KnotMissPriceless Why so much hype?

Cleveronix A different way of telling a story

Tymon Sutton The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

Rexanne It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

Anthony Iessi The sanctity of Marriage just got a shock thorough it's veins. John Casssavates's film "Faces" is a heartbreaking, urgent, real journey through the darkest realms of adultery. Cassavetes must be a traditionalist when it comes to marriage, because he makes this seem like a cautionary tale. A sense of how depression, lust and exploration outside of marriage could lead to vile, uncertain consequences. This movie is absolutely beautiful, and it's earned a spot on my list of the best films that I have ever seen. As grim as this movie is, it captures absolute desperation like few movies have ever did. The characters, Richard and Maria Frost are seen dipping their toes into the lustful life of mistresses and swinging. Not only do they want to mess around between the sheets with a dirty concubine, but they want to experience the love that they never found in each other, and rekindle the times of their youth. In both sections of their escapades, they dance and sing with their mistresses, and just laugh the night away with the swinging cohorts. Each scene lasts about 20 minutes a piece, and examine the surreal experience closely, almost like a stage play would have it. These scenes exist to also make note of the fantastic performances between every character on screen, and they shine brightly. Gena Rowlands's character of the mistress is seen as capitulating to the every fantasy of the men she fools around with, while at the same time losing her dignity and self-respect with every time the men fight for her attention. The character of Maria's concubine, Chet, on the other hand, is a commanding and brooding performance. We see him as a man who wants to take control of multiple women, and seemingly unprepared when his lust almost kills Maria after he lets her overdose on sleeping pills. That scene in particular is the greatest in the entire movie, as it beautifully shows the lowest point in Maria's life. How did she go from a lovely housewife to being unconscious in her own home, and a creepy man slaps her silly and chokes her violently in order to bring her back to life? Cassavetes plays up the ridiculousness of the situation, in order to shock us and make us think. The feeling of the entire picture was disorienting and just plain wrong in every aspect. The couple seemed way over their heads the entire time, and it what also seemed like a life or death situation. Every person in the rooms seemed to be on the verge of screaming, or crying or dying. The tension here is so fierce, you could cut it with a butter knife. Again, I focus on the acting, because that is where the film shines the brightest. It is pitch perfect. The cinematography is world's better here than it was in "Shadows", and it gives us the opportunity to explore the spaces that they live in. For example, the scene in which Richard comes home and eats dinner is filmed tensely, with shots that carefully and seamlessly follow his every move through the house and around his own wife. I know that there were clear cuts, but I simply didn't notice them. Everything seemed to be going in real time, and the performances helped make that time seem genuine. Each situation and scene had a build up period that was so frighteningly real. Emotions just build throughout all of the scenes. John Cassavetes proves here more than ever that he is the master and true father of the independent cinema movement, by making a film so profound in nature, without having any big money and sets to work around. In fact, here, he captures much more than any Hollywood film is willing to capture. Cassavetes was always a Hollywood golden boy, but I think that he should've just walked entirely away, and kept making incredible films. I am now reminded of how amazing it was to meet his son, Nick, at the Syracuse International Film Festival. I know now how important it was for us to see him, and how the Cassavetes name helps us as filmmakers in the end.

gavin6942 An old married man leaves his wife for a younger woman. Shortly after, his ex-wife also begins a relationship with a younger partner. The film follows their struggles to find love amongst each other.This was one of the most influential films of the 1960s, if you consider how it inspired Robert Altman and Woody Allen, as well as employing Steven Spielberg as a production assistant while he was still making short films and had not yet broken into feature films.How well the film has aged is debatable. While its influence is clear, the film itself is not necessarily the most fun. Some have called it "meandering", and it is hard to believe that at one point Cassavetes had a six-hour cut (allegedly).

zolaaar This one can be characterised as some sort of an intermediate Cassavetes film. After his vibrant Shadows, Cassavetes could gain experiences in directing studio productions with two films before he tared his certain form of improvised actor's cinema and which he brought to perfection in the 70s. The look at a small group of people, at the centre is a couple drifting apart, serves as a microcosm and makes porous spots of society visible. In long, extensive, and intensive tableaux, Cassavetes dismantles the bourgeois experience realm of a couple and leaves behind two broken characters.The director's fourth directing work is as timeless as Shadows and goes back to the essence of an acting ensemble. John Marley, Gena Rowlands, Seymour Cassel, Lynn Carlin are all equally brilliant, true, authentic, real, physical, and their performances make Faces so convincing. Cassavetes allowed all freedom and sometimes the cast looks like they're at some kind of acting workshop, but in scenes of tenderness and painful silence, especially between Marley and Rowlands, the vital sparks, their pain jump over. Cassavetes' direction of the actors seems more secure and mature than in Shadows and the wild, uncontrolled camera contributes to the psychologically deep study of the characters and to a well-balanced cinematic entity.

Myshkin_Karamazov This was a marvelous movie to watch. It is so intelligent and informed most of the time, it is hard to believe there were improvisations by Cassevetes and company.Although themes such as those which the movie revolves around were already then considered Bergmanesque, the movie evokes the spirit of other great non-Hollywood directors of the era: Fellini and Antoninoni. Still it retains its integrity and is rather unique. I think that it is a very impressive film even today. Puts many to shame.NSFC did the right thing in awarding the film with Screenplay and Supporting Actor honors. Oscars on the other hands were not so generous. It did not get a nod for best picture nor did Cassevetes for best directors. What a shame! Since Stanley KUbrick's 2001 A Space Odyssey was snubbed the same year, making it a double debacle.