Martin Bradley John Cassavetes shot his first film in the streets of New York and it was almost totally improvised, (for instance, all the characters are named for the actors playing them), taking race as his subject. There was no way this would play in Middle America but it broke new ground and established Cassavetes as a major talent, particularly in Europe, (it was nominated for Best Film from Any Source at the BAFTA's), where cinema meant a hell of a lot more than selling popcorn.The plot is virtually irrelevant, in fact you might say it is non-existent, and the acting of Lelia Goldoni, Ben Carruthers and Hugh Hurd as the three siblings whose lives it follows, is ropy at best but the film has a raw intensity that still astonishes to this day. It's also probably the best record yet of what became known as 'the beat generation'. Over 50 years later young film-makers are still copying Cassavetes' style.

ElMaruecan82 A strange feeling, reality in its purest and most authentic awkwardness, in its uncertainty, in its clumsiness, in the way it makes you feel ... but it's right here happening before our eyes … guys, young hipsters, try to get women on a bar, the talking is so disjointed, it seems like going nowhere, you wonder where this will lead … nowhere, in fact. And why not? Life is like a jazzy score, you know, the one that punctuates this movie every now and then with the feeling that every thing is so cool, nothing is to be taken seriously unless this little thing that makes you enjoy the way you are, and the people you love … it's just … in the air, you know …Yeah, who said whatever happened should mean something when it's happening, no one. We got so used to the 'plot for the plot' concept but what we've got here … it's … well they call it cinema verity, authenticity, reality … but maybe I'm wrong but is this movie from 1957, 2 years before the over-praised "Breathless", two years before modern cinema was invented? I can't believe that … well, I know it is … And this is the truth for me, that "Shadows" is the pioneer of modern cinema, and maybe "Breathless" took the honor to be considered the milestone, but I don't care … because "Shadows" didn't have the pretension to even be taken as a movie, yet it managed to create something so blindingly new, people didn't even realize Cassavettes had just made what cinema needed, poor old fools … Truest and greatest artist are never recognized in their time … But I realized I make the movie sound like an exercise in originality, while this was more the case of "Breathless" which beyond the undeniable artistic creativity, wasn't like the most meaningful movie ever made. "Shadows" brings a new dimension to cinema as the first movie whose main characters are colored people, yet it does indirectly deal with racial issues without the preachy aspect of reverse moralistic racism and of course, with absolutely no stereotypes. It's a superb movie about races, because it's not even about racism, it's about misconception, like the whole film has been also misconceived, which makes it, an incredibly well- made self-referential film, well, let's go back to the film, will you …The central character is named Bennie, a trumpet jazz musician, a hipster, with the demeanor of a young rocker, he could be a Latino but from his brother, an entertainer singer with darker skin, we understand he's Afro-American. Then we meet Lelia, their sister, a beautiful girl, the cutest cinematic character ever … Again, these are not details, they'll serve the plot in a very uneasy way, that'll make question our approach to racial issues. This is not really about racism, but more about our inner conception of "difference", I mean "physical difference", about color of skins, about black and white … and how, ethnicity can fool anyone in such a way, there's no black and white when you think of it, it's more nuanced, more subtle, there's no dark or light, only 'shadows' …This is where the heart of the film relies on, the romance between Lelia and Tony, a powerful relationship that evokes those weird interactions driven by racial misconception… Their chemistry when they meet at the party feels so real and natural we believe they'll automatically form a perfect couple, then you realize that Tony might not be the most honest man in the world, probably sincere by the way he manipulated Lelia's feelings leading her to his home, but the respect he showed was only inspired by a strong desire not to respect her, after. When she understands she was just a body, her distress is so heartbreaking, you feel for her. The shadows is precisely this kind of misunderstanding that undermines relationships between people, it's all about the way you see it, in a way, and I respect Cassavettes' intelligence so much I'm sure this was intended ...One can see this movie as a self-referential masterpiece, it's juts a bunch of people, talking and interacting, that's all, no precise goal, no plot whatsoever, yeah … but remember the museum scene, weren't they all laughing at a statue supposed to be Art? And supposed to be respected just for the sake of that? And this is how "Shadows" works, and I'm not even afraid to say the word, it's iconoclast … it puts into perspective every cinematic conception, what is art? What is cinema? Is it just entertaining people? That's all? Cassavettes, in his directorial debut, decided that cinema was more than showing stuff in a screen while people were eating pop-corn …Art opens your eyes, and now, in 2011, while I'm watching this stuff that happened when my parents were babies, I realize that Cassavettes created something I could relate to, and if a guy like me could relate to, even 50 years after, then all I can said is Kudos to Cassavetes, the pioneer of independent films!Well, it's a special movie, John. You were too ahead of your time, but don't worry, there are people out there who know about "Shadows" and will talk about this film and give it the greatest publicity, whenever some sophisticated movie snobs will bring out a Godard movie as the most influential cinematic thing ever made …You were too great and came too early for cinema, they didn't deserve such a film, I guess they still had to wait 10 years until "Bonnie and Clyde" and "In the Heat of the Night" were made … it's okay, this was the way …The review you just read was an improvisation

Boba_Fett1138 To be honest, I really didn't expected to like this movie, mostly since its entire premise and set-up sounded pretentious but as it often turns out with me; I'm actually quite fond of this 'different' and more art-house type of movie.The movie is an entirely improvised one, so that means that the acting is also being that way. It works refreshing, especially with all of its dialog but it makes it also obvious that not all of the actors in this movie are being very great ones.Still, the style of improvising for this movie is one that works out and makes this movie throughout a good one to watch. Not always an interesting one but a good one nevertheless. As often is the case with these improvised type of movie, it tends to drag on with certain sequences, though it can be argued that this is also actually being something that adds to the realism and rawness of the overall movie.But I really wont pretend as if this is the best example of what the genre is capable off. The movie still does plenty wrong. To be frank, some of the directing can get really sloppy in this movie and it often features sudden cuts and obviously later put in in-between shots. Another thing that the movie does a somewhat bad job with are its characters. It really isn't clear from the beginning on which character or characters are supposed to be the main ones. This won't became apparent until very late into the movie. You could definitely blame the improvisation style of the movie for this.But all in all, I still liked watching this different, little and honest movie, by John Cassavetes. It's well shot with some nice camera-work and it shows the atmosphere and environments of the late '50's New York. It's story also involves some good themes such as racism and interracial relationships, which was something that just didn't get featured very often in movies around that time.7/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

jpschapira In the end credits of "Shadows", after we read 'directed by John Cassavetes', some white letters on the screen can be seen: "The film you have just seen is improvised", they say. I am always pursuing the fact that words are so important in movies since filmmakers started using them because, basically, there's no film without a screenplay and many other reasons.Cassavetes pursued the same goal, and he believed in the freedom of words; "Shadows" is the perfect example. It's a film with no real main characters, with no real main plot lines; it's mostly people in different situations, talking. Yes, some of the situations are connected but Cassavetes, apparently always in a rush to get to the talking, uses a fast forward technique when the characters are going somewhere or escaping from someone and are not speaking.Appearances are everything in this movie. For example, there's a brilliant score, full of jazz influences and a lot of fantastic solos, and there's one character that says he's a jazz musician and plays the trumpet (Ben, all the characters' names are the same names the actors'). However, we never see him play the trumpet or jam with a band; he doesn't even talk about music and just wanders with his friends around the city. They do talk, a lot, and about anything that's in their minds; going from how intelligent each of them are to the hilarious analysis of a sculpture."Shadows" is funny in its intellectual references in parts like the one above, because these friends are not cultured. The only important female character in the film (Lelia), though, wants to be an intellectual. But again, she has one very interesting conversation with an older man at a party, about a book she's trying to write, and about how to confront reality; but nothing to do with being intellectual. At that same party, a woman is actually making an intellectual statement, full of complexity, and asks a guy beside her: "Do you agree?". "Yes", he says, but you can tell he doesn't know what she's talking about.Another character, a singer (Hugh), talks about his glory days in occasions, and we see him perform only once; but no references to the musical industry there. The focus of Cassavetes is the singer's relationship with his manager (Rupert), which most of the time involves chats about trivial stuff and not real 'musical' talks. So the trumpet player's important deal in "Shadows" is the time he spends with his friends; the intellectual wannabe girl's is her way of handling romantic relationships (one of the movie's strong points) and the singer's is the bond with his manager…Appearances.The reason why performances are not important in this movie is simple. Cassavetes needed people who could master improvisation, without mattering if they were actually good. I believe some of them aren't, but they surely know how to improvise in a scene, and you can notice how well they do it. "Shadows" is not about performers; it's about a way of making cinema, based on the magic of conversation; and there you could say that performances mean something.That's why in every conversation the camera is like a stalker, constantly on the eyes of every character, constantly looking for the expressions that come with natural speech. There's a scene where the trumpet player and his friends are trying to pick up some girls. They are three, so each of them sits beside one girl (the girls are three two) in three different tables. They all talk at the same time and the camera shoots through the table, and sometimes the friends look at each other, while they say whatever they are saying…It's natural.