willem Dafoe, who plays villain Rick Masters, has played many antagonists. But I’ve never felt like, oh, no, it’s Dafoe again. You think, oh, hey, it’s Dafoe again!
Willem Dafoe says that Friedkin got him painting to get him into the mindset of counterfeiter/artist Rick Masters. He liked the character’s path of making money to support the art to then destroying his art, lighting it on fire whenever it didn’t meet his high standards.
Masters has that Willem Dafoe way of talking matter-of-factly and yet it’s sinister. He does that Willem Dafoe intriguing stare that sends a chill and conveys intelligence.
Then there’s William Peterson’s swagger as the aptly named Richard Chance.
Roger Ebert said Peterson has some of the qualities of a Steve McQueen. It’s apt. Peterson carries the calm and cool of an agent who knows his job and doesn’t get stuck in the minor details.
Peterson’s Chance is like a catwalk cop (though I guess it’s Secret Service). The character (or maybe just Peterson) has a gait almost like a strut.
He’s got his slick brown boots, tight jeans with rips at the knees, and a jacket zipped down just so. When it’s serious time, he holds his aviators with one hand and his revolver with the other.
But he cruises around in what looks like a blue Ford F-350, knocks back cheap Miller High-Life, and smokes many cigarettes. He doesn’t pop his collar, but it often pops itself.
This isn’t a manicured man of style like a Miami Vice detective. He’s all machismo fearlessness, like some American brand of Italian sprezzatura (if you don’t know it, a word for unplanned, effortless cool).
Darlanne Fluegel, as Chance’s informant and off-the-books affair, Ruth Lanier, plays it pitifully but alluring.
John Pankow is ever-steady as Chance’s new partner, Vucovich (more on this later).
And we’ve got Cohen Bros. and Spike Lee punch-card holder John Turturro (Do the Right Thing, The Big Lebowski) and the always enjoyable Dean Stockwell (Blue Velvet, Quantum Leap).
L.A. Grind, +1 Point
Ask anyone who has worked anywhere in L.A. or Hollywood. This movie has the dog-eat-dog, where can you get me, I’m sizing you up vibes.
Characters use each other to get what they want – even the ones that look like they’re losing the game.
Allegiances are formed on mutual needs and broken apart as soon as it’s gone.
It’s almost a meta-piece that way. Made me wonder if Friedkin was thinking about Hollywood.
Wang Chung Soundtrack, +2 Points
Wang Chung (yes, the “Everybody Wang Chung Tonight” band) surprised me with their soundtrack.
Electronic with thumping bass and wailing guitars, it injects scattered energy into every scene, amping you up into feeling the action, sometimes harder than it hits.
Even exposition scenes, like Masters making counterfeit money to the track “City of Angels” – you gotta love the way the Wang Chung music comes into it to give the whole process that extra feeling.
And my personal favorite of the mix is “Black-Blue-White.” It brings in those drums and synths like yeah, yeah, yeah! It’s like being inside Richard Chance’s invincible head – ready to bomb forward and never looking back.
Car Chase and Cracking Fights, +4 Points
Friedkin being Friedkin, he declared he would only put the car chase in this film if it topped what was in The French Connection. And when you consider that that movie regularly makes “best car chases of all time” lists, that’s quite a bold statement.
But this car chase…also makes those same lists.
You have to love this flurry of close calls and revving engines because it’s done in the old way – no CGI, all dangerous, all real.
There’s a POV cam and some impressively tight turns as Chance and Vucovich go speeding through an industrial zone, dodging forklifts and workers, Vucovich screaming and going pale while Chance can’t get enough of the thrill.
I also enjoyed a minor edit in the car chase, where they flashed back to Chance’s base jumping from the bridge earlier in the film, hovering just above the water. Just for that split second, the movie wanted to show you he’s drawing on that invincibility here. But nervous Vucovich? Nah, the editing shows you he’s still fixated on the disaster that put them in this chase.
And the film’s fights aren’t choreographed for style so much as they’re real-feeling struggles.
When Masters has to square up to the mass of muscle that is Steve James’s Jeff Rice and his pals, it’s a desperate scuffle. There’s tipped over furniture and attempted strangulation, not choreographed swings, blocks, and hits.
80’s Not-So-Buddy Cops, +2 Points
It wouldn’t be the 80s without a buddy-cop pairing in this movie (though I guess it’s buddy agents here).
From a family of law enforcers, John Pankow’s Vucovich is a by-the-book agent. And the maverick Richard Chance is intent on living up to his last name.
It looks like a heavy-handed, all-too-obvious pairing meant to produce sparks.
But the contrast between Chance and Vucovich is more about creating an added source of tension in the story than creating a gimmick or selling point for the film.
So as much a staple as the buddy cop formula would be in the 1980s, the necessity of it here keeps it on the right side of the lines and enjoyable.
Peterson has said in behind-the-scenes interviews that he thinks Chance believed, with his badge, he was above not only the law but life and death.
And that free-wheeling perspective flows through the movie.
A thrill-seeker, Chance leaps from a high bridge toward the water, only a cable tied to his leg saving him at the last moment from the plunge.
And Chance doesn’t care for the rule book. He steals evidence from crime scenes before the police can catalog it. He sleeps with his informant and, ignoring what could be genuine feelings from her, coldly informs her he’ll revoke her parole if she stops giving him information.
And like how a scream queen in a horror movie makes the terror more real for the audience,
John Pankow shows us every anxious idea floating around in Vucovich’s head as he protests his new partner’s wild methods.
Length, Pacing, and Energy +2 Points
At one hour and fifty-six minutes, the movie gives itself enough runway to land.
And the pacing is ever-forward. There are action sequences organically peppered throughout and plenty of characters in motion.
Friedkin wanted to make the movie fast, both on and off the screen. The picture had a meager $6 million budget, and much of the crew was non-union and urged to work quickly. Shoot outside, a few takes, and get it done.
This behind-the-scenes momentum intentionally slipped into the film, as Friedkin would shoot scenes allowing actors to think they were rehearsals, then yelling “cut” and putting their spontaneous work into the movie.
Friedkin would also unexpectedly continue scenes without telling the actors beforehand so they could improvise. Often, the footage of extended scenes made it into the film.
For example, in a making-of video, Peterson said that, in the scene where Vucovich and Chance hold up and search the diamond buyer, as far as the script went, it had played out. But instead of yelling “cut,” Friedkin just let it go and kept rolling cameras.
Peterson, as Chance, just kept smashing the locked briefcase against the wall. It actually did break, which was unexpected.
Improvising, Peterson and Pankow, as a now-furious Chance and Vucovich, strip-search the guy for the money they think he’s carrying, kicking him and dropping him down.
And I have to agree with Peterson — since it was real, it looked more authentic.
L.A. Portrait, +1 Point
With Friedkin and crew’s dedication to shooting on the streets and buildings of Los Angeles, the movie is an imprint of a particular place and time. You can see the haze of 1980s L.A. — the era’s graffiti decorating the sides of buildings, its concrete bridges, and the maze of stuck traffic on its freeways.
Had the movie stuck to the sound stages, it wouldn’t have the same appeal now.
And while The French Connection is rusted out and gritty as a chainsaw left in the rain, To Live and Die in L.A., especially when it moves inside, is neon and hip.
To paraphrase, Friedkin has said in an interview that he mainly hired men on the production design of The French Connection and so intentionally hired mostly women on this film to get what he describes as a more feminine aesthetic.
And that worked. While the two films have similar themes about law enforcement, they are visually set apart.
The Ending, +3 Points
**Major Spoiler Alerts**
I’m about to ruin the ending for you. So skip this part if you don’t want the crux of this movie spoiled!
The movie lulls you into thinking Vucovich will pay the price for Chance’s risk-taking because he’s the sidekick.
But when that shotgun blast hits Chance, in a total shock, a to-hell-with-the-general-rules-of-movies moment, he’s dead. No blaze of glory. Not a damn thing. Dead.
Another film might have had the guy go out in a heroic blaze of glory or cynically make it through another improbable situation because he’s the hero. He’ll die someday but defiantly overcomes this moment by uttering, “Not today,” and miraculously wins.
Well, not this movie. This film just shot Chance, dropping him like a rock, and the camera is following Vucovich now.
Then there’s Vucovich’s unexpected turning into Chance, tracking down and slaying Masters and taking control of informant Ruth.
This transformation at the end of the movie, which the film had NOT been building up to or hinting at, makes the movie for me.
It shows the total parasite nature of the film when Vucovich tells her that he knows she set Chance up but that “you’re working for me now” in his newfound clothes and Chance-style sunglasses.
When I watched this movie for the first time as a teenager, I hated this ending. It broke everything movies do and made no sense to me.
But I was just naive. Seeing it now, it’s a masterstroke. The ruthlessness of the ending is the exclamation point in this film’s kickass sentence.
As the picture progressed, that little line between the right and wrong side of the law has been shaved down to a splinter, if at all.
And so, for me, it’s simple: The movie had no heroes. So it didn’t let anybody die like one.
Credit to Friedkin for having the chutzpah to do something like this over an okay, vanilla finale the Studio suggested (more on this later).
Go Watch To Live and Die in L.A.
Total Score: 21 Points
To Live and Die in L.A. is a well-paced, slick action thriller.
Under Friedkin’s direction, all the collaborators here – the cast, cinematographer, rock band, etc. – smash out a genre classic. The film is a highlight of 1980s cinema, now held by many as one of the best films in a master director’s career.
Tune in for an all-time great car chase, frequent tension, and near voyeuristic views of dog-eat-dog Los Angeles.
The movie leaks all the goo of the era and city in which it was made all over the screen. A tasty, retro sunset on a freeway by the beach goo.
Facts About the Movie:
A few loose tidbits about the making of the film.
When Chance is chasing a suspect with fake credit cards over a bridge, the actor running away from him is none other than Gary Cole (at the left of the photo), AKA Bill Lumbergh from Office Space.
The counterfeiting scene is so convincing because the production used real-life counterfeiters to do the job. Still, it did not show Willem Dafoe at work in all the footage. But Dafoe eventually learned the process. And if he still has the know-how, maybe he could produce some dollar bills with his face on them. I’d love to spend some Dafoe Dollars.
It was potentially illegal for the cast and crew to be in a warehouse in the desert printing faking money. Dafoe believes they could have even gotten in real trouble here and that there was tension on the location about it, especially one day when a helicopter flew overhead.
Over a million fake dollars were created for the film, though with three noticeable, intentional mistakes to keep the currency from leaking out to the real world.
But despite this precaution and burning the fake money, some of the duped bills disappeared off the set.
It turned up when one of the crew member’s sons tried to buy candy with it, and the clerk got the authorities involved.
Apparently, the inspiration for the wrong-way car chase came from real life. William Friedkin had fallen asleep at the wheel in 1963 and woke up in the wrong traffic lane. And ever since, he always thought he’d use that in a movie.
It took six weeks to shoot the wrong-way car chase. It’s said Peterson did much of his driving and that Pankow’s stressed-out reactions are real.
According to Peterson, every morning the blood would drain out of Pankow’s face, learning what Peterson was going to be doing in the car that day. I can’t blame him. It wasn’t lost on the actors that the car chase was the last thing they were filming – I.E. if something happens to one of them, they still have the movie.
They designed a swivel, hydraulic car pulled behind the camera car to help the wrong-way part of the car chase. The actors sat in it, with the vehicle swiveling left and right. From the angle, it looks entirely believable with all the traffic going past them.
To paraphrase, Friedkin has said he was drawn to the project because of the umbrella of crime that the Secret Service has to cover – protecting the president yet also watching over the treasury. Every dollar bill, credit card, etc.
Friedkin believes cops and criminals are similar; even good cops walk a fine line. This is a theme he’s expressed in both To Live and Die in L.A. and, of course, The French Connection.
And Friedkin knows a lot about cops because of his upbringing. In his interview on the WTF With Marc Maron Podcast, I heard him say he spent much time in a bar where cops and criminals hung out.
Also, Friedkin’s uncle played a part in arresting the infamous Frank Nitti – Al Capone’s bodyguard. If you know the movie The Untouchables, he’s depicted as that guy with those ultra-shiny, two-tone shoes.
To Live and Die in L.A.’s Legacy:
**Spoiler Alert**
What makes up the legacy of To Live in Die in L.A.?
Many things.
And first up, another major spoiler warning for this section. I’m about to give away the ending for the second time. So skip this if you don’t want that ruined.
First, Friedkin was urged by the Studio not to kill off Chance, and they actually shot the movie both ways.
In the alternate ending (which you can find on YouTube, I bet), their boss gets the credit for taking down Masters.
While their boss is on TV talking about the story, Vucovich and Chance watch in disbelief.
They’ve been transferred to Anchorage, Alaska – a little building in the middle of nowhere. The credits roll as the camera, in a helicopter shot, I think, flies out, out, out.
Yeah, that ending works. But it’s not badass. It would have taken the thrust off the real movie.
As we touched on in the introduction, this film wasn’t that popular at release but has become a classic. I’m sure it makes the “underrated” or “hidden gem” lists out there.
I can’t draw you a straight line, but I would guess this movie helped influence many films where morally ambiguous law enforcement officers take actions that almost mimic the men they’re chasing.
The standout wrong-way car chase, of course, is well-remembered. The internet says film schools are still studying it, but I don’t know how the internet knows that for sure.
Wang Chung’s soundtrack, full of synths, was reportedly not that popular for action thrillers at this time. But I think you see it in later 1980s and 1990s movies, and perhaps this film helped drive that creative decision, considering how well it works here.
Willem Dafoe was definitely not in his first role here. He’d already worked with the likes of Walter Hill on Streets of Fire(reviewed here) and, before that, starred in Kathryn Bigelow’s (Point Break) The Loveless.
The internet will tell you boilerplate that this role helped propel Dafoe’s career. Still, I would say Oliver Stone’s Platoon,coming out the following year, in 1986, was much, much bigger for him.
He was nominated for an Academy Award. But, hey, maybe To Live and Die in L.A. got him that role. So, all right.
William Peterson did have a big break starring in this movie, and undoubtedly it helped make his career.
Funny enough, Peterson turned down a part in Platoon, and it would have been interesting to see him and Dafoe on screen together again. They have good chemistry.
Apparently, Peterson also turned down the role of Henry Hill in Goodfellas. Man! Maybe he feels differently, but that feels like two misses to me. And as good as Ray Liotta was, I wonder what the universe where Peterson played the part is like.
But don’t feel bad. Peterson went on to have a strong career. He has been in films like Michael Mann’s Manhunter and Young Guns II. And he’s most known for his role as Gil Grissom on the television show you’ve probably heard of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation. He appeared from 2000 to 2015 and was in some of the spin-offs.
Apologies to any cast members I didn’t highlight.
For highly influential cinematographer Robby Muller, this was just another example of his excellence and, no doubt, kept him in further demand.
In addition to working with Friedkin on this film, he collaborated before and after this film with the likes of Wim Winders, Peter Bogdanovich, Jim Jarmusch, Michelangelo Antonioni, Lars Von Trier, and more. The guy even shot director Alex Cox’s Repo Man, which I reviewed here.
If you know it, the Tupac Shakur song “To Live and Die in L.A.” is reportedly unrelated to the movie.
Lastly, to give this film a legacy from me, I would include it on my list of 1980s movies everyone needs to see.
Anyway, that’s all I have. Thank you for reading.
Enjoyed this Post?
Thank you so much. If you’d like to get a ping when I have a new article, you can join my newsletter below.
Disclaimer:
This review’s factual information was gathered through online sources, like Wikipedia, IMDB, or interviews. Misrepresentations and errors are possible but unintentional.
Making art is hard. This is a fan’s blog. Any criticisms are meant to be constructive.
