Review: The Hunted (dir. by William Friedkin)


“Once you are able to kill mentally, the physical part will be easy. The difficult part… is learning how to turn it off.” — L.T. Bonham

The Hunted (2003) is one of those films that feels like it slipped through the cracks of early 2000s cinema—a gritty, atmospheric thriller directed by William Friedkin, a filmmaker whose name alone should’ve guaranteed more attention. Friedkin, the man behind The French Connection and The Exorcist, has always had a knack for tension and raw, almost documentary-like realism, and The Hunted carries that same DNA. It’s not a perfect movie, but it’s a fascinating one, a slow-burn chase film that trades explosive set pieces for mood, character, and a kind of existential dread that lingers long after the credits roll.

The story follows L.T. Bonham, a former survival instructor played by Tommy Lee Jones, who’s called back to help the authorities when a series of brutal murders points to a former student of his, Aaron Hallam, played by Benicio del Toro. Hallam, a highly trained assassin, has gone rogue, and Bonham is the only one who can track him down. The premise is simple, almost minimalist: two men, one hunting the other, with the wilderness of the Pacific Northwest serving as their battleground. There’s no grand conspiracy, no world-ending stakes—just a personal, almost primal duel between mentor and protégé. The film’s strength lies in its refusal to overcomplicate things. It’s a character study disguised as a thriller, and it’s all the better for it.

What’s immediately striking about The Hunted is its pacing. Friedkin doesn’t rush. The film takes its time establishing Bonham’s world—a quiet, isolated life in the woods, where he trains soldiers in the art of survival and combat. There’s a sense of routine, of discipline, and when Hallam re-enters his life, it’s not with a bang but with a whisper. The first act is deliberate, almost meditative, as Bonham pieces together the clues and realizes the man he’s after isn’t just any killer, but someone he once shaped. This isn’t a film about action for action’s sake. It’s about the weight of violence, the cost of skill, and the thin line between hunter and hunted.

Benicio del Toro is the standout here. Hallam is a role that could’ve easily been reduced to a one-dimensional villain, but del Toro imbues him with a quiet, unsettling intensity. There’s a scene early on where Hallam, having just committed a particularly gruesome murder, calmly walks away from the crime scene, his face a mask of detached focus. It’s chilling not because he’s raging or unhinged, but because he’s so controlled. Hallam isn’t a monster in the traditional sense; he’s a man who’s been trained to kill and has embraced that role with terrifying efficiency. Del Toro plays him with a stillness that’s unnerving, his eyes always calculating, always three steps ahead. It’s a performance that relies more on presence than dialogue, and it’s one of his most underrated.

Tommy Lee Jones, on the other hand, is a different kind of compelling. Bonham is a man of few words, a hardened veteran who’s seen too much to be rattled by much. Jones, with his gravelly voice and weathered demeanor, sells the role of a man who’s spent a lifetime in the shadows. There’s a weariness to him, a sense that he’s not just chasing Hallam to stop the killings, but to confront his own past. The dynamic between the two is electric, even when they’re not in the same scene. Their eventual face-to-face encounters crackle with tension, not because of what they say, but because of what they don’t. These are two men who understand each other on a level that most people never will, and that mutual recognition makes their conflict all the more tragic.

Friedkin’s direction is, as always, masterful in its restraint. He’s never been one for flashy camerawork or overly stylized shots, and The Hunted is no exception. The cinematography is stark and functional, emphasizing the cold, unforgiving landscape of the Pacific Northwest. The forests, rivers, and small towns feel like characters in their own right, vast and indifferent to the human drama unfolding within them. There’s a scene where Bonham and a local sheriff, played by Connie Nielsen, track Hallam through the woods. The camera lingers on the trees, the mud, the rain—details that ground the film in a tangible, almost tactile reality. It’s not just a chase; it’s a test of endurance, both physical and psychological.

The film shares some striking thematic ground with First Blood, another story about soldiers haunted by what they’ve seen and done in war. Both films explore men who are not just racked with guilt but suffering from PTSD, their minds fractured by the horrors of combat. But where First Blood ultimately offered a glimmer of hope—that understanding and redemption might be possible—The Hunted takes a far bleaker view. Bonham and Hallam aren’t just damaged; they’re broken in ways that can’t be fixed. Hallam, in particular, represents the idea that some soldiers simply cannot come back from the brink of their experiences. There’s no catharsis for him, no moment of clarity or salvation. The film suggests that for some, the training and the trauma run too deep, and the only way out is through violence. It’s a brutal, unflinching perspective that sets The Hunted apart from more sentimental takes on the same themes.

The film’s action sequences, when they do arrive, are brutal and concise. There’s no shaky cam or rapid editing here—Friedkin lets the violence unfold in long, unflinching takes. A knife fight in a motel room is particularly memorable, not for its choreography, but for its rawness. It’s messy, desperate, and over in seconds. There’s no glorification, no slow-motion heroics. Just two men trying to kill each other in the most efficient way possible. It’s a far cry from the hyper-stylized action of the era, and it’s all the more effective for it.

Unfortunately, the film’s strengths are bogged down by its weaknesses, particularly in how it handles its secondary characters. The supporting cast, including Connie Nielsen as the sheriff, often feel thinly written, existing primarily as obstacles to delay the inevitable showdown between Bonham and Hallam. Their motivations and personalities are barely sketched out, making them feel more like narrative speed bumps than fully realized people. It’s frustrating because the film’s core dynamic is so compelling that these underdeveloped side characters only serve to slow down the momentum. And despite its brisk 90-plus minute runtime, The Hunted still manages to drag at times. The deliberate pacing that works so well in establishing atmosphere starts to feel indulgent when the story isn’t moving forward, leaving the audience waiting for the next meaningful interaction between its two leads.

If The Hunted has other weaknesses, it’s that it might be a little too restrained for some viewers. The slow burn won’t be for everyone, especially in an era where audiences have come to expect constant stimulation. The film demands patience, and those who aren’t willing to meet it on its terms might find it dull. There are also moments where the plot feels a bit thin, as if Friedkin and screenwriter Art Monterastelli were more interested in atmosphere than narrative complexity. But that’s also part of its charm. The Hunted isn’t trying to be a puzzle-box thriller or a high-octane spectacle. It’s a mood piece, a meditation on violence and the men who wield it.

The ending, without spoiling too much, is ambiguous in a way that feels true to the film’s themes. There’s no neat resolution, no easy answers. It’s a conclusion that lingers, forcing the audience to sit with the uncomfortable questions it raises. Is justice served? Is Hallam truly defeated, or is he just the first of many? The film doesn’t provide answers, and that’s to its credit. It’s more interested in the journey than the destination, in the hunt rather than the catch. While First Blood left room for healing, The Hunted closes the door on that possibility for some, reinforcing its bleak worldview.

In the grand scheme of Friedkin’s filmography, The Hunted might not rank alongside his most iconic works, but it’s a fascinating entry in his body of work. It’s a film that feels out of time, both in its style and its themes. Released in 2003, it arrived in a cinematic landscape dominated by CGI spectacle and franchise filmmaking, and it’s easy to see why it didn’t make a bigger splash at the time. But for those willing to seek it out, The Hunted is a hidden gem—a tense, thought-provoking thriller that rewards patience and close attention. It’s a film about the cost of violence, the weight of the past, and the thin line between the hunter and the hunted. And in an era where action movies often prioritize style over substance, its grounded, no-nonsense approach feels like a breath of fresh air.

4 Shots From 4 Films: Celebrating The Silhouette…Again!


4 Or More Shots From 4 Or More Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!

As a photographer, I love a good silhouette shot.  Here are some more of my favorites.

4 Shots From 4 Films

Nosferatu (1922, Dir. by F.W. Murnau)

Gone With The Wind (1939, Dir. by Victor Fleming)

The Exorcist (1973, Dir by William Friedkin)

Saving Private Ryan (1998, Dir. by Steven Spielberg)

Deal of the Century (1983, directed by William Friedkin)


Ø8˜é

Chevy Chase, Gregory Hines, and Wallace Shawn all play small-time arms dealers who get involved in a scheme to sell the “Peacemaker” drone to the dictatorship that has seized control of the Latin American country of San Miguel.  After Shawn commits suicide, Chase and Hines are joined by his widow, who is played by Sigourney Weaver.  Selling the Peacemaker should be easy except that Hines has a religious epiphany and becomes a pacifist and Chase himself is starting to have qualms about the way he makes a living.  As his brother-in-law puts it, something bad seems to happen in every country that Chase visits.

Deal of the Century has the unique distinction of being one of the two films that director William Friedkin did not acknowledge in his autobiography, The Friedkin Connection.  When Friedkin was asked why he left it out of his book, Friedkin said that he didn’t consider Deal of the Century to be a “Friedkin film.”  He wanted to do a Dr. Strangelove-style satire while the studio wanted a board Chevy Chase comedy.  The studio won, Friedkin was not given final cut, the movie bombed, and Friedkin didn’t see any reason to revisit the experience of making it.

Deal of the Century is a disjointed film.  The best scenes are the one that are probably the closest to Friedkin’s original vision.  These are the scenes set in weapons expos and that highlight the commercials designed to sell products of mass destruction.  But those scenes are dwarfed by scenes of Chevy Chase being pursued by cartoonish guerillas in San Miguel and Gregory Hines overacting after getting baptized.  Chase has a few good smartass scenes at the start of the film, some of which are reminiscent of his career-best work in Fletch.  But he loses his way as the film goes on and his change-of-heart never feels convincing.  The film ends with a burst of special effects that are unconvincing even for 1983.

Deal of the Century may have been directed by William Friedkin but he was correct to say that it is definitely not a Friedkin film.

4 Shots From 4 Films: Special William Friedkin Edition


4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!

Today, we honor director William Friedkin on what would have been his birthday.

4 Shots From 4 William Friedkin Films

The French Connection (1971, dir by William Friedkin, DP: Owen Roizman)

The Exorcist (1973, dir by William Friedkin, DP: Owen Roizman)

Sorcerer (1977, dir by William Friedkin, DP: Dick Bush and John M. Stephens)

To Live And Die In L.A. (1985, dir by William Friedkin, DP: M. Scott Smith)

 

Scenes That I Love: The End Of The French Connection


Today, the Shattered Lens celebrates what would have been birthday oif the great William Friedkin.  As a director, William Friedkin revolutionized both the horror genre and the crime genre.  The car chase from 1971’s The French Connection has been much imitated but rarely equaled.

That said, as impressive as the car chase is, the ending of the French Connection is a perfect example of the bleakness of 70s cinema.  Between the seemingly crazed Doyle firing his weapon into the void to the end cards that leave us wondering if any of this was worth it, the final minutes of The French Connection still pack an undeniable punch.

4 Shots From 4 Films: Is It October Yet?


4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking.

We’re halfway through July, which means that it’s time for me to get ready for October!  (Seriously, who cares about August and September?)  Here to inspire are….

4 Shots From 4 Horror Movies

Night of the Living Dead (1968, dir by George Romero)

The Exorcist (1973, dir by William Friedkin, DP: Owen Roizman)

Carrie (1976, dir by Brian De Palma, DP: Mario Tosi)

Suspiria (1977, dir by Dario Argento, DP: Luciano Tovoli)

 

 

4 Shots From 4 Films: Special 1971 Edition


4 Or More Shots From 4 Or More Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!

Today, the Shattered Lens pays tribute to the year 1971!

4 Shots From 4 1971 Films

The Last Picture Show (1971, dir by Peter Bogdanovich, DP: Bruce Surtees)

The French Connection (1971, dir by William Friedkin, DP: Owen Roizman)

Wake in Fright (1971, dir by Ted Kotcheff, DP: Brian West)

The Last Movie (1971, dir by Dennis Hopper, DP: Laszlo Kovacs)

April Noir: To Live And Die In L.A. (dir by William Friedkin)


Some people love money so much that they make their own.

In 1985’s To Live And Die In L.A., Williem DaFoe is magnetically evil as Rick Masters, a genius at counterfeiting who has gotten rich by selling other people fake money.  The film features a lengthy sequence showing how Masters makes his money and the viewer really is left feeling as if they’ve just watched an artist at work.  Masters has a talent and he’s a professional.  He’s good at what he does.  Unfortunately, he’s also a sociopath who is willing to kill just about anyone who he comes across.  There have been a lot of movies made about sympathetic counterfeiters.  They’re often portrayed as being quirky and rather likable individuals.  This is not one of those films.  DaFoe’s charisma makes it impossible to look away from Rick but he’s still not someone you would ever want to have to deal with for a prolonged period of time.  One gets the feeling that Rick eventually kills everyone that he does business with.

Secret Service agents Richard Chance (William Petersen) and John Vukovich (John Pankow) are investigating Masters.  They’re a classic crime movie partnership.  Vukovich is youngish and, when we first meet him, goes by-the-book.  Chance is a veteran member of the Secret Service, an impulsive loose cannon whose last partner was killed by Masters.  Chance is now obsessed with taking Masters down and he’s willing to do whatever it takes.  If that means threatening his lover and informant, the recently paroled Ruth (Darlanne Fluegel), so be it.  If that means defying the lawyers (represented by Dean Stockwell), so be it.  If that means committing crimes himself and nearly getting Vukovich killed in the process, so be it.  At first, Vukovich is horrified by Chance’s techniques but, as the film progresses, Vukovich comes to embrace Chance’s philosophy of doing whatever it takes.

What sets To Live and Die in L.A. apart from some other films is that, even as it concludes, it leaves us uncertain as to whether or not Chance and Vukovich’s actions were really worth it.  This is not a standard cops-vs-robbers film.  This is a William Friedkin film and he brings the same moral ambiguity that distinguished The French Connection to this film’s portrait of the Secret Service.  (When Chance isn’t chasing after a counterfeiter, he’s foiling an assassination attempt against the president.)

Like The French Connection, To Live and Die In L.A. features an pulse-pounding car chase, one that occurs as Chance and Vukovich make an escape from robbing a man who they believe to be a criminal.  (The man turns out to have been an FBI agent.)  This chase involves Chance and Vukovich driving the wrong way down a crowded freeway, desperately tying not to crash into any of the cars that are swerving out of the way.  It’s such an exciting scene that it’s easy to forget that Chance and Vukovich are actually escaping from committing a crime.  In The French Connection, Gene Hackman was chasing the man who tried to assassinate him.  In To Love and Die In L.A., Chance is fleeing the consequences of his own actions.

To Live and Die In L.A. holds up well.  DaFoe and Petersen both give charismatic performance but, for me, it really is John Pankow who carries the film.  Vukovich’s transformation from being a straight-laced member of law enforcement to being a doppelganger of his partner is both exciting and a little disturbing,  To Live and Die In L.A. is a crime film that leaves you wondering how far one can go battling the bad guys before becoming one of them.

6 Shots From 6 Best Picture Winners: The 1970s


4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!

Today, I’m using this feature to take a look at the history of the Academy Award for Best Picture.  Decade by decade, I’m going to highlight my picks for best of the winning films.  To start with, here are 6 shots from 6 Films that won Best Picture during the 1970s!  Here are….

6 Shots From 6 Best Picture Winners: The 1970s

The French Connection (1971, dir by William Friedkin, DP: Owen Roizman)

The Godfather (1972, dir by Francis Ford Coppola, DP: Gordon Willis)

The Godfather Part II (dir by Francis Ford Coppola, DP: Gordon Willis)

One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest (1975, dir by Milos Forman, DP: Haskell Wexler and Bill Butler)

Rocky (1976, dir by John G. Avildsen, DP: James Crabe)

The Deer Hunter (1978, dir by Michael Cimino, DP: Vilmos Zsigmond)

Film Review: The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial (dir by William Friedkin)


The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial is a film that I wanted to like more than I actually did.

The movie, which is based on a play by Herman Wouk (which was itself based on a novel by Wouk that was adapted into an Oscar-nominated film in 1954), takes place in a Naval courtroom.  Lt. Steven Maryk (Jake Lacey) is on trial, accused of mutiny against his commanding officer.  Maryk claims that, when the ship sailed into a storm, his commanding officer, Philip Francis Queeg (Kiefer Sutherland), was giving orderss that put the entire ship at risk.  With the support of the officers, Maryk relieved Queeg of command.  Maryk claims that he did so with the knowledge that it would lead to him being court-martialed.

Maryk is assigned Lt. Greenwald (Jason Clarke) as his defense counsel.  Greenwald is not happy with his assignment because he think that Maryk is guilty and he believes in the chain of command.  When Maryk and his fellow officers claim that Queeg was showing signs of mental instability, Greenwald wonders how they came to that conclusion.  Whereas Maryk and his fellow officers, including Keith (Tom Riley) and Keefer (Lewis Pullman), claim that Queeg was dangerously unstable, Greenwald sees an insecure commander who was abandoned by his men.  Greenwald comes to realize that keeping Maryk out of the brig will mean destroying Queeg on the stand.

As I said, I wanted to like this film more than I actually did.  The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial was the final film to be directed by William Friedkin.  Friedkin started his career by directing adaptations of plays like The Birthday Party and The Boys In The Band, so another theatrical adaptation does feel like an appropriate bookend for a legendary career.  Friedkin’s best films featured troubled and somewhat obsessive individuals, people who are almost addicted to taking risks.  That’s certainly an accurate description of several of the characters in The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial, from Queeg to Keefer to even Greenwald himself.  After Friedkin passed away in August, I found myself really hoping that The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial would be one final brilliant Friedkin film.

There’s a lot of good things to be said about The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial, including the fact that Jason Clarke is well-cast as Lt. Greenwald.  But, in the end, The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial is essentially a filmed play and, despite a camera that moves frequently, it all feels rather stagey and, at a time, a bit too theatrical.  As good as Clarke is, some other members of the cast can’t break free of the film’s staginess and their performances often feel disappointingly superficial.  This is especially true of Monica Raymund as the prosecutor and, surprisingly, Kiefer Sutherland as Queeg.  Sutherland, who, when he was younger, would have been the ideal pick for the role of Lt. Keefer, gives an overly mannered performance as Queeg, one that is all tics and nerves but with little of the vulnerability that Humphrey Bogart brought to the role in the 1954 film.

Friedkin’s The Caine Mutiny Court-Martial takes place in 2022, as opposed to the World War II setting of Wouk’s original novel.  This does lead to an interesting subtext, as Friedkin’s version of the story is set during a time when many people are no longer confident in America’s military leadership.  (Wouk’s novel and play came out while America was still feeling confident after the victory of the Allies in World War II.)  Friedkin takes a direct approach to the material, allowing the audience to decide for themselves whether Maryk did the right thing.

It’s a solid enough film but one that never quite escapes its stage origins.  Friedkin’s respect for the material comes through, even if the film isn’t totally successful.