119 reviews
Matt Dillon igives his best performance in this movie, gives an minimalistic, sympathetic portrayal of a junk addict trying to go straight.
The subject matter may be a bit dark for those that like to see life from the "sunny side". It is set after all, in gray, gray, Portland Oregon in the 70's. It deals with a crew of four, two couples, that go around ripping off drugstores for opiates. It does not attempt to judge or condemn this behavior, it just tells the story of a group of junkies, and one of their attempts to go clean and find out what the straight life is like.
Those of you that have experience with any form of substance abuse may find that this movie rings true. I loved the quote by Bob something to the effect of: "In life, you never know one minute to the next how you're going to feel. But a dope fiend just has to look at the labels on the bottles." By no means does this movie glamorize drug use. In fact, it shows it for what it is, a temporary fix that leads nowhere but destruction.
The subject matter may be a bit dark for those that like to see life from the "sunny side". It is set after all, in gray, gray, Portland Oregon in the 70's. It deals with a crew of four, two couples, that go around ripping off drugstores for opiates. It does not attempt to judge or condemn this behavior, it just tells the story of a group of junkies, and one of their attempts to go clean and find out what the straight life is like.
Those of you that have experience with any form of substance abuse may find that this movie rings true. I loved the quote by Bob something to the effect of: "In life, you never know one minute to the next how you're going to feel. But a dope fiend just has to look at the labels on the bottles." By no means does this movie glamorize drug use. In fact, it shows it for what it is, a temporary fix that leads nowhere but destruction.
- nova_caine
- Jan 1, 2006
- Permalink
In 1971, in Portland, Bob (Matt Dillon), his girlfriend Dianne (Kelly Lynch) and his friends Rick (James Le Gros) and his girlfriend Nadine (Heather Graham) are smalltime thieves of drugstores and hospitals. They spend their lives drugged and Bob is chased by the abusive police detective Gentry (James Remar). They decide to move to another city and soon Nadine has an OD, affecting Bob that decides to return to Portland and be clean. But he is haunted by his past.
"Drugstore Cowboy" is still a great film after almost twenty years. Gus Van Sant discloses a true story and based on an autobiographical novel by James Fogle. Matt Dillon is amazing and the rest of the lead cast is also fantastic. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): "Drugstore Cowboy"
"Drugstore Cowboy" is still a great film after almost twenty years. Gus Van Sant discloses a true story and based on an autobiographical novel by James Fogle. Matt Dillon is amazing and the rest of the lead cast is also fantastic. My vote is eight.
Title (Brazil): "Drugstore Cowboy"
- claudio_carvalho
- Aug 24, 2018
- Permalink
'Drugstore Cowboy' really knocked my socks off when I first watched it about 12-13 years ago, and it still impresses me every time I view it again. An unsentimental drug movie that doesn't resort to knee jerk moralizing, it is one of the very best movies of the 1980s, and still one of the best movies of its kind (Alison Maclean's underrated 'Jesus' Son' is one of the few recent movies to come close to it). Gus Van Sant looked like he was going to be one of the most exciting directors of the 1990s, but after the excellent 'My Own Private Idaho' it quickly proved not to be so, his career ending up with awful saccharine "uplifting" Hollwood dreck and his misguided remake of 'Psycho' that's best if we pretend never happened. Whatever he went on to make there's no denying that this is one brilliant movie. Matt Dillon gives one of his strongest and most complex performances, and he is backed up by an equally impressive supporting cast of Kelly Lynch (easily her best role), the wonderful James LeGros ('Floundering'), future sex symbol Heather Graham ('Boogie Nights'), and quirky character actor fave Max Perlich ('Truth Or Consequences, NM'). Also keep an eye out for the shoulda-been-a-star James Remar ('The Warriors') and a cameo by the legendary William S. Burroughs as "the Priest". 'Drugstore Cowboy' has energy, humour, depth and honesty. I love it. A wonderful movie and highly recommended.
Watching a quartet of teenage junkies rob pharmacies and get high may not be everyone's idea of a good time. But director Gus Van Sant looks beyond the desperate urge for another fix and finds a good deal of insight into the addict's pursuit of slow death in the fast lane, with Matt Dillon giving a memorable performance as the leader of the sometimes comically pathetic outlaw gang. Van Sant's unflinching depiction of the junkie lifestyle is entirely sympathetic but totally unsentimental, showing the non-conformist need for a high without ever glamorizing the drug culture. The episodic story is set (and with good reason) in the year 1971, after the mysticism of experimentation had long since become the grim reality of addiction, but it loses some momentum after Dillon enters a rehabilitation clinic, at which point the film attempts to express verbally what it already proved it could show visually. But the script never sells out for any tidy moral lesson, and the presence of Beat Generation icon William Burroughs in a small but notable cameo role lends a measure of credibility to Van Sant's intentions.
This movie has much personal meaning to me. In 1990, I had the unfortunate pleasure to be incarcerated at the Northern Nevada Correctional Center in Stewart(Carson City, NV.) Yea, we had cable TV, and first run movies. This was one of them. After viewing the movie, I laughed w/ my co-horts about suing for copy right infringement. (joking, of coarse). My prison stint was drug related. but the interesting thing is: I and my girlfriend at the time made these sames moves:(Seizures and all)at a southwestern state small town where the Dilaudids were actually kept on the shelf.(1981-83)We hit this one pharmacy -3- times(largest haul:470 Dilaudids-1,2,3,and 4mg--Smallest: one bottle of 100 # 4's).I lived in Nevada all my life. I did several small stints in several prisons. In closing. I wanted to write this and note, it was a looong time ago. I have lived in Portland ,OR. now for 19 yrs. And I celebrated my -11- year clean anniversary date last Thurs. (8/28/09). After a medical detox, I hooked up w/ a local methadone prgm. and never looked back. It saved MY and my WIFE's life. Take from this what you will. But it's true and I still get a kick out of this movie and "my story" as it relates w/ it. I rarely tell it often. But I did want to post this message. Thank you for allowing me to express myself...Sincerely, doctom1973......
- Doctom1973
- Sep 4, 2009
- Permalink
- rmax304823
- Dec 10, 2005
- Permalink
This is a period picture that takes place in 1971, but there are no references to Vietnam, the flower power movement, Kent State or any other issues or events of the day. This is because the characters have nothing to do with that world. Bob's thoughts revolve around drugstores like planets around the sun. His family of dope thieves lives in almost total isolation. Even junkies who come to do business are admitted to their home with reluctance and then rudely sent on their way. Their only contact with the "other" world is its drugstores and its cops. They live in a world not ruled by the authorities, but by "the dark forces that lie hidden beneath the surface, the ones that some people call superstitions: howling banshees, black cats, hats on beds, dogs, the evil eye..." In his world, Bob's lunatic logic makes perfect sense and serves him as a guide for living better than any "sane" worldview.
When the crew goes "crossroading" to the tune of "the Israelites" we realize that they, too, are like children of a different god; wanderers whose only contact with others is hostile confrontation. They are either "attacking" drug stores or being attacked by ball-breaking cops.
Kelly Lynch, who plays Diane, said in an interview that, "The first take was terrible and Matt (Dillon) said he wouldn't support the film." It is not surprising that a film this ambitious should run into some snags. A great film like "DC" is a tightrope act. The best scenes in the film are also the riskiest; they would have fallen apart in the hands of lesser actors.
If you like the film you might get a kick out of the autobiographical novel on which it is based, by James Fogle, the original drugstore cowboy. At the time of the film's release (1989) Fogle had spent "thirty-five of his fifty-three years in prison on drug-related charges." I wonder what ever became of him.
When the crew goes "crossroading" to the tune of "the Israelites" we realize that they, too, are like children of a different god; wanderers whose only contact with others is hostile confrontation. They are either "attacking" drug stores or being attacked by ball-breaking cops.
Kelly Lynch, who plays Diane, said in an interview that, "The first take was terrible and Matt (Dillon) said he wouldn't support the film." It is not surprising that a film this ambitious should run into some snags. A great film like "DC" is a tightrope act. The best scenes in the film are also the riskiest; they would have fallen apart in the hands of lesser actors.
If you like the film you might get a kick out of the autobiographical novel on which it is based, by James Fogle, the original drugstore cowboy. At the time of the film's release (1989) Fogle had spent "thirty-five of his fifty-three years in prison on drug-related charges." I wonder what ever became of him.
- meisterpuck
- Jan 19, 2001
- Permalink
The most poignant scene in the film Drugstore Cowboy arrives in the opening moments when a drug-addicted foursome uses some skillful maneuvers to steal drugs from the local drugstore. The scenes that follow lack the quality of this interesting opening (rarely in film do addicts rob drug stores though it would seem to be a preferred method of acquiring their drugs) and we are left with a paint by numbers movie about addicts and the lengths that they will go to to protect their habits.
What did Roger Ebert see in this film that I couldn't? In every scene with Kelly Lynch as Dianne I had an incredible desire to watch paint dry. It was almost as though the casting directors were looking for Juliette Lewis or Winona Ryder but somehow ended up with Kelly Lynch. I never once believed that Dianne and Matt Dillon as Bob were married because Kelly Lynch looked older and more mature than him. It seemed that she was more of a bad mother than a wife to him. Matt Dillon did his best with a fairly one-dimensional character but once again it was almost as though the role was designed for someone else and the directors got stuck with Dillon. Heather Graham found herself in the position of being forced to play the role of a pathetic teenage drifter so that she could write it on her resume and go on to bigger and better things in Boogie Nights. I couldn't help but believe throughout the long two hours that the film would have packed a bigger punch if the casting directors had acquired Brad Pitt and Winona Ryder for the lead roles.
Drugstore Cowboy may have been somewhat thought-provoking in 1989 but it hardly deserves mention today when stacked up against Trainspotting and Requiem for a Dream. The film was set in 1971 and wouldn't it have been nice to find out why this foursome adored drugs so much? Was it the horrors of Vietnam that upset them? The high of being a product of the flower-child era? The movie refuses to delve into these issues and instead fixates itself solely on the premise that drugs cause damage but are the most important thing in the lives of the foursome. Perhaps the film would have been more entertaining and visionary if it had occurred to the writers and director to use the 1971 setting to explain the characters motivations. The so-called redemption of the Matt Dillon character is merely an attempt to end the movie at the 2 hour point rather than sooner and the scenes with the former drug addicted old man are trite and unnecessary. Drugstore Cowboy has aged badly and should only be viewed by those who use Roger Ebert's advice as their Bible for opinions on movies.
6/10
What did Roger Ebert see in this film that I couldn't? In every scene with Kelly Lynch as Dianne I had an incredible desire to watch paint dry. It was almost as though the casting directors were looking for Juliette Lewis or Winona Ryder but somehow ended up with Kelly Lynch. I never once believed that Dianne and Matt Dillon as Bob were married because Kelly Lynch looked older and more mature than him. It seemed that she was more of a bad mother than a wife to him. Matt Dillon did his best with a fairly one-dimensional character but once again it was almost as though the role was designed for someone else and the directors got stuck with Dillon. Heather Graham found herself in the position of being forced to play the role of a pathetic teenage drifter so that she could write it on her resume and go on to bigger and better things in Boogie Nights. I couldn't help but believe throughout the long two hours that the film would have packed a bigger punch if the casting directors had acquired Brad Pitt and Winona Ryder for the lead roles.
Drugstore Cowboy may have been somewhat thought-provoking in 1989 but it hardly deserves mention today when stacked up against Trainspotting and Requiem for a Dream. The film was set in 1971 and wouldn't it have been nice to find out why this foursome adored drugs so much? Was it the horrors of Vietnam that upset them? The high of being a product of the flower-child era? The movie refuses to delve into these issues and instead fixates itself solely on the premise that drugs cause damage but are the most important thing in the lives of the foursome. Perhaps the film would have been more entertaining and visionary if it had occurred to the writers and director to use the 1971 setting to explain the characters motivations. The so-called redemption of the Matt Dillon character is merely an attempt to end the movie at the 2 hour point rather than sooner and the scenes with the former drug addicted old man are trite and unnecessary. Drugstore Cowboy has aged badly and should only be viewed by those who use Roger Ebert's advice as their Bible for opinions on movies.
6/10
- yaseminturkish
- Apr 27, 2002
- Permalink
I lived in San Francisco all through the 1970's and saw tons of these kinds of people. They all tended to "group" together for the common purpose of scoring and getting high on any kind of drugs available, but the drug of choice always seemed to be heroin. These groups, or small communes, always tended to have a strong leader who ran the whole show for the group and issued "orders" like a drill sergeant, but interestingly, in a very "loving" way. And nobody ever seemed to question this leader. In fact, HE always seemed to be treated with complete deference (reverence???) as if HE were some kind of a star. Everybody in the group seemed to have a specific "job" to do within the group, and their jobs seemed to define their value to the group and, hence, their "right" to be there. Except for the fact that they existed in the general "hippy" milieu of the time, they never showed any signs of being interested in the presumed hippy world view. I always felt the groups simply represented highly efficient, small business concerns. These people were known thieves, drug dealers, and small-time con artists and, if left alone, they were not considered dangerous. In fact, they were typically very intelligent and interesting people, but very closed-off to the world outside their group. Each group was like its own little cult.
The group portrayed in Drugstore Cowboy would have fit in perfectly with what I remember from that time, except that there were typically more people in the groups than just four. I would say these groups numbered more like six to eight people, certainly enough to occupy a large flat or house in one of the cheap neighborhoods. The fact that the cost of living was so much cheaper back then allowed for this type of lifestyle. And it was only when the real estate boom in San Francisco in the mid-to-late 1970's precluded this type of communal existence (lease applications, leases, personal references, high deposits, etc.) that these "illegal" groups tended to disappear. The ease with which the group in DC moved from one living space to the other would become impossible due to these new economic and social realities (higher rents and stiffer rules). Yes, even in Portland.
Anyway, this movie really resonnated with me and triggered my memories of that time, and I think it's accurate to say that this is truly a "period piece." I'm certain that the DC group could have only existed in the early 1970's, and certainly no later than say 1974-5.
I have no idea why I felt compelled to write all this seeing as how it has very little to do with the movie, which I loved. Thank you!
The group portrayed in Drugstore Cowboy would have fit in perfectly with what I remember from that time, except that there were typically more people in the groups than just four. I would say these groups numbered more like six to eight people, certainly enough to occupy a large flat or house in one of the cheap neighborhoods. The fact that the cost of living was so much cheaper back then allowed for this type of lifestyle. And it was only when the real estate boom in San Francisco in the mid-to-late 1970's precluded this type of communal existence (lease applications, leases, personal references, high deposits, etc.) that these "illegal" groups tended to disappear. The ease with which the group in DC moved from one living space to the other would become impossible due to these new economic and social realities (higher rents and stiffer rules). Yes, even in Portland.
Anyway, this movie really resonnated with me and triggered my memories of that time, and I think it's accurate to say that this is truly a "period piece." I'm certain that the DC group could have only existed in the early 1970's, and certainly no later than say 1974-5.
I have no idea why I felt compelled to write all this seeing as how it has very little to do with the movie, which I loved. Thank you!
- jingster666
- Nov 25, 2007
- Permalink
The beginning of "Drugstore Cowboy" starts out well and the robberies are interesting, but that's all this movie has to offer. Matt Dillon acts well in the first half of the movie, but his acting deteriorates in the second half. His turnaround to the good life is not acted with enough emotion. The script is also poor so Dillon isn't totally to blame. On the plus side, Heather Graham does a fine job in the film and its too bad her part is so small.
A truly great film about the drug life is "Requiem for A Dream". That movie chews up and spits out "Drugstore Cowboy". Ellen Burstyn should have won the Oscar for Best Actress that year.
A truly great film about the drug life is "Requiem for A Dream". That movie chews up and spits out "Drugstore Cowboy". Ellen Burstyn should have won the Oscar for Best Actress that year.
This is easily Gus Van Sant's best movie and contains Matt Dillon's best performance. The other cast members are also terrific, but the part of "Bob" is greatly realized by Dillon and he shines. The movie is difficult to watch at times but you get something out of it to think about when its over. I also must mention a great scene between Lynch, Matt & Matt's mother, played by Grace Zabriskie. To top it all off, this is also Heather Graham's best movie and she delivers as well. A blues soundtrack and beautiful cinematography make this one to remember.
Gus Van Sant's films all seem to be set at a different level of indie quality. That indie level usually seems to depend on the number of big name stars appear in the film. His films like Elephant or Paranoid Park star non-actors in leading roles, and they're some of the most experimental of his films. But the experimentation goes away slightly when stars like Matt Dillon or Kelly Lynch are introduced like in Van Sant's 1989 film Drugstore Cowboy. Drugstore Cowboy is about a group of junkies who spend their time robbing pharmacies so they can use the myriad of drugs available to get all sorts of new and crazy highs. But after a while the crew has to take their show on the road, and things quickly get complicated in this bleak real world drama that may or may not accurately capture the essence of drug addiction and the lengths some go to fuel said addiction.
I said the experimental reaches Gus Van Sant goes to are quelled slightly for this film, and they are, but there is still some interesting and trippy things going on. Van Sant employs a surreal quality to his whole film, capturing the character's highs as dream like mind trips with all sorts of hidden meanings that don't make a ton of sense. But then again, they don't entirely need to. The whole film has a somber and dream like quality to it that drives the whole story and is fuel for the characters motivations, what little motivation these characters have. It's a very strange and loose story about some very strange and loose people.
The problem with swathing this film with such a bleak and dreamy tone is that it makes Drugstore Cowboy kind of dull. It starts out with a lot of promise and plenty of potential. The film opens by interesting Matt Dillon's character, Bob, as he narrates an introduction to what he does and who he does it with. We then see one of their robberies take place in a tense and quiet moment. From there the plot starts to sink in as the characters lives grow more and more harrowing and the situations they find themselves in become increasingly grave. But at a certain point the film sort of plateaus and stops being interesting and you stop caring so much about the characters. I was never painfully bored with this film and I watched with a keen and interested eye all the way through, but I was by no means enthralled and the story didn't grip me like it should have.
Drugstore Cowboy is a very interesting film and it does plenty of things right. Unfortunately it's just a little boring, and the events that play out aren't terribly original, and I felt like I was just watching another reformed junkie film with a little bit of a Gus Van Sant twist. This is still a pretty decent film, but don't expect too terribly much from it.
I said the experimental reaches Gus Van Sant goes to are quelled slightly for this film, and they are, but there is still some interesting and trippy things going on. Van Sant employs a surreal quality to his whole film, capturing the character's highs as dream like mind trips with all sorts of hidden meanings that don't make a ton of sense. But then again, they don't entirely need to. The whole film has a somber and dream like quality to it that drives the whole story and is fuel for the characters motivations, what little motivation these characters have. It's a very strange and loose story about some very strange and loose people.
The problem with swathing this film with such a bleak and dreamy tone is that it makes Drugstore Cowboy kind of dull. It starts out with a lot of promise and plenty of potential. The film opens by interesting Matt Dillon's character, Bob, as he narrates an introduction to what he does and who he does it with. We then see one of their robberies take place in a tense and quiet moment. From there the plot starts to sink in as the characters lives grow more and more harrowing and the situations they find themselves in become increasingly grave. But at a certain point the film sort of plateaus and stops being interesting and you stop caring so much about the characters. I was never painfully bored with this film and I watched with a keen and interested eye all the way through, but I was by no means enthralled and the story didn't grip me like it should have.
Drugstore Cowboy is a very interesting film and it does plenty of things right. Unfortunately it's just a little boring, and the events that play out aren't terribly original, and I felt like I was just watching another reformed junkie film with a little bit of a Gus Van Sant twist. This is still a pretty decent film, but don't expect too terribly much from it.
- KnightsofNi11
- Jul 28, 2012
- Permalink
Matt Dillon seems to have improved as an actor over the course of his career. In this film about pharmaceutical drug use, Dillon has the majority of lines and is also the narrator. His performance is disarmingly wooden, and is a constant reminder that he is really an actor reciting his lines, rather than the character he is playing.
In Drugstore Cowboy, Dillon and his wife (played well enough by Kelly Lynch) rob drugstores with a younger couple (James LeGros and Heather Graham, who was actually not bad). The film is basically a story about how that lifestyle is not so simple. The story and the cinematography are both fine - plenty of gloomy shots when things aren't going well, and some beautiful shots of Oregon. However, the directing and editing seem to be off in a hard-to-quantify way. It's not particularly fast or slow, and not all that long at 100 minutes, but the pacing fails to pull the viewer in. The story is not overpowering, so it needs a directorial style which dwells on the atmosphere and feel, which it doesn't get. At times it starts to veer off nicely towards the somewhat surreal (for example, the "hex" scene). Most of the time though, it's very representational, simply presenting the facts, and that more slowly than it could.
As a side note, William S Burroughs was apparently not meant to be an actor, and the way in which his character exists only to make a point is frustratingly blatant. I think this appearance only diminishes him.
In Drugstore Cowboy, Dillon and his wife (played well enough by Kelly Lynch) rob drugstores with a younger couple (James LeGros and Heather Graham, who was actually not bad). The film is basically a story about how that lifestyle is not so simple. The story and the cinematography are both fine - plenty of gloomy shots when things aren't going well, and some beautiful shots of Oregon. However, the directing and editing seem to be off in a hard-to-quantify way. It's not particularly fast or slow, and not all that long at 100 minutes, but the pacing fails to pull the viewer in. The story is not overpowering, so it needs a directorial style which dwells on the atmosphere and feel, which it doesn't get. At times it starts to veer off nicely towards the somewhat surreal (for example, the "hex" scene). Most of the time though, it's very representational, simply presenting the facts, and that more slowly than it could.
As a side note, William S Burroughs was apparently not meant to be an actor, and the way in which his character exists only to make a point is frustratingly blatant. I think this appearance only diminishes him.
- Arsenic Drone
- May 29, 2007
- Permalink
If you're one of the so-called `art-film' aficionados who was disappointed, as I was, by Requiem for a Dream (and even if you weren't), you'll love Drugstore Cowboy. Directed by the man who gave us such classics as To Die For and Good Will Hunting, Drugstore Cowboy is, without doubt, Van Sant's greatest work. It's a magnificent time capsule from the early seventies, having no reference to the Vietnam War, Kent State, or any other icon of the period. It's purely about the drug subculture.
Set along the affluent north Atlantic seaboard, where pharmacies and drugstores litter the urban landscape, the drama revolves around four friends who support their drug habits by robbing the official dispensaries of addictive substances. An interesting and compelling setup all by itself, in lesser hands, the script and action would be enough to produce a decent flick; but, it goes way beyond that. Matt Dillon gives what I think is his best performance ever, a perfectly charming substance abuser who has created a little cocoon of a world all to himself. Like little moons revolving around his dreamy and sometimes terrifying little world, the drugstores he stalks all promise a one-way trip to a different place. As viewers, we're all sucked in by the gravity of his world, such that we even begin to understand and believe his peculiar little superstitious rituals. In this special existence, they make sense. To transgress against the rules is to court disaster. And like Adam in the garden, he eventually breaks his own rules, and pays the price.
But it's a fortunate fall from grace. Drugstore Cowboy is completely realistic in its portrayal of the full-blown addict's hitting rock bottom, an experience that is foundational in the wisdom of AA. The recovery scenes are moving in their sincerity and simplicity, none of which is sugarcoated or saccharine. And yet, the recovery scenes are both joyous and heartbreakingly poignant. God, what a great movie.
Set along the affluent north Atlantic seaboard, where pharmacies and drugstores litter the urban landscape, the drama revolves around four friends who support their drug habits by robbing the official dispensaries of addictive substances. An interesting and compelling setup all by itself, in lesser hands, the script and action would be enough to produce a decent flick; but, it goes way beyond that. Matt Dillon gives what I think is his best performance ever, a perfectly charming substance abuser who has created a little cocoon of a world all to himself. Like little moons revolving around his dreamy and sometimes terrifying little world, the drugstores he stalks all promise a one-way trip to a different place. As viewers, we're all sucked in by the gravity of his world, such that we even begin to understand and believe his peculiar little superstitious rituals. In this special existence, they make sense. To transgress against the rules is to court disaster. And like Adam in the garden, he eventually breaks his own rules, and pays the price.
But it's a fortunate fall from grace. Drugstore Cowboy is completely realistic in its portrayal of the full-blown addict's hitting rock bottom, an experience that is foundational in the wisdom of AA. The recovery scenes are moving in their sincerity and simplicity, none of which is sugarcoated or saccharine. And yet, the recovery scenes are both joyous and heartbreakingly poignant. God, what a great movie.
I've got to admit that I don't rate Gus Van Sant very highly. Most of his films are disappointing; and, of course, he was also the man responsible for the entirely pointless Psycho remake - but Drugstore Cowboy is a major highlight of his filmography, and a film that I wouldn't hesitate to name as the best that he's directed. Drugstore Cowboy takes place in the seventies, and is a story of a self confessed 'dope-fiend'. Bob is a man wrapped up in superstitions, and a man that cares for little outside of where his next fix is going to come from. Along with a small group of like-minded friends, Bob robs pharmacies. However, his life changes when he believes that he's been hexed. The plot sticks closely to its subject material; and the director and cast do well in aptly portraying the mind of a drug user, whether it be through pseudo-dream sequences or the actions of the central protagonists. Following a man that robs drugstores isn't the most obvious base for a film; but it provides a good point of view for a story like this, and this film is almost completely successful throughout.
Gus Van Sant appears to enjoy making films with documentary elements; 1995's To Die For is key in this respect, but there are several instances where it appears that Drugstore Cowboy is attempting to analyse it's characters from a documentary standpoint. Lead actor Matt Dillon has had a varied career, and many of his films haven't been the best. He can, however, be very proud of his lead performance here. Dillon looks the part that he's meant to be playing, as his good looks brilliantly offset the 'in the gutter' character and his acting talent, which has never been under question if you ask me, is allowed to shine through also. The rest of the cast don't stand out over the lead; although it's worth noting that this film features an early performance from Heather Graham. The atmosphere of the movie is gritty and dirty, and this is helped along by the grainy film stock that the movie has been shot on. The locations are well used also, and Van Sant ensures that the film takes place in the sort of atmosphere you would associate with junkies. Overall, this film is a good dissection of drugs and drug users and comes recommended.
Gus Van Sant appears to enjoy making films with documentary elements; 1995's To Die For is key in this respect, but there are several instances where it appears that Drugstore Cowboy is attempting to analyse it's characters from a documentary standpoint. Lead actor Matt Dillon has had a varied career, and many of his films haven't been the best. He can, however, be very proud of his lead performance here. Dillon looks the part that he's meant to be playing, as his good looks brilliantly offset the 'in the gutter' character and his acting talent, which has never been under question if you ask me, is allowed to shine through also. The rest of the cast don't stand out over the lead; although it's worth noting that this film features an early performance from Heather Graham. The atmosphere of the movie is gritty and dirty, and this is helped along by the grainy film stock that the movie has been shot on. The locations are well used also, and Van Sant ensures that the film takes place in the sort of atmosphere you would associate with junkies. Overall, this film is a good dissection of drugs and drug users and comes recommended.
Matt Dillon delivers one of the best performances of his career in Drugstore Cowboy, a gritty film about the real life of junkies. There is heavy drug content in this film, but in no way is the drug life glorified. We see the more realistic life of drugs on the streets, which is probably what makes this such an aesthetically unpleasing film. No one in the movie looks good, it has just about as much ugliness as a spectacularly ugly movie like Buffalo '66, which enhances the realism of the film. Much of the film is shot in a documentary style, giving it a gritty, realistic feel, almost like a twisted home movie.
Dillon plays the part of Bob, a young junkie in the early 1970s who goes around with his group of friends breaking into pharmacies and drug stores and stealing random bottles of prescription bottles looking for their next high. The movie starts at the end of the story, with Bob riding in an ambulance and telling us the story of how he got there, but has the pleasing distinction of not leading you exactly to where you knew you were going to be. Even by showing the end of the story there is nothing given away. This is a powerful drug film that doesn't hold anything back. It is not pretty to look at, but also like Buffalo '66, it's hideously unattractive counterpart, the movie has something to say.
Dillon plays the part of Bob, a young junkie in the early 1970s who goes around with his group of friends breaking into pharmacies and drug stores and stealing random bottles of prescription bottles looking for their next high. The movie starts at the end of the story, with Bob riding in an ambulance and telling us the story of how he got there, but has the pleasing distinction of not leading you exactly to where you knew you were going to be. Even by showing the end of the story there is nothing given away. This is a powerful drug film that doesn't hold anything back. It is not pretty to look at, but also like Buffalo '66, it's hideously unattractive counterpart, the movie has something to say.
- Anonymous_Maxine
- Dec 19, 2002
- Permalink
Another film directed by the awesome gus van sant. In 1971 portland. Matt dillon, kelly lynch. Bob and his crew knock over the local pharmacies for pills. We can tell when bob is tripping... trees and animals go flying across the screen. They keep making sloppy mistakes, as they try to stay one step ahead of the cops. It doesn't help that bob is superstitious, and they keep on jinxing themselves with bad luck. Or maybe its just because they make really bad decisions. He wants to get into a rehab program, but he's also smart enough to know the challenges he is facing. This one is much more finished and professional than mala noche, an earlier film by gvs. Pretty good stuff. Based on the story by james fogle.
Drugstore Cowboy takes a look an element of the drug/crime subculture without glamorising, sensationalising or demonising it. I honestly can't think of another film on a similar subject that has managed to pull off this balance so successfully.
We care about the characters, but are completely aware of their (many) flaws. We are shown that drugs are pleasurable, but given a realistic portrayal of the great damage they can do. The crime scenes are exciting but we never lose sight of how risky and sometimes pathetic the crimes are.
This film is moral without moralising and humane without romanticising or sentimentalising the subject. Drugstore Cowboy may lack the visceral punch of a film like Trainspotting, but has a subtlety, depth and heart missing from other more voyeuristic cinematic treatments of drug use.
We care about the characters, but are completely aware of their (many) flaws. We are shown that drugs are pleasurable, but given a realistic portrayal of the great damage they can do. The crime scenes are exciting but we never lose sight of how risky and sometimes pathetic the crimes are.
This film is moral without moralising and humane without romanticising or sentimentalising the subject. Drugstore Cowboy may lack the visceral punch of a film like Trainspotting, but has a subtlety, depth and heart missing from other more voyeuristic cinematic treatments of drug use.
We all know the arc of a drug addict movie; drugs are fun, until they're not. Drugstore Cowboy keeps the stakes low and calmly drifts along with aloof swagger, not opting for Requiem for a Dream level theatrics. So what it gains by not being over the top, it loses in truly gripping drama. Points for a near autobiographical cameo in what would be the twilight years of William S. Boroughs' life.
- youngcollind
- May 6, 2021
- Permalink
Excellent movie that stands the test of time and is likely even more relevant today than when it was made. Not exactly a feel good flick but if you're in the mood for a little depressing drama, this movie will not disappoint. Excellent characters, script, and acting. Matt Dillion crushes this role and a young Heather Graham is icing on the cake. Really a well done film across the board, definitely worth seeing
- SupremeMovieKing
- May 15, 2020
- Permalink
It's 1971 American Northwest. Rob (Matt Dillon), his girlfriend Dianne (Kelly Lynch), his second Rick (James Le Gros) and Rick's girl Nadine (Heather Graham) are all drug addicts. They rob drugstores with well planned schemes. Federal agent Gentry (James Remar) stakes out the group waiting for them to slip up.
Director Gus Van Sant brings a jazzy hypnotic sense to the feel of being on drugs. He infuses the movie with an off-center sense of humor. The four leads all contribute some great work. Matt Dillon is a terrific lead. Kelly Lynch is a perfect match. She has the same power without the manic personality of Dillon. James Le Gros is a great second and Heather Graham is build to be a victim in this movie.
Director Gus Van Sant brings a jazzy hypnotic sense to the feel of being on drugs. He infuses the movie with an off-center sense of humor. The four leads all contribute some great work. Matt Dillon is a terrific lead. Kelly Lynch is a perfect match. She has the same power without the manic personality of Dillon. James Le Gros is a great second and Heather Graham is build to be a victim in this movie.
- SnoopyStyle
- Nov 14, 2015
- Permalink
In Bonnie & Clyde style, Bob Hughes (Matt Dillon) and his pack of thieves travel the Pacific Coast ripping off drugstores to maintain their high. Through their adventures we learn about Bob's technique, the police that are after them and the moral/philosophical issues surrounding junkiedom.
The cinematography of the film is great. Van Sant seems to try and put the camera into every possible crevice imaginable. At the same time, the Pacific landscape sets up great contrasts of natural and industrialized scenery.
Unfortunately, there is something extremely stiff about most of the performances. It seems as though everyone in the film was forced to strictly adhere to the script word's, comma's and all. In a scene where Matt Dillon talks to a rehab counselor, the viewer fells as though Dillon is acting to a mirror in his bedroom. Surprisingly, William S. Burroughs is one of the better actors in the film, playing an on again/off again 80-something junkie preacher. Although, I'm sure drug philosophy wasn't too much of a stretch for Burroughs.
In the end, this is one of the better criminal/junkie films out there. Expect Van Sant's boredom loving pacing and pay attention to a couple of shots that are eerily similar to later Tarantino-Aranofsky flicks.
The cinematography of the film is great. Van Sant seems to try and put the camera into every possible crevice imaginable. At the same time, the Pacific landscape sets up great contrasts of natural and industrialized scenery.
Unfortunately, there is something extremely stiff about most of the performances. It seems as though everyone in the film was forced to strictly adhere to the script word's, comma's and all. In a scene where Matt Dillon talks to a rehab counselor, the viewer fells as though Dillon is acting to a mirror in his bedroom. Surprisingly, William S. Burroughs is one of the better actors in the film, playing an on again/off again 80-something junkie preacher. Although, I'm sure drug philosophy wasn't too much of a stretch for Burroughs.
In the end, this is one of the better criminal/junkie films out there. Expect Van Sant's boredom loving pacing and pay attention to a couple of shots that are eerily similar to later Tarantino-Aranofsky flicks.
I'm at a loss. I've been hearing about this movie since it came out - it's been in my to-see list since then. I finally watched it last weekend.
The opening robbery was just ok. It could have been presented with way more tension. That goes the same for the rest of the movie - bits and pieces here and there were better than average, but they were short and few, and you could see all over the place missed opportunities for greater drama, emotional impact, and excitement. Parts were just plain boring. But then something semi-interesting would come along and (barely) keep me from turning it off.
There are vastly superior drug movies out there - my favorite being Requiem for a Dream. I don't know why this is singled out as such a great film. It certainly was not the first to tackle the subject - Panic in Needle Park, among others that came before it. Do I regret watching it? No. Will I ever watch it again? Absolutely not.
I don't think this is a case of built-up expectations either. It's like I just knew there was something off about all the praise it was getting at the time - maybe that's why it's taken nearly 30 years to get around to watching it. I didn't think it was going to be a masterpiece, but I did think it was going to be much better than it was. Sometimes I think a prominent, popular critic ends up liking something that is actually mediocre and then everyone else just feels like they have to jump on the bandwagon. Otherwise, I just figure this one out.
The opening robbery was just ok. It could have been presented with way more tension. That goes the same for the rest of the movie - bits and pieces here and there were better than average, but they were short and few, and you could see all over the place missed opportunities for greater drama, emotional impact, and excitement. Parts were just plain boring. But then something semi-interesting would come along and (barely) keep me from turning it off.
There are vastly superior drug movies out there - my favorite being Requiem for a Dream. I don't know why this is singled out as such a great film. It certainly was not the first to tackle the subject - Panic in Needle Park, among others that came before it. Do I regret watching it? No. Will I ever watch it again? Absolutely not.
I don't think this is a case of built-up expectations either. It's like I just knew there was something off about all the praise it was getting at the time - maybe that's why it's taken nearly 30 years to get around to watching it. I didn't think it was going to be a masterpiece, but I did think it was going to be much better than it was. Sometimes I think a prominent, popular critic ends up liking something that is actually mediocre and then everyone else just feels like they have to jump on the bandwagon. Otherwise, I just figure this one out.
- harbingerofapocalypse
- Apr 29, 2018
- Permalink