It's not hard to understand the ethos of a John Cassavetes film. The essence of the human condition is to be found on the outskirts... in the fringes... in the moments between significant events. Where a wise person once said that life truly happens. Well, that's one way to tell a story. Unfortunately it's not a particularly interesting way to do it. What we have is essentially a 30 minute story (and I'm being generous!) strung out for 2 and a quarter hours. One would be hard pressed to pay attention to a film that actually cared about the plot, stayed in focus and didn't have the camera crammed in everyone's faces. To be fair, the last two points in particular are artistic choices.... more's the pity. And it was very likely a financial choice as well, so as to not betray its limited scope and cast.
I can recall seeing this years ago, and I'm sure (absolutely sure, in fact) that my main take away was the Paris stage production midway through the film, where the film does manage some puerile stripper titillation. I'm sure my teenage self was giddy, and completely ignored the droning tedium of the rest of the film. And even now, that scene is only one small part of agonizingly bad stage show, which gets repeated time and again. Imagine you had to watch the beginning of Ishtar repeatedly, and you get the picture.
I *get* that this is meant to be avant garde cinema. I get that Cassavetes is trying a European sensibility in an American film. But why use all the most tedious and hackneyed techniques and atmosphere? 4 stars, only for the effort to make something different... and the fond nostalgia for Azizi Johari.
I can recall seeing this years ago, and I'm sure (absolutely sure, in fact) that my main take away was the Paris stage production midway through the film, where the film does manage some puerile stripper titillation. I'm sure my teenage self was giddy, and completely ignored the droning tedium of the rest of the film. And even now, that scene is only one small part of agonizingly bad stage show, which gets repeated time and again. Imagine you had to watch the beginning of Ishtar repeatedly, and you get the picture.
I *get* that this is meant to be avant garde cinema. I get that Cassavetes is trying a European sensibility in an American film. But why use all the most tedious and hackneyed techniques and atmosphere? 4 stars, only for the effort to make something different... and the fond nostalgia for Azizi Johari.