Cruising (1980)

brightcobra91 said:Who actually figured this one out? Who killed the neighbor? I’m completely lost... 😁
Could someone please give me an explanation... 😳

I don't know if they just ran out of actors during production or what... but the killer from the first murder ends up being the victim in the second one. It's confirmed.
Word on the street is there are actually several different killers involved who aren't even connected... and if you listen to some of the theories floating around, Al Pacino might even be one of them...
I didn't quite catch that. I'm going to have to sit down and really break this one down...

Charles Smith4 said:I still find it bizarre that the movie pulled three Strawberry nominations out of thin air... worst director, worst screenplay, and worst cinematography.

Those were the very first Strawberries back in 1980, which were full of weird nods... they even nominated Friday the 13th for worst film, along with Brian De Palma (Dress to Kill) and Stanley Kubrick (The Shining) for worst director.

But wait, isn't Al Pacino actually the killer? If you look closely at the end of the film, when he’s sitting there shaving in his chair, he leaves behind that leather cap and those sunglasses that the killer was wearing. It seems his girlfriend dressed up in them.

Charles Cox60 said:Wait, isn't Al Pacino actually the killer? At the end, when he's shaving in his chair, he leaves behind the exact leather hat and glasses the killer used... which his girlfriend then puts on.

The ending was designed that way on purpose—to leave you guessing who the real killer is...

redorca11 said:I think his roommate/lover killed him because he was jealous of his relationship with Al Pacino...

So, all in all, there aren't many pieces left for me to finish my Al Pacino marathon. My take on "Cruising"? Well, it was an interesting ride, for sure. It’s such a different kind of role for Al Pacino—he really nailed it, though. Definitely not his career-defining moment or anything, but a solid effort overall. I actually liked the movie, except for that messy ending... that killer part totally tripped me up. Did anyone else catch that? Wasn't the first killer (that curly-haired Slash look-alike) the one who stabbed the guy in the back while he was tied to the bed, only to end up being the murder victim himself in the park later that night?!?

brightcobra91, you're not alone... I was cracking up at that dance scene just as much as you, and honestly, that part where Pacino is lifting weights and drawing on his eyebrows with a pencil before hitting the club... pure comedy...

An interesting experience, indeed 😁. Basically, I'm with you on the description, though I’d just add that the whole thing screams untapped potential to me—there was so much more story to tell and characters to flesh out, but... hey, I'm no William Friedkin 😁.
That dance scene was literally hilarious 🤣, though I'm not entirely sure if Friedkin was actually aiming for laughs with it 😁, especially since he's trying to show how uncomfortable and "suffocated" Pacino's character feels.
I did a little digging on IMDb, and there are theories that men started becoming attractive to Pacino's character 😁 (which explains why he kept saying he couldn't take any more and had to get out—it was all too much). So, by denying those feelings and trying to destroy them within himself, he became a killer of the same sex (psychology, right? 😁). The movie really makes that visual for us 😁. And didn't he actually attack the guy in the park who ended up in the hospital?
Whoever thinks that's the case 🤷. I definitely need to give this one another watch 😁

wearytinker8 said:Those were the first Golden Raspberries back in 1980—they had some pretty wild nominations too; Friday the 13th for worst film, plus Brian De Palma (Dress to Kill) and Stanley Kubrick (The Shining).

🤣

plus Anthony Hopkins, Michael Caine, and Marlon Brando 🤷
Everyone has a bad day 🤷 😁 ?
Nowadays we've got Scent of Women 😍 😍 😍

brightcobra91 said:I was doing some reading on IMDb, and there's a theory floating around that Pacino's character started being attracted to men😁 (which explains why he said he couldn't take it anymore, that he had to get out, that it was all too much)—so because of that, by denying it and trying to destroy that part of himself, he turned into a killer of his own kind (psychology, right? 😁).

I don't think Pacino actually got involved in murders, though that could be a plausible theory👍, but his character, Steve, is definitely a latent gay. By entering that world, his subconscious finally revealed his attraction to men. After completing the undercover assignment, he returns to his girlfriend just to try and "return to normal"—largely due to societal prejudice and the public stigma surrounding homosexuality, and because he doesn't want to hurt her. However, when he leaves those aviator sunglasses and that leather cap sitting on the chair, and she puts them on herself, I get the impression he was subconsciously signaling his true orientation to her. It feels like she realized he was gay, yet they both continued their life together by silently accepting his homosexuality without ever actually speaking the truth to one another. It’s much like how Marlon Williams in Brokeback Mountain discovered her husband's sexuality; she kept quiet and endured it for several years, continuing to live with him for a while longer... at least, that is my interpretation of it.

They cut 40 minutes from this movie and it’s basically gone forever. It’s a damn shame there hasn't been a special edition release yet, especially since it's been nearly 30 years. 👎

This urge to hunt down gay men spreads just like some kind of infectious disease.
The way she’s throwing on that jacket and hat... it’s like she’s just prepping herself to be the next killer.

Maybe I’m just being narrow-minded... but I really felt like I was left hanging without some actual answers once the credits rolled...😕 🤷

EDIT:Oh, wow, I just now realized people are saying a huge chunk of the movie is actually missing, which might actually explain why some parts felt so out of place...

http://www.petitiononline.com/Vixens02/petition.html 🙂

Charles Cox60 said:Wait, isn't Al Pacino actually the killer? At the end of the movie, when he’s shaving in his armchair, he leaves behind that leather hat and those glasses that the killer was wearing, and then his girlfriend ends up dressing up in them.

Charles Cox60, did you miss the part where half the city wears clothes just like that? It really makes it possible for the killer to be anyone—even Al Pacino himself!
I don't think this is the first time a killer has finished their business in a park, but it's definitely not the guy who gets blamed at the end.
By the way, I actually have the uncut version which runs about 15 minutes longer, though I don't see anything particularly groundbreaking in those extra scenes...😕

So, what’s the deal with that Black guy in the cowboy hat at the end? What is he actually supposed to represent?
Supposedly, the whole thing was inspired by a real case out in New York City. The idea was to use him to intimidate the guy being interrogated—basically trying to scare him into a confession. But they also made sure he looked so outlandish that if anyone ever tried to complain, nobody would believe them... just total overkill.
Whether it's true or not... the scene is honestly kind of ridiculous. When that guy walked in, I half expected an Indian, a construction worker, a biker, and the rest of the Village People to follow right behind him.

wearytinker8 said:So, what’s that guy in the cowboy hat actually supposed to represent?
Supposedly, it was inspired by an actual incident in New York City—they wanted to intimidate the suspect into a confession, but they made the whole thing look so absurd that if he ever tried to complain, nobody would believe him...

Exactly.

Walter Fowler53 said:http://www.petitiononline.com/Vixens02/petition.html 🙂

did you sign 😉 😁?
now that I've watched her movie myself—gonna give it another spin soon, maybe catch something I missed the first time🤷 : enlightenment:

wearytinker8 said:So what's the deal with that Black guy in the cowboy hat at the end?
Supposedly, it was inspired by some real thing that went down in New York City. Like, they wanted to freak out the guy being interrogated to force a confession—but they also made it look so wild that if he tried to complain, nobody would believe him.
True or not... the scene is just hilarious. When that guy walked in, I honestly thought an Indian, a construction worker, a biker, and the rest of the Village People were gonna follow right behind him.

🤣 🤣you hit the nail on the head

Walter Fowler53 said:http://www.petitiononline.com/Vixens02/petition.html 🙂

I've already signed... 🙂 and I am demanding that all other Al Pacino fanatics and film buffs in general get on board and do the same...

brightcobra91 said:did you sign 😉 😁?
now that I've filmed my own movie, I'll probably give it another watch soon—maybe I'll catch something new 🤷 : enlightenment:

yeah 😁

I'm downloading a rip from CNN too; I'm gonna rewatch it because it just didn't sit right with me the first time. 😁

This petition is pretty much moot now—the movie hit US DVD shelves on September 18th and I managed to snag a copy. It’s the standard theatrical cut at 102 minutes... includes a documentary, Friedkin's commentary, and the trailer. There was originally a full version running about 140 minutes, but according to Friedkin, all that extra footage is either lost or completely destroyed, so don't hold your breath for the full cut.

So, I finally sat down and watched it for the first time yesterday. Honestly? It started off pretty strong, but man, things really started to slide halfway through—I don't know, the quality just seemed to tank once it hit the second act.
The killer was actually super intense and intimidating at the beginning, but after that, he just lost all that momentum, right? Plus, I kept waiting for them to actually dig deeper into his backstory, but they just kind of brushed past it.
Looking at the big picture, though, the whole movie felt pretty mid. My rating: 5/10