Cassavetes

[the science eel]

I like everything I've seen - especially Husbands - but I think there's a kind of protective bubble around him and his work as he's regarded as the originator of American independent cinema and all the rest of it. I mean, you could say that about a lot of directors, but it seems especially the case here. Fans appear to be blindly devotional in the Fb groups I follow.

The film guides I've got tend not to rate him at all, saying he's 'pretentious' and 'humourless', and that the scripts (one of the biggest misconceptions about his work is that everything was improvised) were badly written.

I watched The Killing Of A Chinese Bookie again a couple of nights ago and loved the first half. After the shooting, it treads water and several scenes are directionless and overlong. And all those blurred, tight close-ups are absolutely confusing AND meaningless.

So - I'm sort of torn. Maybe the only thing that's great about his films is that they don't look like other films. It's got little to do with actual talent.

[Sebastian Cobb]

I think they're great but love a bit of pulp and seediness.

[chveik]

why are you torn if you like his films? film guides are often stupid, he's a great filmmaker (and actor) on his own right. I mean, you couldn't make A Woman Under the Influence without having any talent.

[the science eel]

why are you torn if you like his films? film guides are often stupid, he's a great filmmaker (and actor) on his own right.

Don't you ever have those thoughts sometimes? Your opinions are bolstered by other people's praise ('oh WOW yeah he's so great!') but then you sort of doubt that there's really that much talent there?

I feel the same way about The Fall, for example. Or that fella who makes those political photo collages.

[chveik]

Don't you ever have those thoughts sometimes? Your opinions are bolstered by other people's praise ('oh WOW yeah he's so great!') but then you sort of doubt that there's really that much talent there?

at times, of course. I guess all you can do is try to ignore those voices and see for yourself. the guides you talk about aren't even aware of how he worked on his scripts, and it's obvious to me that there's a great deal of humour in his films. I don't love everything he's done, it can be a bit meandering sometimes, but when it works it really is something else. and I dunno about American independent cinema, I can't really see his influence in recent stuff (tbf I don't follow that closely contemporary cinema).

obviously I'd totally understand if you think in the end that he's not that great. it has happened to me quite a few times.

[Sebastian Cobb]

If I decide I like something and then read a criticism of something, even if it's quite scathing, I don't tend to find it'll make me change my opinion even though I may well accept the criticism as valid. I tend to find enjoyment as a visceral feeling really and the reasoning may be used to explain why something is good or bad. But then I like plenty of things that upon analysis could be described as objectively bad.

[the science eel]

at times, of course. I guess all you can do is try to ignore those voices and see for yourself. the guides you talk about aren't even aware of how he worked on his scripts, and it's obvious to me that there's a great deal of humour in his films. I don't love everything he's done, it can be a bit meandering sometimes, but when it works it really is something else. and I dunno about American independent cinema, I can't really see his influence in recent stuff (tbf I don't follow that closely contemporary cinema).

obviously I'd totally understand if you think in the end that he's not that great. it has happened to me quite a few times.

I DO think he's great!

I think

I mean, I had doubts after seeing Love Streams - I don't think he comes across that well in that. But then defenders say 'he's just playing a role'

Sometimes the guides you turn to to find out more about an artist are the guides that - at the same time - say they're not so hot.

I liked A Woman... but David Thomson says it's really just Gena Rowland doing an extremely good piece of acting and there isn't really much of a film around it.

I'm aware I might be overthinking this.

[the science eel]

If I decide I like something and then read a criticism of something, even if it's quite scathing, I don't tend to find it'll make me change my opinion even though I may well accept the criticism as valid. I tend to find enjoyment as a visceral feeling really and the reasoning may be used to explain why something is good or bad.

Yes, yes. That's key.

[Sin Agog]

The second half of Chinese Bookie is after Gazzara's been shot.  It's not overly telegraphed or anything, but most of the movie is him ambling about as his life slowly ebbs out of him, like, uh, a poisoned health bar in Dark Souls/Monster Hunter.  You can feel him getting stiffer and more distant.  Definitely prefer the longer version of that one when it comes to highlighting the character's mind-set.

Cassavetes was an incredibly alive and gregarious person.  Just utterly enraptured by the people he allowed into his inner-sanctum.  If you're into a certain kind of narrative, you could say it came at the expense of some of his films, but I don't think so at all.  Not every movie has to be a tight, three-act 90.  His had a different purpose.

One thing I will say is it's interesting how, at least up until Love Streams (and possibly including that really), he often gave himself the ugliest, most unpleasant roles.  And not even necessarily in a 3D warts and all kind of way.  Probably an extension of his love of his cabal of friends that he preferred to play the cunt himself.

Was thinking of watching him in Paul Mazursky's Tempest soon.  Was supposedly an underrated late-career role.  https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0084776/  I already love the score by the bittuva genius Stomu Yamashta.

[PlanktonSideburns]

Hate it when they unspool and you have to poke a pen in them and wind them back  up

[Schnapple]

Still consider A Woman... to be one of the most uncomfortable films I've ever witnessed, and the sort of performance that could only come from such an honest and vulnerable creative partnership. He's great, although I haven't yet seen Love Streams.

[chveik]

Definitely prefer the longer version of that one when it comes to highlighting the character's mind-set.

well fuck my hat, I wasn't aware that there are 2 cuts! I need to get my hands on that long version sharpish

[Sin Agog]

The original '76 version bombed and dropped out of cinemas after a few days.  Some say that the '78 cut, edited by Cassavetes, is more true to his vision as he was supposedly forced to rush the earlier edit.  I think that's bollocks, or maybe it's true but fuck his vision if so. First instincts are usually much more on the money than later rewrites. Do you ever watch a film and think this is just a hurricane of plot with no center to it?  The longer cut has more scenes of Gazzara's day-to-day business, the extraneous, quotidian things which aren't really extraneous at all because they make you think of them as real characters as opposed to chess pieces being moved around by the vicissitudes of the plot.  That said, like the different versions of Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid, I think there may be scenes unique to both cuts.  So Gazzara absolutely hated the first cut and Cassavetes was dissatisfied enough to have another ride on the merry-go-round, but I prefer it and I'm obviously far more crucial to the film than both of them put together.

[peanutbutter]

I think he's great but I also think a certain amount of it is just down to him giving this (at the time) more-or-less unique outlet to some really great actors. You remove Gena Rowlands alone from his filmography and it takes a nosedive; saying nothing of whatever role she had beyond what's on screen, as his wife I assume quite a lot.

[Sin Agog]

By the way, I caught one of his 'for the studio' pics recently, A Child Is Waiting, and though it's clearly second tier (despite starring Burt Lancaster and Judy Garland) it has a lot of heart to it, and he used Garland's wasted, vulnerable nature really well.  It's also yet another example of why irascible, stubborn gets like him were so important.  I know it's a truism, but the studios really are and were obstacles to be overcome.  They wanted pretty Aryan Milky Bar Kids in the roles of the disabled children (it's about a disabled care home/school), and Cassavetes fought tooth and nail to have real disabled kids in there, something which Hollywood shies from even today.  And he won.

[Phil_A]

I love Timothy Carey's character in Bookie, he's such a bizarre, creepy presence. Must get around to watching The World's Greatest Sinner at some point.

[the science eel]

I think he's great but I also think a certain amount of it is just down to him giving this (at the time) more-or-less unique outlet to some really great actors. You remove Gena Rowlands alone from his filmography and it takes a nosedive; saying nothing of whatever role she had beyond what's on screen, as his wife I assume quite a lot.

Yep. That's why I think films like Husbands are so flawed, as much as I love it, because it's so blusteringly uncompromisingly shoutingly MALE. And yes - I KNOW that was his intention (I feel that every criticism is met with that line! it's unthinking) but some scenes leave a bit of a bad taste. And if you see the infamous Cavett show with JC, Falk and Gazzara pissed up and belligerent, it's even more offputting.

We'll see in 20 years, anyway. There might be 200 people left in the whole world still flying a flag for him.

[the science eel]

I love Timothy Carey's character in Bookie, he's such a bizarre, creepy presence.

Al Ruban says Carey wasn't popular on set, wanting to dominate scenes, and that made the others uncomfortable - which JC loved!

[Funcrusher]

Sometimes the guides you turn to to find out more about an artist are the guides that - at the same time - say they're not so hot.

I liked A Woman... but David Thomson says it's really just Gena Rowland doing an extremely good piece of acting and there isn't really much of a film around it.

I'm aware I might be overthinking this.

David Thompson is the most miserable, begrudging critic ever. There are a few 'masters' like Jean Renoir and virtually everyone else is no good.

[the science eel]

David Thompson is the most miserable, begrudging critic ever. There are a few 'masters' like Jean Renoir and virtually everyone else is no good.

Yeah, I'm beginning to realise that. And Halliwell doesn't have time for anything after 1964.

I'd still rather read these fellas than look at RT or whatever.

[Retinend]

A Woman Under The Influence is great

"verMOUTH!!"

[peanutbutter]

I liked A Woman... but David Thomson says it's really just Gena Rowland doing an extremely good piece of acting and there isn't really much of a film around it.

That's insanely unfair on Falk and the dynamic between the two. She's amazing, elevates it hugely, but the idea there's nothing else there is a huge stretch.

Yep. That's why I think films like Husbands are so flawed, as much as I love it, because it's so blusteringly uncompromisingly shoutingly MALE. And yes - I KNOW that was his intention (I feel that every criticism is met with that line! it's unthinking) but some scenes leave a bit of a bad taste. And if you see the infamous Cavett show with JC, Falk and Gazzara pissed up and belligerent, it's even more offputting.

We'll see in 20 years, anyway. There might be 200 people left in the whole world still flying a flag for him.

Nah, if it was gonna happen it'd happen now. If I were to guess I'd imagine they probably got a harsher time for coming across as belligerent pricks back at the time. Nowadays it results in him coming across as one of the few people who was at least openly a bit of a prick.

Ultimately, anyone who's ever even gonna get into Cassavetes will probably be knowledgable enough to have a nuanced view of the circumstances of his career. It's not like he's Woody Allen or Roman Polanski, the production value issues of his films alone push them a bit further from the mainstream than an easily offended person will get. Most the time the male characters are easily the most unlikeable ones too, there isn't a Bukowski style narration giving a bit of a "sure I'm a prick but at least I'm aware of it" vibe either.

[dissolute ocelot]

Are there no Le Tigre fans in here?

I like A Woman Under The Influence but generally don't have a lot of time for this sort of "actor's cinema" (Kazan, Sean Penn, etc) which is all about performances. If I want to see someone act, I'll go to the theatre!

But definitely kudos to Cassavetes for doing what he had to do to get films made, he's like Sayles in that way, except while Sayles did any random screenwriting Cassavetes acted in all kinds of films and TV, some trash, but also the likes of Rosemary's Baby. He'd be regarded as a great character actor even if he didn't direct anything.

[zomgmouse]

Had no idea people trashed Cassavetes. He is absolutely a true great. Astonishing, uneasy, tender, difficult, moving cinema.

I think as mentioned above that there's a lot of misconceptions that his films are completely improvised or whatever when in reality they're scripted and that's a real testament to how free and real he makes his films seem. Ditto the above comment about "acting" when there's so much other precise technical achievements and choices being made re camerawork, sound, lighting, editing, etc. A truly individual filmmaker lauded for a reason.

[shagatha crustie]

I loved The Killing of a Chinese Bookie but found A Woman Under the Influence difficult (it obviously deserves its acclaim, just felt like a real slog to me). Which one to watch next? I'd like to watch more of his films and I've got them all on my BFI Player watchlist but they're a bit imposing, want to know I'm signing up for the right three-odd hours of grainy raw unfiltered emotion.

[zomgmouse]

the right three-odd hours of grainy raw unfiltered emotion.

Faces

[the science eel]

Yeah, that's a good description of Faces but it's not an easy watch - kind of busy, claustrophobic.

Go for Opening Night. Or maybe Shadows, which is short and lively and fun and jazz-fifties.

[Mr Banlon]

Most of the episodes of Johnny Staccato are up on dailymotion.