Drugstore Cowboy

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......

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.

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.

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!

'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.