I wanted to mention this quotation by film scholar Ray Carney on Cassavetes' approach to film:
The secret of Cassavetes' method is to deny viewers every form of intellectual distance and control. The
experiences he presents can't be held intellectually at arm's length.
They won't be simplified by being translated into received ideas or
push-button emotions. They resist being formulated. They must be
challengingly negotiated moment by moment the way we live and feel
things in real life. In all of their unresolved sprawl and mutability,
the experiences in his films are the opposite of the canned,
pre-programmed summaries of experience most other movies provide....
It's a good formulation of the different position Cassavetes' films put viewers in--and why they resist typical ways of watching and reacting to his work.
In our discussion someone compared the film to theater, which is apt, and not only because the script was initially aimed at a stage performance. The minimal editing and long shots which characterize the cinematography in the film brings out this theatrical approach. As Cassavetes put it, he simply lit the scene and let the actors do the scenes. We watch as if they are performing on stage rather than cutting constantly to a specific reaction, as is the more conventional practice. Such minimal editing is another reason why the already long scenes feel even longer. We're expecting much more cutting from character to character.
To take it further, I'd extend the analogy into musical theater, in this case the original musical theater, opera, which Cassavetes himself encourages in the film by including several arias from operas (La Boheme, Aida, etc.). The reference emphasizes what we might call the operatic way that Mabel approaches her life (and connects with Carney's characterization above).
I wonder if Cassavetes wanted to touch on the women's liberation movement a bit in this film. It was shot at a time where women were thinking about alternative career paths, or else thinking about having a career while running a home and raising a family. We'll never know if Mabel had any desire to do anything besides be a homemaker. She struck me as an artistic type.
ReplyDeleteWe didn't know what went on in the hospital, but we got a chance to see Falk's character trying to run a home for a while in addition to working. I saw a sort of "we're okay, we're dealing with it" vibe as if he were trying to convince everyone, including himself, that it was all going to turn out okay. Dealing with mental illness is difficult, but probably more so back in the mid-1970s.
It was refreshing to a see a film shot as if it were a play.
As difficult as this film was too watch at times, I was glad that it was done in an "emotionally draining" format. I literally did feel mentally exhausted after watching it, and that is how a family feels when thrown in to a mental illness situation. At times, I felt like this film as somewhat similar to Silver Linings Playbook based on the various examples of "mental instability." For example,the films starts by showing you the wife's issues, but my the movie's end you become more questioning of the husband and his rages. With Silver Linings Playbook, the Bradley Cooper character is the one primarily shown as being treated/punished for his illness, while in reality his father and mother both have their own mental quirks/difficulties. I think more films with this type of truth to them need to be made today.
ReplyDeleteWhen this film was called mentally exhausting to watch (which it is), it made me think of Lars Von Trier's Dancer in the Dark. Dancer in the Dark is one of the more difficult movies that I've ever watched. Like Woman under the influence, you will not be watching twice back to back.
ReplyDeleteWhen this film was called mentally exhausting to watch (which it is), it made me think of Lars Von Trier's Dancer in the Dark. Dancer in the Dark is one of the more difficult movies that I've ever watched. Like Woman under the influence, you will not be watching twice back to back.
ReplyDelete