面孔1968

Mille Plateaux: YEAR ZERO: FACIALITY

Faces are not basically individual; they define zones of

frequency or probability, delimit a field that neutralizes in advance any

expressions or connections unamenable to the appropriate significations.

Similarly, the form of subjectivity, whether consciousness or passion,

would remain absolutely empty if faces did not form loci of resonance that

select the sensed or mental reality and make it conform in advance to a

dominant reality. The face itself is redundancy. It is itself in redundancy

with the redundancies of signifiance or frequency, and those of resonance

or subjectivity. The face constructs the wall that the signifier needs in order

to bounce off of; it constitutes the wall of the signifier, the frame or screen.

The face digs the hole that subjectification needs in order to break through;

it constitutes the black hole of subjectivity as consciousness or passion, the

camera, the third eye.

Title: Faces

Year: 1968

Country: USA

Language: English

Genre: Drama

Director/Writer: John Cassavetes

Music: Jack Ackerman

Cinematography: Al Ruban

Cast:

John Marley

Gena Rowlands

Lynn Carlin

Seymour Cassel

Fred Draper

Val Avery

Elizabeth Deering

Gene Darfler

Dorothy Gulliver

Joanne Moore Jordan

Darlene Conley

Rating: 8.0/10

It takes an acquired taste to be comfortably and thoroughly engaged in Cassavetes’ intensely disheartening dramaturgy of bourgeois ennui, FACES isirrefutably a feather in his cup, not in the least for its unsparing cinéma-vérité bravura, one could only imagine watching it in front of a celluloid with those intrusive, sidling über-closeups underlined by that grainy monochrome, how different would it be from anything else in the year of 1968?

Watching in on a TV screen might be a less dizzying experience and it may even lend a helping hand for the audience to become more appreciated of Cassavetes’ scalpel-like dissection of an internecine relationship tangle where no one comes off as unscathed.

The film takes the course roughly within one day, we are peering into the disintegration of a 12-year-old marriage betweenRichard Frost (Marley, who physically resembles an elder version of Cassavetes), a well-off movie financier and his younger wife Maria (Carlin), plus its immediate aftermath. What tickles the idea of divorce into Richard’s mind is another woman, Jeannie Rapp (Rowlands), a classy fille de joie who is tentative by the courtship from one of her patron, whom she might also fall for.Whilst Richard visits Jeannie in her apartment with the presence of her other clients, Maria, pent-up after receiving the bolt from the blue, hangs out with her gal pals in a club and they bring back a young go-go dancer Chet (Cassel) to find some cheap solace, but the problem is always the morning after, does she have the courage to face a new day? What else can a domesticated woman do when she is going to a cast-off?

The story pans out intimately in its interior-exclusive episodes, burnished by what dynamo of a cast, the film galvanizes our attention from A to Z, it is hard to tell whether the dialogue and play-off is semi-improvised or strictly script-based, but Cassavetes relentlessly presses home a brisk tension of fickleness and turns of moods through the lengthy procedures, two friends banter, jape, dance until one of them finds himself becomes an inconvenient third wheel and he snaps; the same coup-de-théâtre occurs almost repetitively in each episode, whether it is between Richard and Maria’s abruptly disconnected duologue, or the tangible disquiet/agitation between Jeanine and her client Jim McCarthy (Avery, a wonderful chameleon), or later the macho confrontation/reconciliation between Jim and Richard. But it is the chapter where Maria and co. facing off a woman-pleasing Chef leaves the most indelible mark, for its utterly frank expose of a lonely woman’s delusion and desperation under the influence of alcohol, the unsung hero here is Dorothy Gulliver's importunate Florence, you cannot help but feeling pity for her, but the pity is concomitant with a whiff of involuntary disgust.

The cast is pure gold, John Marley upstages the rest with hissilver fox allure so damning pungent in every line delivery and gesticulation, deceptively papers over Richard’s dark streak with a winning/poignant combo of open-facedness and bluntness, only belies his shallowness and misery in the morning after as an exasperating cuckold. Ms.Cassavetes, the unparalleled Gena Rowlands drums nuances into every pore of her body and every glance she casts (also thanks to the majestically in-your-face shots to create that stunning effect). However it is two newbies who are given some legitimate Oscar love,Lynn Carlin is stripped down to her raw emotion in her film debut, which powerfully elicits Maria’s clogged mental state and counterpoises its life-threatening after-effect; on the other hand, a blond and youthful Seymour Cassel beautifully oozes sex appeal and wide-eyed sophistication as an unexpectedly selfless symbol of savior to all those wrenched and dissatisfied housewives, his Chet is the diagonal counterpart of Rowland’s Jeanine, only in exeunt omnes, he has to rashly flee from a window whereas she might eventually get what she wants, if one wanna write about sex politics, FACES is a gold mine.

Most suitably, FACES should be ensconced as a smoldering pendant of Mike Nichols’ WHO’S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOOLF?, both are hell-bent in tearing down smoke and mirrors to debunk lethargy, inaction and mythomania (among many other maladies) abound in all relationships, dare you to watch them cheek by jowl!

referential points: Cassavetes’ A WOMAN UNDER THE INFLUENCE (1974, 7.3/10), OPENING NIGHT (1977, 8.1/10); Mike Nichols’ WHO’S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOOLF? (1966, 8.2/10)

《面孔》是卡萨维蒂继《影子》之后的又一艺术性高峰，但是与前者给我带来的爽快观感不同，《面孔》的后半段观影过程堪称折磨，虽然其叙事和结构的确富有艺术性与新意，但是主题的单调性和高度重复化风格化的特写确实在一个小时后将我带入了疲惫的深渊。与众多影评人对这部影片给出的高分不同，笔者认为其对立结构缺乏密度和深度，并且在人物个像和群像之间并未求得较好的平衡（这个问题在弗朗西斯瓦·欧容的新作《感谢上帝》中有更加突出的体现，到时继续做更加详细的讨论），因此算不上是完全的佳作。 该电影的结构可以被宏观上剖析成一个联结的崩塌，对于婚姻不满的男方女方分别外出寻欢，并在这一夜与其他人相遇相知相“爱”。整个电影基于一个夜晚所发生的一切，这对于一个长达两小时有余的影片来说是一个过于充分的叙事空间了，然而卡萨维蒂并未像他后来如《爱的激流》或者《女煞葛洛蒂》一样安排交织的故事和空间，只是将摄像机无数次的对准演员，他们的神情动作，所有的姿态被他分解和观察，并通过两位主角与其他角色的沟通来继续投射。这个方式本身在笔者看来出现了令人困惑的非一致性，男主理查德和商人们与他的风流对象采取了过度风格化的（又名：喝了酒的卡萨维蒂）影响调度，快速切换的镜头，过度嘈杂的笑声等等（当然这个观影体验可能是上海影城在放映单声轨电影时的通病）。理查德在这个部分的表现是主动而外显的，俨然为一名参与者。而相对的在女主玛丽带酒吧男孩回家派对后，她始终未有进一步的行动，而是以一名偶尔做出费解表情的观察者去注意她姐妹们的行径。笔者只能从卡萨维蒂的固有男性视角来理解这样的身份不一致。

《面孔》可以是卡萨维蒂对于他所钟情的宏观意义上的爱情主题中婚姻和性所进行的二维探讨，理查德代表的性和玛丽代表的婚姻在一夜的混沌之后走向了沉默的统一。但是其内核的反复性配上低反差的黑白影像让笔者不断地想起伯格曼的《婚姻生活》，虽然两者确实相差甚远，但同样略显枯燥。 当然，《面孔》有着无与伦比的室内调度和特写，虽然广度尚欠，但是其对于一种外放性的视觉表达：表情 做出了深刻的探讨。卡萨维蒂不畏惧夸张的手法来彰显连绵不断的习惯性的谎言，和迅速转变的表情一起所被描写的同样是不断起伏而挣扎的内心。We are all making fool of ourselves. 结尾与楼梯上位置的互换，是一种生活态度上的切换，还是单纯位置上的扭曲。

1，兩男一女，兩個男人為爭奪一個女人，跳舞，講笑，笑。

否定一切，當做時尚，當做笑話說。否定友誼，否定女人：每一個女人都是妓女，其中一個男人說。

其中一個男人被排擠離開，一男一女共處一室，情不自已接吻，男人離開。

2，男人回到家，興奮又嚴肅，要宣佈重要的事情，妻子正在講電話，妻子不理他。

男人興沖沖地奪過妻子的電話，表示要和妻子將重要的事情，你一會兒再打來。但聽了電話那頭說了什麼，莫名地輕鬆地笑了起來，掛掉電話，對著妻子一反常態，笑鬧。

兩人躺在床上，男人不斷講著無趣的笑話，兩人笑做一團，妻子不斷迎合地大笑著。丈夫繼續用笑話的口吻講著：你覺得我講的笑話不好笑，對不對？

女人說，我覺得你很好笑。

男人接著說笑話，女人戛然而止，從男人身上抽離：一點都不好笑。

妻子一如既往拿了兩個杯子，每個玻璃杯兩個冰塊...男人走了過來，他說：我要離婚。

男人當著妻子的面撥電話：Jeanie，我今晚要見你。在酒吧？好，一會兒見，多久都行。

男人離開。

3，燈紅酒綠嘈雜的酒吧，男人穿過一次又一次的人群，始終找不到J的影子。

4，J的家裡，旁邊有一對男女在調情，J對富商男說，我有一個困惑，有一個男人在酒吧等我...

富商男還在用大豪大放的口吻，粗魯地叫著旁邊男子的名字，男子停下熱絡的調情，回應富豪男，這對男女顯然不高興。

該男沖J發火，這種女人都是妓女...

J要離開，被富豪男攔下來，男人對J說：你覺得我怎麼了？我有什麼問題嗎？你不希望我這麼粗魯？我可以不粗魯...

J說：你結婚了？

富豪男沮喪地說，是的，我結婚了...然後他絮絮叨叨地講著自己兒子的事情...

兩人從廚房出來之後，正好前一場戲的男人進門。富豪男興奮起來：你來得正好，你在酒吧等了兩個小時的那個吧？

J很窘迫。男人卻很坦然：是的。

富豪男不斷挑釁他，J直接不滿，挑明希望富豪男離開，富豪男十分生氣，被另一男子攔了下來，顯然這一男子是富豪男的下屬或者生意夥伴。

這個男人將富豪男趕到廚房，逗他說：you son of a gun.

富豪男出來之後再次與來拜訪的男人發生衝突，被同事以you son of a gun攔下來后，轉而熱絡地聊起了生意。幾個男人邊說邊聊生意，各個是大名鼎鼎的，身家百萬...

富豪男轉頭對J說：Do you know what is director of the board?

J不滿，你為什麼還不走呢？

富豪男顏面盡失，最終還是走了。

男人和J獨處一室，說著情話，接著吻...

5，妻子跟著幾個朋友來到酒吧，五光十色的環境，妻子和丈夫在之前一樣，不適應。

眼前有一個帥氣男子跳舞跳得青春四射，幾個女人都被迷倒，男人邀請妻子跳舞，妻子不願意，男人和旁邊的F跳得起勁。

6，妻子的家裡，幾個女性朋友和年輕男子進門。F勁頭不減，粘著男子跳舞。

妻子氛圍低沉，冷冷看著， 啪地將唱片機關了，讓大家坐下，聊天。

男子發表了人生在世須盡歡的言論，四個女人，各有心事，都對這一男人色心在懷。

L向對面的女人提出丈夫的存在，對面的女人一驚，他說：because they are scared! They are scared of you!她指眼前的這個男人，這個會跳舞會唱歌，活力四射的男人。男人回復說，我不在乎。女人瞬間被打臉。

男人起身跳舞，在他的鼓勵下，L終於起身與他一起跳舞。這關頭，女主人起身離開客廳，男人注意到，停止了身體的擺動，隨口說了句：we are making fool of ourselves.

L生氣，傷了自尊，you are telling me i am making fool of myself...

L生氣離開，眾人沮喪。剛剛坐在L對面的女人也收拾行裝，說至少現在只有我一個人保持了尊嚴。看看我們四個吧，多麼可笑...L回家又該嚼舌頭了，她就是這樣的人...

女主人始終不語，送她離開。

回頭女主人公坐在F身邊，F感慨著這一晚上多麼不同、珍貴，C是個好男人，L...

C出現以後，F再次撲了上去，要跳舞...C滿眼淚水，仰頭問著C說：你可以吻我嗎？

C猶豫了一會兒，親吻了F。F接著充滿勇氣地詢問，你可以送我回家嗎？

C說當然可以。C轉頭找女主人，F急急喝住:你說你要送我回家的！

女主人公說，你沒有開車過來呀？F說：C答應要送我回家。。讓我坐你的車吧！

女主人公說，我可以送你回家。隨之又改了口，算了我去給你拿鑰匙。

F一副對不起又無可奈何地委屈樣子。

C和F二人離開。

女主人一個人，一個個把家裡所有的門窗關好，把燈打開，然後關上某扇門的時候，發出尖叫，C出現，追逐，笑叫...接吻...

女人要去沖洗，從浴室出來，接吻，做愛。

7，第二天早晨，男人和J醒來，兩人確認著彼此的愛，J問他所有的問題，他說是。J說，你看，我能說中你說有的想法。

8，女主人昏厥中，C焦急地打電話叫救護車，醫院那邊問請留下電話號碼，C猶豫了一下，掛掉電話，自己解救。

C將女人拖到浴室，用水沖刷，無效；去廚房翻亂，找咖啡，給女人喝咖啡，喝不進去。

C將女人拖到馬桶，使其嘔吐，女人吐了...讓後將她拖到床上，一巴掌一巴掌把她打醒，女人眼睛未睜開就開始哭泣...

“這就對了，哭吧！這就是人生。我剛剛跟上帝祈禱，別讓她死，我愛這個女人...儘管我根本就不信這一套...”

女人在痛苦中，哭泣的淚水是黑色的，沾著眼影。

9，門外丈夫帶著J帶給他的活力回了家，一邊進門一邊唱著歌，等他走到臥室的時候，C剛剛跳窗而逃，妻子的臉上滿是悲傷。

丈夫發飆，女人說：我不在乎。我只是不愛你了。

兩人一上一下跌坐在樓梯上，男人抽煙，女人跟男人借煙。窗戶滲出的光下，煙霧裊裊。

女人起身，走下樓梯，婚姻或許也走向了盡頭。