John Cassavetes & the Mystery of Moviemaking
A CINEMATIC VIEW
I have to admire John Cassavetes even when I become angry at him — and I become angry at him each time I see one of his films! His latest creation, Love Streams, is a typical Cassavetes opus: at times a beautiful blend of intuition, sensitivity, and compassion, but at other moments a maddening mixture of overly long scenes, aimless dialogue, and a seemingly directionless plot.
An individualist who refuses to surrender to the system, Cassavetes has been directing highly personal films (most of which he authored) for more than 20 years. If you wonder where the authentic artist is in movieland in the 1980s, the artist who refuses to change his perspective or alter his technique for monetary gain, you don’t have to look past John Cassavetes. There is not a compromising shot in a Cassavetes film, not a dishonest bit of dialogue, not a moment of cheap manipulation of the viewers’ emotions.
Using a hand-held camera without a script, Cassavetes improvised with a group of protégés and created his first film, Shadows (1961). A piece of classic cinéma vérité, the film won the Critics’ Award at Venice. Shadows illustrates the kind of personal style of moviemaking — highly improvisational, wrenchingly realistic, loosely edited, strongly intuitive — that Cassavetes has continued right up to Love Streams. In films such as Faces (1968), Husbands (1969), A Woman Under the Influence (1974), and Gloria (1980), Cassavetes has explored the human condition with enormous compassion.
Obviously in love with his characters and probably also with the actors and actresses who portray them, Cassavetes in his filming often seems to become part of the audience: he allows scenes that begin marvelously to go on too long. Not exercising control, Cassavetes lets his stories ramble, and so the theme of a plot can be obscured.
Enjoyed reading this?
READ MORE! GET A FREE 7 DAY TRIALSUBSCRIBE TODAY
You May Also Enjoy
Hollywood's standard view of sexuality frequently works against a film’s best intentions. Is all the bed-hopping supposed to have any real significance?
Two films that are interesting adaptations from another medium are "Amadeus" and "Cal," each rewritten by its original author for the screen.
There may be a benevolent God and life may have a meaning because how else can you account for the marvelous humor in a Marx Brothers’ movie?