109 min
7.3
1972
USA
Intent on seeing the Cahulawassee River before it's turned into one huge lake, outdoor fanatic Lewis Medlock takes his friends on a river-rafting trip they'll never forget into the dangerous American back-country.
Overview
Reviews
talisencrw wrote:This was remarkable and scared the crap out of me. I read the book eons ago, probably 1988, for a first-year university class back when I was earning my first degree. Not a Burt Reynolds fan, and having only seen two other works by Boorman (the great 'Point Blank' and the not-so-great 'Exorcist II: The Heretic'), I wasn't in a huge hurry to rush out and see the film. BIG mistake on my part, to be frank.
Probably the gifted 83-year-old, Surrey native and five-time Oscar nominee's best work--and easily the finest work ever done by Reynolds, shortly before he simply rested on his laurels and became nothing but a caricature. THIS at the very least was proof that he at one time actually had chops and could act.
The scariest aspect of all is that this goes on all the time and we just don't know about it. Hundreds of people go 'missing' every day. And, as a Canadian, it's people like the culprits in this film that are responsible for America now having the worst Presidential candidate of all time actually having a chance of being the head of the most powerful country in the world. Now THAT's scary.
John Chard wrote:Brutal, Beautiful and Brilliant.
Four Atlanta friends - Lewis (Burt Reynolds), Ed (John Voight), Bobby (Ned Beatty), and Drew (Ronny Cox) – decide to canoe down the Cahulawassee River out in the Georgia wilderness. They see it as a test of manliness whilst also wanting to experience this part of nature before the whole valley is flooded over to make way for the upcoming construction of a dam and lake. But the perils of nature are not the only dangerous things in their midst, unfriendly wood folk are about to bring another dimension in terror.
Deliverance is one of those films that sometimes suffers by way of reputation. Much like Straw Dogs and 70s films of that type, the hype and promise of unremitting hell often isn't delivered to an expectant modern audience. Which is a shame since Deliverance is one of the finest, glummest, brutalistic and beautiful films of the 1970s.
Adapting from James Dickey's novel (screenplay duties here also), British director John Boorman crafts a tough and powerful film of men out of their environment, thus out of their league. As each man sets off initially, it's a test of manhood, but each guy is forced to deconstruct their worth, and it soon becomes more about survival as this deadly adventure proceeds. Boorman, aided by cinematographer Vilmos Zsigmond, has painted a raw and treacherous landscape, unconquered by city slickers but dwelt in by inbreds who don't take kindly to the city folk showing up with their machismo attitudes. From the first point of contact with the strange locals, where Drew goes "duelling banjos" with an odd looking child, the film doesn't let up, much like the locals themselves, the film also is remorseless. Some critics over the years have proclaimed that Deliverance is too pretty, mistaking lush physicality as something detracting from the dark thematics at work. Not so, the Chattooga River sequences are electrifying, the rapids scenes (brilliantly filmed with Voight and Reynolds doing real work, and getting real injuries) are merely setting up the unmanning of our "macho" guys just around the corner. It's a fabulous and potent piece of "beauty". With the four cast leaders absolutely brilliant in their respective roles. In fact there are few better casting decisions ever than that of Reynolds as Lewis, one can only lament that he didn't have more hard edged serious roles in his career.
Minor itches exist, metaphors are heavy (Vietnam a 70s staple it seems) while ecological concerns are hinted at without being as prominent as they are in the novel. Surveying the landscape during the opening of the piece, Lewis reflects that man is going to rape this land, rape it, it's stuff like that that is not totally formed, given way to abject horror and survival, Lewis again noting that survival is the name of the game. A game of life and death, where man's primal being means violence may indeed beget violence. Boorman clearly agreed. 10/10
Bazzjazz wrote:The Banjo scene still haunts me today!
Never mind the New Beaty scene.
Great movie.
Filipe Manuel Neto wrote:**It would certainly have been more interesting at the time it was released.**
When this film came out in 1972, there was something interesting about themes linked to nature and the environment. Not that environmentalism was in vogue, but it was the golden age of the hippie movement that advocated, among other things, a more harmonious connection between Man and Nature. And in fact, what we have here is a group of four men from the big city who seek to find fun, emotions and beauty in the natural environment, in a wild river full of rapids that will disappear in a few months due to the construction of a dam. However, as they begin their descent down the river, things begin to go terribly wrong after an encounter with two men.
Fitting into that type of nature thrillers where man faces the dangers of Nature or hostile people, it is one of those films that I cannot understand how it was nominated for three Oscars (Best Film, Best Director and Best Editing). It's not memorable at all, and the proof is that, outside the USA, no one remembers it. John Boorman, who directs, gives us a work full of tension and brutality, which takes away all our comfort and makes us grit our teeth. That is great! However, the director did not overcome the difficulties caused by the low budget in the best way and the film always has a cheap and “second-rate” look, whether in terms of props, sets and costumes, or in the unpleasant cinematography, with washed out colors and without glare, lack of contrast and shadows. Even the celebrated banjo soundtrack seemed ugly and tiring to me.
If there is a saving value that makes this film worthy of attention, it is the quality that we observe in the work of the main actors. Burt Reynolds, Jon Voight, Ned Beatty and Ronny Cox are excellent in their respective roles and give their all to this project. I especially liked Voight, who exudes charisma and energy. And although I can eventually talk a little about the good work of Bill McKinney and Herbert Coward, the fact is that the film completely lacks a quality secondary cast to support the four main actors. Before finishing, a note about the film's title: I was truly taken aback by the original title, in English. “Deliverance” could be the title of the original literary work on which the film is based, however, if we consider that this film never explains it and that we never clearly understand the title, perhaps it would have been a good idea to come up with a clearer title.
CinemaSerf wrote:This is one of those films I remember watching as a kid and being genuinely scared! It centres around a bunch of city folks who decide to canoe down the Cahulawassee river before it is dammed to make a giant reservoir. The four men arrive at the backwater town where they are to start their journey, and meet a population that progress has largely skipped and where the gene-pool is sadly nowhere as deep as the river. "Drew" (Ronny Cox) plucks his guitar and gets a response from local lad "Lonnie" (Billy Redden) and for the next four minutes or so, "Duelling Banjos" offers quite an astonishing degree of synchronisation as the two improvise a toe-tapper that is instantly recognisable. Then off they go, and a perilous game of brutal cat-and-mouse with the locals ensues. They become the hunted, and "Ed" (Jon Voight), "Lewis" (Burt Reynolds) and especially "Bobby" (Ned Beatty) are ill-prepared for the "welcome" they are to get from a cunningly violent community that sees them as sport. With the river running fast and the terrain very much playing into the hands of their antagonists, it's a real battle for survival - and just what will these men have to do. It's a story of resilience, this one, and this quartet of actors each bring quite different aptitudes as their characters' worst fears are realised. The photography is perfect and coupled with the sparse, increasingly earthy and panic-stricken, dialogue helps keep the potency of the menace of their situation effective without the slightest certainty as to the outcome. Even now, over fifty years later, this is still a disturbing watch - but well worth it.
