Shadows

I hate when you start watching a movie and it immediately feels like you are wasting your time. It's a pretty bad movie with some horrible production values. I don't see what it so groundbreaking about it either. The French were already making movies similar to this (Melville, anyone?), only better and more interesting. This just feels like a semi rip off with horrible acting and shitty dialogue. Pass!

I just finished watching this and I cannot tell you a single thing about what happened in it other than some idiots look at a statue's butt and say fink a bunch. Cassavetes got great which was great for me because I still have the rest of this Criterion set to go through and every other one has been delicious. I felt like I was watching soem french new wave idiot shit and was soured. LOVE seeing street photography though so hey there was that to keep my idiot brain going

There are quite a few rather abrupt cuts and the acting is just stilted enough to be noticeable but neither is distracting enough that it substantially harms an otherwise intriguing film.

At first blush it's difficult to look past this film's crude production, but after a second viewing and with a better understanding of its place in this filmmaker's work - and the greater arc of American cinema - it is remarkable. A complete disregard for composure is its lifeblood: it so freely ditches the beats and conventions audiences are conditioned toward. It projects vitality. These are the real concerns of real people in the real New York. Who cares if the acting is bad? It's sincere.

Cassavetes' first film is interesting, but too amateurish to really get into. It would be better if the acting weren't so stagey. Some say Shadows is responsible for launching the independent film movement. That might be an exaggeration, but it is obviously a bold and unique film for its time, just not quite my cup of tea.

Cassavetes's first attempt as improvisational maestro. It plays a little like a basketball without air in it. But the players themselves (and their coach) are undaunted. The very low budget, the scratchiness of the surface, the absence on screen of either Cassavetes himself or any of his Hollywood cronies for glamour, the overall aura of experimentalism, not to mention the earnest theme of racial understanding, all work together to elicit our maximum indulgence and best wishes.

"I didn't know it could be so awful." Damn.

This is the ultimate cool, a definitive landmark in American film making. Cassavetes does it his way, breaks all the rules, months before Breathless, and 14 years before Mean Streets, you know what I mean.

Can you imagine how crazy and original and different this was in 1959? And maybe the French were making movies like this then, but I doubt Cassavetes and co. (or most of America, for that matter) had access to them. It's amateurish, yeah, but also extremely impressive.

There are some films that I appreciate solely based on context, and this is one of those films. I have nothing of value to add.

This is artistic expression casting off all constraints. A tour de force of what would become known as American independent cinema. What sets this apart from almost all other cinema from the era is Cassavetes' understanding that some things are better left unsaid.

Cassavetes' first feature film is never boring, and he actually seems pretty competent behind the camera, but this film screams "amateur." The acting is inconsistent all over, with some very good scenes driven by performance and some other scenes where it's really hokey. The love relationship is really, really weak, and the movie feels pretty aimless throughout. It's very sloppy, albeit mildly interesting and entertaining in spurts. Worth a look, just don't expect much.

I get what Cassavettes was trying to do, but it was a failed experiment.

Cassavetes honing the skills that he would later become so adept at. This isn't on par with his early 70's stuff, but gives you the chance to watch his early development. He is already able to get highly naturalistic performances from a semi-professional cast, and ofcourse, historically speaking, this is da bomb: an indie, full feature cinema-verite-style film made in 1959 USA with black folks making up half of the cast. It's mind-blowing, really, considering the historical context.

Cassavetes seem to capture something unique, immidiate and universally valid here in these pulsating images...

Real NY beat scene, 'youngsters on the fringe', does off with traditional narrative and hollywood pose; the ideals -and relative success- are that of a liberal revolutionary. Prolly a bomb of its time. Anyway, quality of directing and acting is extremely variable.

I love the way the film plays out like a jazz piece--you're never sure where it's going, but it is going somewhere. I wish they had a stronger ending, for just as in a jazz tune, the piece should actually end up somewhere rather than just fade away, which is the sense I get here. The acting is terribly uneven, but Cassavetes eye for composition and the aforementioned rhythm of the film makes for an engaging and thought-provoking 81 minutes.

An entirely different experience on the second viewing.

Like Faces, it is both enthralling and dull. Faces is a bit better though.

50s NYC is one of the most uniquely enchanting locales in American history, and Cassavetes captures it not just through his characters but also through a rhythm created through cuts and close-ups.

Meandering consideration of race relations and relationships in general circa 1959 is fascinating as a capsule of its time, and for the seeds of Cassavetes' later signature style (though mercifully this film is much briefer and compact than some of his later efforts). Performances range from adequate to amateurish, though Goldoni is heartbreaking, and her story/character arc is far and away the most intriguing and interesting.

I loved the visceral film-making of it all. Everything just felt so spontaneous. Loses points because of Lelia, who would earn a place in my top ten worst characters of all time. Such an aggravating character, and just a straight-up bitch.

Everything and everyone is obnoxious, I lost interest after 10 minutes. A painful experience from start to finish. At least it's short

I find the shitty production pretty appealing, and when viewing the film in the proper context, the whole thing's sort of mind-blowing.

# 293

As much as I love John Cassavetes, this has not aged well at all. Really awful acting, sloppy directing, and awkward storytelling. It's all over the place, which is kind of the point, but I doesn't really work.

beatnik movie influenced by nouvelle vague

refreshing piece of poor cinema

302

A noble experiment that fails to engage

We could discuss for a long time the impact it had on film history and how groundbreaking and original it was (or wasn't). But what is most important is the strenght of the movie in itself; the pure spontaneous energy and raw emotional power which make it such a sensation to watch, despite some flaws due to its low productions values

Incredibly ahead of its time in many ways yet also an unfortunate product of its times in other ways, namely the use of two white actors to play Black siblings. At least there are actual Black actors with compelling and prominent roles as well, a rarity for the time to be sure. Cassavetes essentially kickstarted indie filmmaking with Shadows and would go on to refine his improvisational style over the following years.

A powerful portrait of that time, shot with the help of acting improvs an a remarkable jazz score. This is so influential that you can identify its legacy from Scorsese's I Call First to Jim Jarmusch's indie filmmaking. The dialogues shot by Cassavetes through quick but functional closes are really something. New Hollywood loved that.

watched: 2012, 2014

appreciative of what it attempts method-wise but it being ahead of its time means the time holds it back from a true polish that i can assume would come in later years

clearly the work of a beginning director. the performances seem a bit forced and the plot is unfocused and not as interesting as usual. it isn't particularly good, but it's hardly bad either, and is clearly reminiscent of his future work. and this study of interracial relations in 1959 was surely quite radical for the time.

Cassavetes's debut, which despite its very rough edges apparently went on to become highly influential, suffers a lot from the actors being in over their heads which makes it all the more obvious that the film consists of little more than a string of loosely defined improv exercises. Skip it.

really entertaining despite not really dragging me into it. the improvisation brought a lot of inconsistency and it seemed somewhat aimless. but something about cassavete's style keeps it enjoyable

Dumb men and the women who feel obligated to love them. Strengths abound: good acting (save maybe for Goldoni). Lays off the schmaltz when it comes to race relations. The hands-off approach to directing actors yields excellent results when the energy level is high; when the characters are partying and/or arguing, one truly feels like a fly on the wall. When things quiet down, though, the limited production value and primitive (intentionally and otherwise) cinematic technique do get in the way.

an Avant-Garde Expreimantal Film!! one of the most important Films of American Independent Cinema!! but ...!!!

This guy made Breathless before Breathless was Breathless, and his gusto to make a story is the true star of the film. I couldn't give less of a rat's ass that it exists, but I'm glad it exists, because he balled with the girl he was broke with, and now Gena Rowlands is a fucking icon

Some terrible acting and the sound track is annoying. I am not a fan of all these people with asinine attitudes. Basically an hour and a half of stupid jackass conversations with the occasional song. The woman is especially annoying.

The Cassavetes film I have seen the most and amongst my very favourite of his. It's one of his easiest films to consume, not because it has a more straightforward plot or is any less a collection of moments, but because it's so influential it's the film of his you'll already have seen many like. I love how this film bursts with jazz energy.

309

Light years ahead of its time in America (feels more like a 70s movie maybe), but hurt by low budget and the fact that most of the involved talent had little to no experience (it was Cassavetes' directorial debut and was very early or the debut for most of the actors, who were largely improvising). Acting is uneven and while Cassavetes shows talent, he hadn't yet fully harnessed it (or the budgetary constraints stopped him from showing more.) Historically significant but rough around the edges.

#298

The acting is pretty so-so, but Cassavete's debut is impressive - filled with life, humor, and rhythm.