list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around A Woman Under the Influence on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/A_Woman_Under_the_Influence/38737/default.aspx Title: A Woman Under the Influence
Year: 1974
Director: John Cassavetes
Plot: John Cassavetes' harrowing masterpiece charts the emotional meltdown of a suburban housewife and its effects on her blue-collar Italian family. Gena Rowlands stars as Mabel Longhetti, a mother of three whose husband Nick (Peter Falk) works as a construction worker; a mismatched couple like so many others in Cassavetes films, the Longhettis seem to be complete opposites: she's impetuous, extroverted, and fragile, while he's controlling, distant, and hard-bitten. Their differences underscore a series of domestic dramas, culminating in a nervous breakdown that sends Mabel to a psychiatric hospital for six months, only to return to a home environment on even thinner ice than before. The improvisational style central to Cassavetes' vision is at its most acute throughout A Woman Under the Influence. Like its title heroine, the film threatens to veer out of control at any time, its shape and scope defined not by narrative but by the emotional upheaval at its center. Embracing the full spectrum of the Longhettis' relationship, from seismic bursts of high drama to small, even trivial moments of domestic tedium, its long scenes relentlessly probe every nook and cranny of the family's life, drawing out each moment for maximum emotional impact; the film is by turns beautiful and ugly, illuminating and frustrating, and it features a performance by Rowlands as heartwrenching and unforgettable as any ever committed to celluloid. ~ Jason Ankeny, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 5
Number of Lists: 29
Number of blog posts: 4
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:06:01 GMTA Woman Under the Influence1974John Cassavetes<a href="/players/P____84410/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>John Cassavetes</a>' harrowing masterpiece charts the emotional meltdown of a suburban housewife and its effects on her blue-collar Italian family. <a href="/players/P____61889/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Gena Rowlands</a> stars as Mabel Longhetti, a mother of three whose husband Nick (<a href="/players/P____22575/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Peter Falk</a>) works as a construction worker; a mismatched couple like so many others in Cassavetes films, the Longhettis seem to be complete opposites: she's impetuous, extroverted, and fragile, while he's controlling, distant, and hard-bitten. Their differences underscore a series of domestic dramas, culminating in a nervous breakdown that sends Mabel to a psychiatric hospital for six months, only to return to a home environment on even thinner ice than before. The improvisational style central to Cassavetes' vision is at its most acute throughout A Woman Under the Influence. Like its title heroine, the film threatens to veer out of control at any time, its shape and scope defined not by narrative but by the emotional upheaval at its center. Embracing the full spectrum of the Longhettis' relationship, from seismic bursts of high drama to small, even trivial moments of domestic tedium, its long scenes relentlessly probe every nook and cranny of the family's life, drawing out each moment for maximum emotional impact; the film is by turns beautiful and ugly, illuminating and frustrating, and it features a performance by Rowlands as heartwrenching and unforgettable as any ever committed to celluloid. ~ Jason Ankeny, All Movie Guide5Slightly Tagged (1-5)2943http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t00745xohwq.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/A_Woman_Under_the_Influence/38737/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/paul/archive/2007/12/21/23095.aspx Post By: paul
Post To: paul on spout.com
Post Date: 12/21/2007 4:16:13 PM
Body: A few weeks back, listener DJP requested a show on spirituality, which coincides nicely with the Film + Faith blog-a-thon kicking off this week. As we thought about it, the spiritual is so broad and pervasive in movies it’s hard to know where to start. Somehow, Kevin and I sojourn on The Dareeling Limited, Children of Men and A Woman Under the Influence. Karina investigates the “curse” surrounding one of the most spiritual characters in moviedom, Joan of Arc. (Subscribe to FilmCouch in the iTunes store and an episode will download each Friday.) Clockwise from top left: Jean Seberg Saint Joan (1957), Ingrid Bergman Joan of Arc (1948), Ren??e Maria Falconetti The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928), Milla Jovovich The Messenger (1999) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Paul
]]>Fri, 21 Dec 2007 21:16:13 GMTpaulpaul on spout.com12/21/2007 4:16:13 PMA few weeks back, listener DJP requested a show on spirituality, which coincides nicely with the Film + Faith blog-a-thon kicking off this week. As we thought about it, the spiritual is so broad and pervasive in movies it’s hard to know where to start. Somehow, Kevin and I sojourn on The Dareeling Limited, Children of Men and A Woman Under the Influence. Karina investigates the “curse” surrounding one of the most spiritual characters in moviedom, Joan of Arc. (Subscribe to FilmCouch in the iTunes store and an episode will download each Friday.) Clockwise from top left: Jean Seberg Saint Joan (1957), Ingrid Bergman Joan of Arc (1948), Ren??e Maria Falconetti The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928), Milla Jovovich The Messenger (1999) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Paul http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2007/11/2/21363.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 11/2/2007 10:00:50 AM
Body: A few weeks back, listener DJP requested a show on spirituality, which coincides nicely with the Film + Faith blog-a-thon kicking off this week. As we thought about it, the spiritual is so broad and pervasive in movies it’s hard to know where to start. Somehow, Kevin and I sojourn on?? The Dareeling Limited, Children of Men and A Woman Under the Influence. Karina investigates the “curse” surrounding one of the most spiritual characters in moviedom, Joan of Arc. Clockwise from top left: Jean Seberg Saint Joan (1957), Ingrid Bergman Joan of Arc (1948), Ren??e Maria Falconetti The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928), Milla Jovovich The Messenger (1999) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 14:00:50 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com11/2/2007 10:00:50 AMA few weeks back, listener DJP requested a show on spirituality, which coincides nicely with the Film + Faith blog-a-thon kicking off this week. As we thought about it, the spiritual is so broad and pervasive in movies it’s hard to know where to start. Somehow, Kevin and I sojourn on?? The Dareeling Limited, Children of Men and A Woman Under the Influence. Karina investigates the “curse” surrounding one of the most spiritual characters in moviedom, Joan of Arc. Clockwise from top left: Jean Seberg Saint Joan (1957), Ingrid Bergman Joan of Arc (1948), Ren??e Maria Falconetti The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928), Milla Jovovich The Messenger (1999) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/analogzombie/archive/2007/6/24/11965.aspx Post By: analogzombie
Post To: analogzombie Blog
Post Date: 6/24/2007 4:21:00 PM
Body: Cassavetes is one of those directors you either love or hate. Much the same way people are totally polarized on the works of Tarantino, or the film Magnolia, Cassavetes has driven film fanatics to loathe him, critics to praise him, and general audiences to simultaneously revile and admire him. He can either open an entire world of film to you, or simply reinforce your preconceived notions of the pretentiousness of auteur films, and in that he is singular. If the validity of art were based on its ability to produce extreme emotion Cassavetes would be considered a DaVinci. The way in which he achieves this provocation of emotion is special too. No other director, not Ozu, Renior, Scorsese, or Anderson (either of them), has successfully captured the essence of feeling in their films the way Cassavetes does. You don’t watch one of his films, you feel it, you live it. The audience registers every second of joy, anguish, or pain that floats across the characters’ faces. This is why his films create such a variation of comment: some people are not comfortable with how they feel while viewing them. But I think I’m getting ahead of myself here. Let me slow down, back up, and give you a little background on the man and his works.John Cassavetes is considered to be the father of American Independent film. When the French New Wave was exploding in Europe, Cassavetes was developing his own answer to Hollywood in NYC. But unlike his European counterparts who were seeking to take ‘cinema into the streets’, Cassavetes was seeking a more interior and personal space. He always called himself an amateur director and professional actor. Indeed many people know him better as the husband in Rosemary’s Baby, or from The Dirty Dozen, than they do as the creator of Shadows. But it is his work as a writer/director that means the most to us today. His first film, Shadows (1958), was born out of improvisational routines he developed in his acting workshop class. The film proudly proclaims ‘this film was improvised’ at its conclusion, but the reality was it was quite scripted by the time it came to start shooting. It was, however, always fluid, and open to change on set. After the initial shooting of 1958, Cassavetes came back in 1959 to shoot a few more scenes to flesh out the main characters. Presumably because at the time of original shooting it was not clear were the story would end up. Many of these additional scenes involve Lelia and her relationship with her brothers.The heart of the film concerns their sibling relationship, and the reaction of Lelia’s white boyfriend when he realizes, upon meeting one of her darker skinned brothers, that she has been passing for white. In the pivotal scene of realization no words are spoken between the lovers, everything is conveyed in glances and body language. This is what I am getting at with Cassavetes. He doesn’t need excessive dialogue or score to make sure we understand exactly what each character is feeling. He achieves it through his shot composition and by eliciting real moments from his actors. Moments that are all too recognizable to us. We don’t need to be told how Lelia’s boyfriend feels; it’s all there, in his face. The way his eyes dart from Leila to her brother, and then down to the floor. The way his body tightens with revulsion and then immediately loosens to say he is aware of the vibe he’s giving off. He is ashamed of how he feels, but cannot help it. He loves Lelia, but is also repulsed by her. Lelia and her brother recognize that look immediately; they know what he’s thinking and want no part of it. Her heart is broken with his glances, and her brother steps in to be her protector. As he demands the ashamed boyfriend leave his house, Lelia’s would-be beau apologizes, asks them all out for dinner, he is sorry; he wants to prove he is no racist. All this comes too late for Lelia and her kin. The damage has been done; they see him for what he is, for what he thought, if even only for a second. Their world is a world without compromise, they cannot flinch on this issue for one second. They will not be denied, or judged on their race. Her boyfriend knows this too, knows it’s too late, but he cannot help himself, he loves her.This scene in Shadows lasts about 3 minutes, but is so riveting, real, and amazing to behold, that you cannot watch the rest of the movie without it dominating your thoughts. Of course this is not the only instance in which Cassavetes captures real life, there are many others. The diner cruising scene, scenes between the siblings, and between Lelia’s brother (a sad sack jazz singer) and his manager, all resonate with authenticity. Cassavetes went on to develop this style in subsequent movies, each one primarily financed with his own money. Many paid for with cash generated from his growing acting career. He looked at acting as the means to make these intensely personal films. Take 1977’s Opening Night for example. It’s a movie about the lengths one actress (Gena Rowlands) will go to embody the character she plays in a Broadway play. (Cassavetes also stars in this one, as her husband in the play within the movie.) No doubt the desire to ‘get it right’ was something he often sought for himself when making movies, either as an actor or director. Through increasingly disturbing events, we witness the self-destruction of an actress. A woman who is subsuming her own identity within the character she is playing. As this strains her relationship with the play’s writer, the director (Ben Garazza), and the cast, she begins to understand the depths she will really have to sink if she is to be successful. Unwilling to play the ‘desperate woman over 40’ that is written into the script, she attempts to develop her character into a living human being: someone real. This scenario of ‘woman on the edge’ was a recurring theme in his films. With 1974’s A Woman Under the Influence, starring Gena Rowlands (again) and Peter Falk, Cassavetes received some extremely negative criticism for his portrayal of a woman ‘going nuts’ in a suburban home. Those that would label this a perfect example of the inherent sexism in his films would miss the point of the character entirely. As Cassavetes saw it, this was a film about a free spirit who loved life, and was admittedly socially inept in her transition to suburban mother and wife. It did not help her predicament that her spouse is a blue-collar guy with mother issues. This film is Cassavetes condemnation of the routine and monotony of the standardized life that the suburbs can force onto someone. Rowlands isn’t crazy as defined by Cassavetes, she’s simply a woman under the influence of these pressures to conform, and she can’t cope, it’s just not her. For his credit, his husband loves her, demanding throughout the film that she ‘just be herself’. It’s the wild side he loves about her, and he is determined to have her live a happy and fulfilling life, but at the start of the film he is also concerned with the perceptions of his coworkers and family. To free himself, and his marriage of these exterior pressures, this family must endure tests of its unity, culminating in Rowlands’ committal to a psychiatric facility following her nervous breakdown. Her breakdown is brought on by the perception by her husband that some very odd things were going on while she was throwing a party for her children. Sure, allowing them and the neighborhood kids to play dress up, and asking them to imitate Swan Lake for a visitor by yelling ‘Die kids, die for Mr. Jenkins’, is a bit off, but no real impropriety took place. When Faulk comes home to find the children running around his house nude, and a strange man standing in his living room, he doesn’t wait for explanations, he simply unloads onto his wife. As his rage builds, Faulk elicits the help of the family doctor and his mother to confront his wife about, as he sees it, her crazy behavior. All this proves too much for Rowlands. As her world turns against her, she desperately clings to her children while begging her husband to help her. When she realizes the futility of her pleadings, she begins to spiral out of control. She mounts the couch, begins rambling and jabbering about the events of the day, and demands that ‘everyone leave her alone’. All of this is to no avail as the doctor and her mother-in-law are convinced that she is certifiable, and should be committed. Her husband however is reluctant to do so. His love for his wife makes him waiver on what was previously a drawn conclusion of action for him. He doesn’t know if he should sign the paper, doesn’t know if it’ll do any good. He blames himself, he loves her, he wants his wife back, the free spirit, yet he cannot allow such outbursts to overturn his home, and his world. He is too entrenched in what he sees as ‘normal and acceptable’ for Rowlands’ eccentricities to be tolerated.This is perhaps the most extreme scene in any of Cassavetes’ films, yet it doesn’t seem like soap opera. Somehow it all comes off as believable and real. Somehow we sympathize not only with Rowlands, and Falk, but the mother-in-law, the doctor, all the characters in fact. Each one is so eloquently drawn that we can imagine ourselves in any one of those positions. We understand the desire of the family friends to ignore the problem, the same as we can concede that the mother-in-law is right in wanting to keep Rowlands from influencing her grandchildren. It paints the most realistic portrait of coping with someone’s mental illness, or seeming insanity, ever committed to celluloid before or since. It’s a much more truthful portrayal than Harmony Korine’s self-indulgent ‘Julien Donkey-Boy’ which was more about getting a Dogme 95 certificate than it was about looking into life with someone who is schizophrenic.What Cassavetes accomplished with Shadows, Opening Night, A Woman Under the Influence, and every other film he made was the most precise and honest capturing of raw human power in the movies. His achievements cannot be dismissed as pretentious, arty, or self-indulgent, because he never indulged his own ego, rather the egos of his characters. He allowed them to develop and grow within the story as real people do, through believable experiences and trials. While doing so he created some of the most riveting cinema ever. He took these very personal stories that came from within him, and filtered them into something we can all enjoy, connect with, and appreciate. Because of the extremes of emotion his films portray, they polarize their audience. Some people are just afraid to admit to themselves they see their own flaws when watching one of his masterpieces. Shadows, Opening Night, and A Woman Under the Influence are available in a Cassavetes box set of DVDs from Criterion, which also includes Faces, and The Killing of a Chinese Bookie.
]]>Sun, 24 Jun 2007 20:21:00 GMTanalogzombieanalogzombie Blog6/24/2007 4:21:00 PMCassavetes is one of those directors you either love or hate. Much the same way people are totally polarized on the works of Tarantino, or the film Magnolia, Cassavetes has driven film fanatics to loathe him, critics to praise him, and general audiences to simultaneously revile and admire him. He can either open an entire world of film to you, or simply reinforce your preconceived notions of the pretentiousness of auteur films, and in that he is singular. If the validity of art were based on its ability to produce extreme emotion Cassavetes would be considered a DaVinci. The way in which he achieves this provocation of emotion is special too. No other director, not Ozu, Renior, Scorsese, or Anderson (either of them), has successfully captured the essence of feeling in their films the way Cassavetes does. You don&rsquo;t watch one of his films, you feel it, you live it. The audience registers every second of joy, anguish, or pain that floats across the characters&rsquo; faces. This is why his films create such a variation of comment: some people are not comfortable with how they feel while viewing them. But I think I&rsquo;m getting ahead of myself here. Let me slow down, back up, and give you a little background on the man and his works.John Cassavetes is considered to be the father of American Independent film. When the French New Wave was exploding in Europe, Cassavetes was developing his own answer to Hollywood in NYC. But unlike his European counterparts who were seeking to take &lsquo;cinema into the streets&rsquo;, Cassavetes was seeking a more interior and personal space. He always called himself an amateur director and professional actor. Indeed many people know him better as the husband in Rosemary&rsquo;s Baby, or from The Dirty Dozen, than they do as the creator of Shadows. But it is his work as a writer/director that means the most to us today. His first film, Shadows (1958), was born out of improvisational routines he developed in his acting workshop class. The film proudly proclaims &lsquo;this film was improvised&rsquo; at its conclusion, but the reality was it was quite scripted by the time it came to start shooting. It was, however, always fluid, and open to change on set. After the initial shooting of 1958, Cassavetes came back in 1959 to shoot a few more scenes to flesh out the main characters. Presumably because at the time of original shooting it was not clear were the story would end up. Many of these additional scenes involve Lelia and her relationship with her brothers.The heart of the film concerns their sibling relationship, and the reaction of Lelia&rsquo;s white boyfriend when he realizes, upon meeting one of her darker skinned brothers, that she has been passing for white. In the pivotal scene of realization no words are spoken between the lovers, everything is conveyed in glances and body language. This is what I am getting at with Cassavetes. He doesn&rsquo;t need excessive dialogue or score to make sure we understand exactly what each character is feeling. He achieves it through his shot composition and by eliciting real moments from his actors. Moments that are all too recognizable to us. We don&rsquo;t need to be told how Lelia&rsquo;s boyfriend feels; it&rsquo;s all there, in his face. The way his eyes dart from Leila to her brother, and then down to the floor. The way his body tightens with revulsion and then immediately loosens to say he is aware of the vibe he&rsquo;s giving off. He is ashamed of how he feels, but cannot help it. He loves Lelia, but is also repulsed by her. Lelia and her brother recognize that look immediately; they know what he&rsquo;s thinking and want no part of it. Her heart is broken with his glances, and her brother steps in to be her protector. As he demands the ashamed boyfriend leave his house, Lelia&rsquo;s would-be beau apologizes, asks them all out for dinner, he is sorry; he wants to prove he is no racist. All this comes too late for Lelia and her kin. The damage has been done; they see him for what he is, for what he thought, if even only for a second. Their world is a world without compromise, they cannot flinch on this issue for one second. They will not be denied, or judged on their race. Her boyfriend knows this too, knows it&rsquo;s too late, but he cannot help himself, he loves her.This scene in Shadows lasts about 3 minutes, but is so riveting, real, and amazing to behold, that you cannot watch the rest of the movie without it dominating your thoughts. Of course this is not the only instance in which Cassavetes captures real life, there are many others. The diner cruising scene, scenes between the siblings, and between Lelia&rsquo;s brother (a sad sack jazz singer) and his manager, all resonate with authenticity. Cassavetes went on to develop this style in subsequent movies, each one primarily financed with his own money. Many paid for with cash generated from his growing acting career. He looked at acting as the means to make these intensely personal films. Take 1977&rsquo;s Opening Night for example. It&rsquo;s a movie about the lengths one actress (Gena Rowlands) will go to embody the character she plays in a Broadway play. (Cassavetes also stars in this one, as her husband in the play within the movie.) No doubt the desire to &lsquo;get it right&rsquo; was something he often sought for himself when making movies, either as an actor or director. Through increasingly disturbing events, we witness the self-destruction of an actress. A woman who is subsuming her own identity within the character she is playing. As this strains her relationship with the play&rsquo;s writer, the director (Ben Garazza), and the cast, she begins to understand the depths she will really have to sink if she is to be successful. Unwilling to play the &lsquo;desperate woman over 40&rsquo; that is written into the script, she attempts to develop her character into a living human being: someone real. This scenario of &lsquo;woman on the edge&rsquo; was a recurring theme in his films. With 1974&rsquo;s A Woman Under the Influence, starring Gena Rowlands (again) and Peter Falk, Cassavetes received some extremely negative criticism for his portrayal of a woman &lsquo;going nuts&rsquo; in a suburban home. Those that would label this a perfect example of the inherent sexism in his films would miss the point of the character entirely. As Cassavetes saw it, this was a film about a free spirit who loved life, and was admittedly socially inept in her transition to suburban mother and wife. It did not help her predicament that her spouse is a blue-collar guy with mother issues. This film is Cassavetes condemnation of the routine and monotony of the standardized life that the suburbs can force onto someone. Rowlands isn&rsquo;t crazy as defined by Cassavetes, she&rsquo;s simply a woman under the influence of these pressures to conform, and she can&rsquo;t cope, it&rsquo;s just not her. For his credit, his husband loves her, demanding throughout the film that she &lsquo;just be herself&rsquo;. It&rsquo;s the wild side he loves about her, and he is determined to have her live a happy and fulfilling life, but at the start of the film he is also concerned with the perceptions of his coworkers and family. To free himself, and his marriage of these exterior pressures, this family must endure tests of its unity, culminating in Rowlands&rsquo; committal to a psychiatric facility following her nervous breakdown. Her breakdown is brought on by the perception by her husband that some very odd things were going on while she was throwing a party for her children. Sure, allowing them and the neighborhood kids to play dress up, and asking them to imitate Swan Lake for a visitor by yelling &lsquo;Die kids, die for Mr. Jenkins&rsquo;, is a bit off, but no real impropriety took place. When Faulk comes home to find the children running around his house nude, and a strange man standing in his living room, he doesn&rsquo;t wait for explanations, he simply unloads onto his wife. As his rage builds, Faulk elicits the help of the family doctor and his mother to confront his wife about, as he sees it, her crazy behavior. All this proves too much for Rowlands. As her world turns against her, she desperately clings to her children while begging her husband to help her. When she realizes the futility of her pleadings, she begins to spiral out of control. She mounts the couch, begins rambling and jabbering about the events of the day, and demands that &lsquo;everyone leave her alone&rsquo;. All of this is to no avail as the doctor and her mother-in-law are convinced that she is certifiable, and should be committed. Her husband however is reluctant to do so. His love for his wife makes him waiver on what was previously a drawn conclusion of action for him. He doesn&rsquo;t know if he should sign the paper, doesn&rsquo;t know if it&rsquo;ll do any good. He blames himself, he loves her, he wants his wife back, the free spirit, yet he cannot allow such outbursts to overturn his home, and his world. He is too entrenched in what he sees as &lsquo;normal and acceptable&rsquo; for Rowlands&rsquo; eccentricities to be tolerated.This is perhaps the most extreme scene in any of Cassavetes&rsquo; films, yet it doesn&rsquo;t seem like soap opera. Somehow it all comes off as believable and real. Somehow we sympathize not only with Rowlands, and Falk, but the mother-in-law, the doctor, all the characters in fact. Each one is so eloquently drawn that we can imagine ourselves in any one of those positions. We understand the desire of the family friends to ignore the problem, the same as we can concede that the mother-in-law is right in wanting to keep Rowlands from influencing her grandchildren. It paints the most realistic portrait of coping with someone&rsquo;s mental illness, or seeming insanity, ever committed to celluloid before or since. It&rsquo;s a much more truthful portrayal than Harmony Korine&rsquo;s self-indulgent &lsquo;Julien Donkey-Boy&rsquo; which was more about getting a Dogme 95 certificate than it was about looking into life with someone who is schizophrenic.What Cassavetes accomplished with Shadows, Opening Night, A Woman Under the Influence, and every other film he made was the most precise and honest capturing of raw human power in the movies. His achievements cannot be dismissed as pretentious, arty, or self-indulgent, because he never indulged his own ego, rather the egos of his characters. He allowed them to develop and grow within the story as real people do, through believable experiences and trials. While doing so he created some of the most riveting cinema ever. He took these very personal stories that came from within him, and filtered them into something we can all enjoy, connect with, and appreciate. Because of the extremes of emotion his films portray, they polarize their audience. Some people are just afraid to admit to themselves they see their own flaws when watching one of his masterpieces. Shadows, Opening Night, and A Woman Under the Influence are available in a Cassavetes box set of DVDs from Criterion, which also includes Faces, and The Killing of a Chinese Bookie. http://www.spout.com/blogs/chesterfilms/archive/2007/5/18/8970.aspx Post By: chesterfilms
Post To: chesterfilms Blog
Post Date: 5/18/2007 2:31:44 AM
Body: If Hitchcock's Rear Window, and Michael Powell's Peeping Tom are the quintessential voyeuristic films, than John Cassevettie's A Woman Under The Influence invites you in to it's home, and doesn't care what you see or if it makes you uncomfortable. The godfather of independent film, with his crew consisting of friends and family, A Woman Under The Influence feels more personal and uncompromising than anything I have ever seen. With his use of hand held cameras, natural lighting, and non-actors, Cassavetes completely destroyed the conventional film making process. A Woman Under the Influence remains to be as powerful as when it was first released. The performances by his own wife, Gena Rowlands and Peter Falk are so intense and truthful, that they stay with you for days after a viewing. Without a doubt, they are two of the greatest performances you will ever see.
]]>Fri, 18 May 2007 06:31:44 GMTchesterfilmschesterfilms Blog5/18/2007 2:31:44 AMIf Hitchcock&#39;s Rear Window, and Michael Powell&#39;s Peeping Tom are the quintessential voyeuristic films, than John Cassevettie&#39;s A Woman Under The Influence invites you in to it&#39;s home, and doesn&#39;t care what you see or if it makes you uncomfortable. The godfather of independent film, with his crew consisting of friends and family, A Woman Under The Influence feels more personal and uncompromising than anything I have ever seen. With his use of hand held cameras, natural lighting, and non-actors, Cassavetes completely destroyed the conventional film making process. A Woman Under the Influence remains to be as powerful as when it was first released. The performances by his own wife, Gena Rowlands and Peter Falk are so intense and truthful, that they stay with you for days after a viewing. Without a doubt, they are two of the greatest performances you will ever see. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dysfunctional/MemberTagFilms.aspxdysfunctional
Number of films tagged: 486

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 42

]]>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:04:09 GMT4863142Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/pain/MemberTagFilms.aspxpain
Number of films tagged: 127

Number of people who tagged: 28

Number of times used: 69

]]>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:09:20 GMT1272869Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/suburbs/MemberTagFilms.aspxsuburbs
Number of films tagged: 224

Number of people who tagged: 18

Number of times used: 27

]]>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:03:11 GMT2241827Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/mentalinstitution/MemberTagFilms.aspxmentalinstitution
Number of films tagged: 321

Number of people who tagged: 11

Number of times used: 18

]]>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:02:27 GMT3211118Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Female-Hysteria/MemberTagFilms.aspxFemale-Hysteria
Number of films tagged: 50

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 54

]]>Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:58:13 GMT50854Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/mentalbreakdown/MemberTagFilms.aspxmentalbreakdown
Number of films tagged: 153

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 12

]]>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:02:27 GMT153812Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/emotionalproblems/MemberTagFilms.aspxemotionalproblems
Number of films tagged: 75

Number of people who tagged: 6

Number of times used: 8

]]>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 13:01:53 GMT7568Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/parenting/MemberTagFilms.aspxparenting
Number of films tagged: 11

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 11

]]>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:35:44 GMT11511Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/criterion-collection/MemberTagFilms.aspxcriterion-collection
Number of films tagged: 19

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 21

]]>Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:46:04 GMT19421Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/homemaker/MemberTagFilms.aspxhomemaker
Number of films tagged: 217

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 4

]]>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:02:06 GMT21744Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/bluecollar/MemberTagFilms.aspxbluecollar
Number of films tagged: 75

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 3

]]>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:02:48 GMT7533Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/botchedending/MemberTagFilms.aspxbotchedending
Number of films tagged: 9

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 9

]]>Sat, 12 Aug 2006 19:03:45 GMT919Tag