logo Sign In

To Live and Die in L.A. (1985): Opinions?

Author
Time

Thought I might as well start a discussion thread on the classic 1985 film, To Live and Die in L.A. I was just watching it and became eager to discuss with others. I believe there are fellow fans of the film on the board… captainsolo? 😃

In any case, everyone who hasn’t seen it should check out immediately. Normal revenge/crime film instead becomes a noir-esque character study with tense, suspenseful sequences and brilliant, visceral action scenes. Rarely are both character AND plot given such great attention. There’s one scene involving cop and criminal on the opposite sides of a single wall that is the definition of nail-biting. The movie really does explore the hellish soul-sucking void that is Los Angeles and the terribly unhealthy relationships, on which even the protagonist thrives. Trust is a commodity as counterfeit as the antagonists’ fake bills. The hellish, fiery finale, the culmination of all that is wrong with L.A., is truly something to behold. All the performances, from the undeniably underrated William Petersen to Willem Dafoe to Darlanne Fluegel to John Turturro, are magnificent. I do wish those first two got more juicy roles nowadays. Might be Friedkin’s masterpiece, even over The Exorcist. (For reference, I still need to check out The French Connection).

Oh and Wang Chung KILLS it with the score!

However, I’ve always had one problem with the movie…

SPOILERS (for a 31-year old film)
I admire the ending, but I hope fellow To Live and Die in L.A. fans will forgive me when I say that I don’t think the execution completely works. In fact, I actually PREFER the studio-mandated ending.

When Petersen’s character eventually tempts fate one too many time, Chance (get it?) is fatally shot in the face in a seemingly shocking moment. While I recognize why it might seem like a good idea to kill Chance (as, aside from taking many risks, he has done horrible things- led to the death of an FBI agent/blackmailed Darlanne Fluegel’s character, Ruth, for sex), I feel it is counter-intuitively the more “expected” outcome, particularly considering the title of “To Live and DIE in L.A.” But, for the plot to follow the expected outcome is not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself: what I really don’t like is how his death is essentially electing the traditional trope on the part of the story to “punish” the protagonist for his transgressions. In killing him, the movie follows traditional morality, eschewing something more innovative. I think a truly cynical and unique approach would have been to let him live, showing how, unlike traditional movies, amorality often goes relatively unpunished in noir city. Friedkin, in the featurette for the studio-mandated alternate ending, defends his killing of Chance as exposing how the random hand of fate; far from it, Friedkin actually affirms the notion of fate as NOT random but rather a deliberate moralizing force.

But, really, I would have been fine with all that, if not for that ending scene. Again, I GET what the movie was going for. Chance’s meek partner, John Vukovich, is almost “possessed” in a weird sense by Chance’s spirit, having learned that to live in L.A. he must be just as cruel. He takes Chance’s place, deciding to continue blackmailing Ruth for information and sex. It’s a lovely idea and an appropriate thematic conclusion to a movie about falseness, but where it fails for me is execution. Vukovich comes in with Chance’s demanding masculine swagger, garbed in a “cool” outfit that doesn’t fit in with any of the character’s previous attire. Moreover, he seems to be directed to not only act LIKE Chance but rather literally ape Petersen’s performance, discarding his normal character. As-is, Vukovich’s transformation is VERY literal and heavy-handed. In my opinion, the scene would have worked far better if, at the start of the scene, Vukovich seemed unchanged, only for it to become shockingly evident through his dialogue with Ruth that he has changed a great deal. Then, you have the dichotomy between an unthreatening, likeable exterior and secretively predatory actions, which, would seem to fit in with the movie’s theme better; in L.A., nothing is what it seems because the outside doesn’t match (rather than painfully highlighting) the inside. The flashbacks of Chance are also too on-the-nose.

In contrast, the studio ending, while a seemingly bad idea conceptually, is magnificently executed! There, Chance survives, and, alongside Vukovich, is discreetly transferred to L.A. On a sheerly visual level, the ice of Alaska makes a lovely contrast with the hellish heat (exposed especially in the fiery finale) of L.A. For reasons I more or less stated above, I like the notion that punishment eludes the two agents; the subversion of the title works to form a thematically fitting ending. The audience is left a little uneasy at the broken expectation that Chance doesn’t die after all his crimes; confusion gives way to understanding, as they realize that life doesn’t always punish the guilty like in the movies. It’s also VERY in keeping with theme that their chief, implied to have discovered all their actions, would simply deal with it under the table rather than jail them; in terms of superficial appearances, their transgressions, if exposed, might reflect badly on their chief, who publicly takes credit for the success of the case. The cherry on top is Chance’s wry smile, performed aptly be Petersen, as he realizes who betrayed him.

Sorry for the long rant but thought I had to admit that. Rarely do I find a studio-mandated ending, directly opposed by the director, to be more satisfying. Anyone else happen to agree… or vehemently disagree for that matter? 😉

Author
Time

It’s been a while since I saw it. I remember liking it but not being blown away. I’ll add it to my list of flicks I should rewatch.

Don’t do drugs, unless you’re with me.

Author
Time

I’ve never seen it. I skipped most of your post because of spoilerfear but your enthusiasm has sold it to me. I’ll check it out the next chance I get!

Author
Time
 (Edited)
  1. TLADILA is Friedkin’s masterpiece.
  2. I think the film is the definition of the 80’s and barring Blade Runner and some other favorites think it is the best film of the decade.
  3. The soundtrack is one of the finest ever made and completely thematic. I still listen to it reularly and it became the band’s finest work. The LP is hugely dynamic and murders the film mix.
  4. https://thehificelluloidmonster.wordpress.com/2012/01/25/to-live-and-die-in-l-a-1985/
    My more recent musings on the film can be found here: https://thehificelluloidmonster.wordpress.com/2016/03/22/soul-erosion-in-a-counterfeit-world/

Please give the second a read. You seriously cannot tell how much I respect this picture can you? 😉

As for the ending I completely disagree. I think it is perfectly handled as you can’t quite read Vukovich when he comes to the door. He seems exhausted, burned out, bruised, bartered and beyond lucky to be alive. You realize he no longer cares. And then the final line cements his shift that began the moment he partnered with Chance. Chance himself teeters on the edge throughout the film so his eventual fall fits thematically. What is astounding is how the seemingly cheesy ending mandated by nervous executives actually matches the same bleak tone so it would work almost as well. And also as nasty as he was I too never want to see Chance go down though it makes for the better and fitting ending.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

The new BD from Shout is going to recycle the MGM master with their worse compression like they usually do. The big news is that they may produce new extras-and better yet that Arrow is doing a uk release with their high level of quality- so expect the MGM master from them with better compression and original audio and new extras.
The current MGM release is as good as it gets and could only use the original 2.0 track and feature the extras on the BD instead of only on the DVD. The 5.1 mix is faithful and is virtually identical to the original as far as I can tell and the transfer is about the only one Friedkin hasn’t fiddled with.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time
 (Edited)

captainsolo said:

I think the film is the definition of the 80’s and barring Blade Runner and some other favorites hay it is the best film of the decade.

I’ve certainly got to see this movie now.

Author
Time

captainsolo said:

The new BD from Shout is going to recycle the MGM master with their worse compression like they usually do. The big news is that they may produce new extras-and better yet that Arrow is doing a uk release with their high level of quality- so expect the MGM master from them with better compression and original audio and new extras.

Was that confirmed somewhere? Both Invasion of the Body Snatchers and Return of the Living Dead have had new masters with superior detail to MGM’s old ones; their compression has come a long way since the days of Escape from New York and particularly since Day of the Dead. Then again, the Manhunter HD transfer was recycled (though already excellent) with the slightest bit inferior encoding then the original MGM BD; the inclusion of “The Director’s Cut,” whose accuracy I deem questionable, was also a bonus.

Also, I heard Arrow were themselves working on a new 4K restoration.

As for the ending I completely disagree. I think it is perfectly handled as you can’t quite read Vukovich when he comes to the door. He seems exhausted, burned out, bruised, bartered and beyond lucky to be alive. You realize he no longer cares. And then the final line cements his shift that began the moment he partnered with Chance. Chance himself teeters on the edge throughout the film so his eventual fall fits thematically. What is astounding is how the seemingly cheesy ending mandated by nervous executives actually matches the same bleak tone so it would work almost as well. And also as nasty as he was I too never want to see Chance go down though it makes for the better and fitting ending.

I suppose we must agree to disagree then. 😃 My problems with the ending, as written, are due to how it’s performed. The notion of Vukovich’s transformation is quite an elegant one, but the execution, perhaps a matter of taste, is just too blunt. Unlike you, I think it’s fairly obvious by Vukovich’s changed manner and apparel from the start of the scene where it’s going to end, with John Pankow not particularly subtle.

That being said, I agree with everything else you wrote in your two To Live and Die in L.A. write-ups on your blog- truly wonderful stuff, eloquently said.

Author
Time

Thanks man. Not often that I get to discuss TLADILA in much detail. And totally agree to disagree. 😉 I get your argument and you make a valid point about the alternate ending having a good deal of satisfaction. Try giving Friedkin’s commentary a listen. When he speaks about the film in greater detail it makes the thematic arcs more clear.

If you want to talk awkward and iffy on performance, what do you make of the deleted scene where Vukovich goes to his ex?

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

I also enjoy this movie very much. It’s a great 80s film and is held as “the best Michael Mann movie” that he obviously didn’t direct. Great music, one of the best car chases, great cinematography. I don’t see any similarity to Blade Runner though, it’s just Miami Vice in L.A.
I can see where both of you are coming from. I agree a little that it came a little surprisingly that Vucovich suddenly took a 180 but I’m okay with Chance dying. I don’t like the flashbacks either, there’s even a weird one after the credits.
Btw, this movie takes a loooong time to introduce Chance, I think his name is first said like over an hour into the movie?

And in the time of greatest despair, there shall come a savior, and he shall be known as the Son of the Suns.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DuracellEnergizer said:

captainsolo said:

I think the film is the definition of the 80’s and barring Blade Runner and some other favorites hay it is the best film of the decade.

I’ve certainly got to see this movie now.

It is a very good film but certainly not in Blade Runner league. Still you should watch it yes.

真実

Author
Time

I enjoyed the film immensely and the soundtrack even more. It will be nice to see it again.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Look again at the ending of the film! CHANCE IS ALIVE, in the last scene of the film, from the window behind the girl, we see Chance arriving with his car. This happens after Vukovich tells the girl that she would start working for him. Following the sequence sees the girl first, then some flashbacks of the night just passed with Chance, then the girl smiles and behind her, out the window, you can see the Chance car coming with him driving with his sunglasses. It is understood that Chance, before organizing the meeting with Master, thanks to the help of Cody, organizes the fake shooting together with the Master’s bodyguard. In this way Chance finally discovers that Vukovich is corrupt and has direct relations with Master. We understand this when Vukovich talks with the Master’s lawyer for an eventual agreement. Vukovich is also the author of the tip that caused the death of fellow policeman of Chance. If you notice, at the beginning of the film, Chance presents some perplexities about working with Vukovich. Chance will then arrest Vukovich (this is not seen but we can imagine it).