Reviewed by Colin Jacobson (March 25, 2025)
In 1977, William Friedkin directed his follow-up to 1973’s massively successful Exorcist: a thriller called Sorcerer. Rather that create an original property, Friedkin remade 1953’s French flick The Wages of Fear, the subject of this review.
Set in the tiny South American town of Las Piedras, four men seek a way out of this location. We meet rough and tumble Corsican Mario (Yves Montand), cynical French gangster Jo (Charles Vanel), brawny Italian Luigi (Folco Lulli) and shady German Bimba (Peter van Eyck).
US corporation Southern Oil needs someone to transport nitroglycerin to extinguish a massive fire. This requires the material to be transported hundreds of kilometers to reach its destination.
The nature of the nitroglycerin makes the task especially hazardous, as it can explode due to the slightest jostle. Desperate to get out, the four men named earlier accept this life-threatening job and deal with a mix of potential calamities.
As I noted in my original review of Sorcerer, the 1999 DVD became my initial experience with this narrative, and I went into that long-ago screening with almost literally no foreknowledge of plot or characters. Obviously I don’t enter Wages with the same absence of awareness.
Not that Sorcerer provided a wholly literal remake of Wages, of course. Friedkin gave his version its own twists.
Still, the two resemble each other enough to mean that I go into Wages with moderate understanding of what to expect. The question becomes whether or not it holds up for me under these circumstances.
Yes! While I don’t know if I regard Wages as highly as its reputation maintains, I do think it offers a solid thriller.
To be sure, writer/director Henri-Georges Clouzot paints a grimy and dark picture. This starts as soon as the film launches via the manner in which Clouzot depicts the South American setting.
We don’t find a tourist version of the area here. Instead, Wages plays up the filth and poverty of Las Piedras.
This adds to the desperation and lack of options felt by the main characters. Given the borderline suicidal nature of the transportation job, the audience needs to understand what would drive the men to accept, and Clouzot pulls off that side of things well.
Clouzot also makes the rest of the story bleak and largely unsentimental. Wages offers the kind of film in which the theoretical dashing leading man – Montand’s Mario – reacts to pleas from his lover Linda (Véra Clouzot) with a shove off a moving truck that tosses her into the dirt.
Not that Wages comes completely devoid of human emotion, as the four main characters do develop some forms of connection. Still, the “every man for himself” motif remains dominant.
In addition, Wages paints an ugly – but accurate – picture of American businesses that likely shocked at the time. Indeed, the film came under much criticism for these sentiments in the US and thus got a few minutes cut for its exhibition there.
None of these scenes seem startling circa 2025. Nonetheless, they didn’t match the tenor of the time and add to the film’s pervasive cynicism.
Like Sorcerer, Wages takes a good chunk of time to get to its main story. The film doesn’t even bring up the truck driving mission until almost the 45-minute mark, and the men don’t embark on their journey until about one hour into the tale.
Though both force the audience to wait for the action to start, they get there in different ways. Sorcerer shows what brought its characters to South America, whereas Wages opens with them already there.
In both cases, though, these elements give us a good view of the roles. As noted, we need a strong understanding of what would prompt men to accept such a dangerous mission, and Wages depicts the characters in a manner that convinces us of their desperation.
Once the trucks depart, the movie mainly emphasizes its thriller side, and it does this well. Granted, the frequent use of process shots alleviates some drama – at least for modern audiences – because these elements make the scenes seem less real.
Nonetheless, Clouzot stages the film in a tight and dramatic manner that allows it to overcome its dated elements. He also brings a Hitchcockian tone at times, especially when the audience knows of potential danger ahead of the characters.
As noted, I can’t claim that Wages bowled me over, though I admit I should watch it a second time to better dig into it. When one goes into a film globally lauded as a classic, one enters with elevated expectations, and an additional screening can allow the viewer to better appreciate the movie.
Even if another time through Wages doesn’t change my opinion, I still really like the movie. Dark and relentless, it turns into a quality thriller.
