Film Review: Cruising (1980)

(source: tmdb.org)

Just as there are films that are praised unjustly and for the wrong reasons, there are films that are vilified unjustly and for the wrong reasons. This phenomenon can be best seen with passage of time, when the socio-cultural context which served as the basis for criticism changes. Probably the best known (or infamous) example could be found in Cruising, 1980 thriller written and directed by William Friedkin.

The film is based on the novel by Gerald Walker, which has been inspired by the real events in 1960s and 1970s New York. The plot begins with the discovery of body parts in river, which New York police connects to the unsolved murders of gay men. Some of the victims were known to frequent specialised “leather” bars in order to engage in S&M sex with complete strangers and Captain Edelson (played by Paul Sorvino), lead police investigator, believes that the killer did too in order to pick his prey. He believes the best way to catch him is to plant undercover officer who physically resembles the victims. Steve Burns (played by Al Pacino), relatively young and inexperienced officer, is chosen for the task and he takes it very seriously, not telling his girlfriend Nancy Gates (played by Karen Allen) why he would have to leave. He takes new identity under name “John Forbes” and new apartment in the building where he would befriend aspiring gay playwright Ted Bailey (played by Dan Scardino). From there he begins to frequent leather bars, parks and different locations frequented by gay men interested in extreme forms of S&M. Murders continue while Burns , being exposed to all kinds of sexual activity while pretending to be gay, begins to question whether his own sexuality or moral compass will be changed.

Cruising was for many decades known mostly as one of the most controversial films made in Hollywood. During the production and the premiere it was attacked by most vocal members of American gay community over alleged homophobia and stereotypical portrayal of gays as killers, perverts and “freaks”. Most of the critics wanted to be seen as progressive and open-minded, so they took some of those complaints more or less seriously and rated Friedkin’s film poorly. Unlike Basic Instinct, which had same issues with gay and lesbian community twelve years later, Cruising was affected by criticism at the box-office and in subsequent years almost became film nobody dared to talk about. Only when the times changed and homosexuality was firmly embraced as part of society’s mainstream, Cruising was allowed to be viewed as a film less affected with its allegedly homophobic context.

One of the most common complaints against Cruising was Friedkin’s sensationalist approach to the subject. This kind of criticism does have some merit. Although film through the words of Captain Edelson explicitly claims that leather and S&M subculture doesn’t represent “mainstream of gay life” and although such “mainstream” gets portrayed sympathetically through character of Ted, Friedkin obviously shows more interest for the more exotic world of men indulging in the most bizarre and potentially dangerous fantasies. Large sections of film take place in leather bars where the tightly packed, sweaty, scantily dressed or completely nude male bodies interact often in all the ways imaginable (or unimaginable). Friedkin shot those scenes in real leather bar using real gays as extras, with many of them featuring content so graphic that around 40 minutes of original film version had to be cut out before satisfying even the lax censorship standards of late 1970s and early 1980s. Those scenes, although they posses certain documentary quality, become repetitive over time and only stand in the way what was supposed to be thought-provoking crime drama.

And this is where Cruising ultimately fails. Friedkin shows too much enthusiasm for throwing the red herrings to the audience before he unceremoniously reveals the identity of killer, whose motivation for killings is presented as rather banal combination of childhood traumas and serious mental disorder. There are some interesting scenes which feature dark humour, including the one in which semi-nude black police detective (apparently played by the real life police detective) tries to extract confession from murder suspects, or the one in which deliberately puts relationship between Edelson and Burns in a possibly different context. Friedkin gives impression of enjoying making this film, but this playfulness is often at the expense of the audience that is deliberately left confused. This is probably most evident in much talked about final scene that seemingly puts things back to normal for Burns, now happily reunited with his girlfriend, but leaves many questions unanswered, including those whether his undercover experienced changed his sexuality or even led him to discover his own murderous impulses.

The film is made watchable mainly thanks to Friedkin’s solid direction and very good work by diverse and talented cast. Some of them shine in small but memorable roles, like Powers Boothe who explains colour codes for handkerchiefs in leather subculture. Some, like Karen Allen, do their best in rather thankless roles. Al Pacino, who is strangely restrained in comparison with most of his role, does solid but unremarkable job and it could be argued that he was miscast, being a little bit too old for the role of young police officer (with Friedkin claiming that the film would have been much better with Richard Gere in his role).

Cruising was in the end rescued from oblivion and gradually had its reputation improved due to events beyond film maker’s control and comprehension. Only a year after its premiere real life brought much more dangerous killer than the fiction portrayed in this film. Mysterious, unstoppable and deadly disease that would later become known as AIDS began to affect leather scene and gay community in a way more devastating that any insane killer or sensationalist film maker could do. The carefree hedonistic lifestyle based on indulging in most bizarre forms of sex with complete strangers was becoming almost equal to suicide. After few years, a film that was source of offence for gay community became valuable document of increasingly distant past and even nostalgic reminder of better past for some people.

RATING: 5/10 (++)