danielmartinx The rave reviews made me expect more from this film. It was clunky and, at times, highly artificial and stagey -- I wouldn't have minded the stageyness except for the endless reviews claiming it was the first honest depiction of how Americans lived, etc., etc. Ebert's review, for instance, sounds the trumpets because this film is the first time that our American way of life is depicted on film.Our way of life? The characters are boring middle-management businessmen and traveling salesmen -- the woman are housewives and prostitutes -- and there is almost no American life in this film whatsoever. The scenes are interesting and well-done, but they are staged arguments. The salesmen hang out with prostitutes and -- and tell each other limericks? Did no one have a hi-fi or a radio in this world? It's bizarre and unrealistic.However, taking it as a bizarre and unrealistic film, this is a good film. It dramatizes the vacancy of middle-class white culture, largely by showing scene after scene in which vapid middle-class white people have empty and meaningless conversations. This does not prove that life is meaningless in general, however. It only proves that middle-management and sale staff do not find fulfilling lives when they hang out getting drunk with prostitutes, with whom they do not have sex. It's all a little odd. Watch it, but be warned.

Jackson Booth-Millard From director John Cassavetes (The Killing of a Chinese Bookie), this film from the 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die book was rated rather well by the critics, so I hoped I would agree with their opinions, as the book has often rewarded me with some great watches I otherwise may not have found. Basically, shot in a style similar to documentary, the marriage of a middle-aged couple is disintegrating and in its final stages, the husband Richard Forst (The Godfather's John Marley) is the one who demands the divorce from Maria (Oscar nominated Lynn Carlin), he is leaving her to be with Jeannie Rapp (The Notebook's Gena Rowlands) and many groups and individuals are coming to see them during this time. After the divorce is filed a company of brash businessmen and prostitutes is who Richard spends a night with, while his wife spends her time with middle-aged her female friends and an ageing free-associating playboy, and then young Chet (Oscar nominated Seymour Cassel) from Detroit. This night is full of conversations that cause tension and confrontations, modern American lifestyle is illustrating from all of this as interests, love lives and emotional/spiritual fulfilment of characters is brought into the situations. Pretty much all the character display dissatisfaction and are deeply happiness with their personal lives and try to cover this up while hanging with their friends putting on a false face, and overall there is no hope in the film at all, it only presumes most people in the world have to realise they may be unhappy in some way. Also starring Fred Draper as Freddie Draper, Val Avery as Jim McCarthy, Dorothy Gulliver as Florence, Joanne Moore Jordan as Louise Draper, Darlene Conley as Billy Mae, Gene Darfler as Joe Jackson and Elizabeth Deering as Stella. The performances by Marley and Rowlands and the supporting cast members are fine, and the direction is also fine, I think the only problem for me was that I couldn't really follow what was going on, apparently the film was meant to last six hours, so it was probably a good idea it was cut down, there were some interesting sequences so overall it was an alright drama. It was nominated the Oscar for Best Writing, Story and Screenplay - Written Directly for the Screen. Good!

cmccann-2 John Cassavetes' second feature of any note after 1959's Shadows, Faces is one of the late director's most daring and experimental films. Telling the story of a disintegrating relationship and the love its members seek in the arms of strangers, the film stars, amongst others, Lynn Carlin, John Marley, Gena Rowlands, and Seymour Cassel. It is shot in black and white and has a freewheeling home video quality - Cassavetes' camera scanning across various "faces", faces blurred, in focus, laughing, and crying.The director's greatest success with the picture rests in his ability to dismantle traditional Hollywood ideas about plot and pacing and still stir up emotion and feeling in the viewer. Cassavetes manages to capture remarkably human and naturalistic performances from his cast (for instance, the way his roving camera captures a shirtless Seymour Cassel chasing flirtatiously after Lynn Carlin through their hotel room, or Lynn Carlin and John Marley rubbing noses together and laughing in a moment of ecstasy), helping the film become more than just a collection of meandering long takes.Essential viewing for anyone looking to explore Cassavetes' work or trace the roots of the current independent film movement. 8/10.

willwalsh1111 All we have here is Cassavetes' name to draw us into this hopeless waste of someone's production money. I've never understood the Cassavetes directorial style (expression of his intense anger), nor the masochism of his film audiences. This is a typical Cassavetes product - characters are in-your-face loud, crass, and shallow (again: reflecting the director's personality). Overly theatrical "performances", abrupt, artificial mood changes, and hysterical, mindless, irritating laughter. Misogynistic, forced humor. Good camera work but poor sound and lighting. One would be seriously deluded to consider this art. Throughout the film you will feel uncomfortable, and ask yourself, "Why am I watching this?"