William Friedkin’s To Live and Die in L.A. (1985) stands as one of the most subversive crime thrillers of the 1980s. While it fits comfortably within the neon-lit, synth-scored aesthetic of the decade, it challenges many of the conventions that defined action and crime films of the time.
In an era filled with high-concept action blockbusters and clear-cut heroes, To Live and Die in L.A. instead offers a world of moral ambiguity, flawed protagonists, and an unpredictable narrative structure that defies audience expectations. It is both a quintessential product of the 1980s and a film that actively works against the genre’s typical conventions, making it one of the most compelling and unique crime films of all time.
The 1980s Crime Genre and Its Conventions
The crime films of the 1980s were often characterized by a clear moral divide. Heroes and villains were typically well-defined and law enforcement figures were frequently portrayed as determined, morally upright protagonists taking on corrupt organizations or ruthless criminals.
Movies like Beverly Hills Cop (1984), Lethal Weapon (1987), and Die Hard (1988) followed charismatic, wisecracking heroes who overcame their enemies through sheer willpower and a strong sense of justice. Even darker crime films like Scarface (1983) and The Untouchables (1987) operated within familiar storytelling frameworks, adhering to an established rise-and-fall structure or the inevitability of good triumphing over evil.
To Live and Die in L.A., however, refuses to conform to these norms. Its protagonist, Secret Service agent Richard Chance (William Petersen), is not the noble, justice-driven hero audiences might expect. Instead, he is reckless, selfish, and willing to break the law to achieve his personal revenge. The film’s narrative does not follow a standard trajectory of good versus evil, and its shocking twists—including the fate of its lead character—further dismantle conventional expectations.
The Subversion of the Hero Archetype
Richard Chance is introduced as a brash, adrenaline-fueled law enforcement officer who initially appears to fit the mold of a typical 1980s action hero. However, as the film progresses, it becomes evident that Chance is far from the righteous, heroic figure audiences might anticipate. His primary motivation is not to uphold the law but to avenge his murdered partner. This obsession leads him to adopt increasingly unethical and dangerous tactics, including coercion, manipulation, and ultimately an ill-fated armed robbery that seals his fate.
Unlike characters such as Martin Riggs (Lethal Weapon) or John McClane (Die Hard), Chance’s recklessness does not come with redeeming qualities. He does not have a tragic backstory that justifies his behavior, nor does he have a moral epiphany that redeems him. Instead, his refusal to acknowledge his limitations or compromise his methods leads directly to his downfall. By the end of the film, it becomes clear that Chance is not the hero of the story—he is merely another player in a ruthless world where justice is ambiguous and survival is uncertain.
The Villain as an Antiheroic Mirror
Opposing Chance is counterfeiter Eric Masters (Willem Dafoe), one of the most enigmatic and compelling villains of 1980s cinema. Unlike the over-the-top crime lords of the decade, Masters is not a power-hungry drug kingpin or a maniacal mastermind. Instead, he is an artist, a meticulous craftsman whose counterfeiting is depicted as a form of creative expression. While undoubtedly a criminal, Masters is charismatic, intelligent, and operates by a code that, in some ways, is more consistent than that of Chance.
The relationship between Chance and Masters further blurs the lines between hero and villain. Both are driven by obsession—Chance with avenging his partner and Masters with perfecting his counterfeit money. Both use deception and manipulation to get what they want. Friedkin presents them as two sides of the same coin, challenging the audience’s expectations about traditional protagonists and antagonists. Masters’ ultimate fate—burning alive in his own hideout—also diverges from the standard crime film narrative, where villains are typically killed in a climactic confrontation with the hero.
The Unpredictable Narrative Structure
Perhaps the most shocking subversion of audience expectation comes in the film’s third act, when Richard Chance is abruptly killed during an attempted robbery. His sudden death is jarring, breaking the Hollywood convention that a film’s protagonist will survive to the end, either to achieve redemption or to claim victory. Instead, To Live and Die in L.A. echoes films like Psycho (1960) and Bonnie and Clyde (1967) in its willingness to eliminate its main character in a brutally unceremonious way.
This narrative choice forces the audience to reassess the film’s entire structure. John Vukovich (John Pankow), Chance’s reluctant partner, is left to take up his role, embodying the cyclical nature of corruption and moral compromise in law enforcement. Rather than providing closure or a sense of justice, the film ends on an unsettling note, with Vukovich seemingly adopting Chance’s same reckless, dangerous mindset. It suggests that, in this world, heroes and villains are interchangeable and the cycle of violence and obsession is never-ending.
Aesthetics and Atmosphere: 1980s Style with a Nihilistic Edge
While To Live and Die in L.A. subverts many narrative and thematic conventions of 1980s crime films, it is still very much a product of its time in terms of aesthetics. The film’s use of neon lighting, the excellent synthesizer-heavy score by Wang Chung, and fast-paced editing places it firmly within the decade’s stylistic trends. However, rather than using these elements to create a sense of excitement or glamor, Friedkin employs them to heighten the film’s atmosphere of paranoia and moral decay.
Los Angeles is depicted as a cold, alienating city where everyone is either corrupt or complicit. The film’s action sequences—most notably the legendary car chase—are not thrilling in the traditional sense but instead feel chaotic and desperate, reinforcing the film’s themes of unpredictability and existential dread. The juxtaposition of high-energy music with bleak, nihilistic storytelling creates a unique tension that sets To Live and Die in L.A. apart from its contemporaries.
The Legacy of To Live and Die in L.A.
In the years since its release, To Live and Die in L.A. has gained a reputation as one of the most daring and unconventional crime films of the 1980s. While it was not a massive commercial success upon release, it has since been recognized for its willingness to challenge genre expectations and present a morally ambiguous, relentlessly cynical vision of crime and law enforcement.
Its influence can be seen in later films that similarly reject traditional protagonist arcs and embrace a more nihilistic tone, such as Heat (1995), Drive (2011), and Good Time (2017). The film’s blending of 1980s style with subversive storytelling has also cemented its place as a cult classic, appreciated for both its aesthetic appeal and its narrative audacity.
Conclusion
To Live and Die in L.A. is a crime film that both embodies and rejects the conventions of its era. While it is steeped in the visual and musical stylings of the 1980s, its themes, characters, and narrative choices make it a deeply unconventional entry in the genre. By presenting a protagonist who is more reckless than righteous, an antagonist who is more complex than purely evil, and a story that refuses to adhere to traditional Hollywood structures, the film continuously subverts audience’s expectations. In doing so, it remains one of the most compelling and thought-provoking crime films of its decade—one that continues to resonate with audiences seeking something beyond the standard action-thriller formula.
Check out Our Top 5 William Friedkin Films here.
Check out our discussion about this film after seeing it for our podcast a few years ago…
That concludes our article on To Live and Die in L.A.
Did you enjoy the review? Let us know in the comments down below!
For more episodes of More Movies Weekly as well as our other shows and podcasts, be sure to check out the Podcasts page on our website.
Remember, you can have a choice of what films we review on our Weekly podcast by joining us on Patreon here.
Please join us on social media on Bluesky, Instagram and Facebook. We really appreciate all the likes, shares, retweets etc., and we would love to hear from you and continue chatting about all things cinema on these platforms.
If you love to watch videos on YouTube, then please subscribe to our channel here. There’s lots of fun and informative videos uploaded that we hope you will enjoy!
We have a passion for movies and aim to produce entertaining and informative movie-related content. It certainly is a lot of hard work, but we love films so much that it’s worth all the effort. We have to keep the lights on and make sure we have plenty of caffeine to keep all of the articles, videos and social media posts coming, so if you like our work, then please consider supporting us at Buy Me A Coffee here. You can also become a More Movies patron on Patreon here.
To help support us here at More Movies, we do use advertising in a few places and we try our best to make sure they are not intrusive or aggressive, so we appreciate it if you do not use AdBlockers on our site. Who knows, you may actually see something you like!
We are also affiliated with Funky T-shirts so be sure to check out their range of cool t-shirts which include categories Film & TV, Slogans and Retro Comics!
