When first seeing a film from each director, one has opposing reactions in their opposing styles. John Cassavetes had a raw, edgy style that one now sees as commonplace in TVshows that have shaky camera and each contain more slapping of faces than all Three Stooges episodes combine. Stanley Kubrick had a scrutinizing, analytical mind who would make films like a grandmaster chess champion, he would set his moves very carefully and very precise.
What they have in common? A lot, actually. Aside from their completely different styles, they where both about discovery. They would both film with a very limited crew, nothing too grandiose. Technique and method: both would have very solid scripts and have a very clear picture of the performance ahead of time and rehearsals and amount of takes until they were satisfied were numerous. They both directed about 12 feature films, they are both currently deceased and haven’t risen yet.
When first thinking of this idea, i thought this will be a hard one, but in the beginning of writing this, i had already come to my conclusion. Studio V.S. Independent.
In the end, the choice was an easy one. At the risk of getting much grief from many fellow film geeks, i regret to inform, Cassavetes wins! Hands dizzown, fo sheezy. After all, Kubrick doesn’t have songs written tributing him or his films. (Le Tigre – “What’s Yr Take On Cassavetes”, Fugazi – “Cassavetes”, Joan of Arc – “John Cassavetes, Assata Shakur, and Guy Debord Walk Into a Bar..”)
Now that i scared off 85% of the people reading this who know the Kubrick name, we can now go into how i even compared the two, because it wasn’t at all an easy task, as those who are familiar with both will no doubt agree.
I compared the two on many levels; Cinematic Presence, Framing, Lens Focus, Entertainment Value, Mise-en-sen (the surroundings of the character) etc. Kubrick won all of these, even the ones i didn’t list here, they tied for Artistic Merit. Cassavetes only excelled in one category that blew the rest of the list out of the water for Kubrick who was winning by a Mississippi mile.
Emotional Complexity. This category is so expansive and so far reaching that once you take a long look at it, it’s very easy to see why Cassavetes came out on top. Humanity, Humanization (two different things, but similar), Erratic behavior, Viewer participation, Viewer reaction, Intuition, i could go on.
It’s a broad statement to say that Cassavetes has very little fans, but i’ll make it, its sad but true. I’ll venture to say that you don’t even know who Cassavetes is, though, his number is growing everyday. Many might not know they are Cassavetes fans… even upon first viewing of one or two of his films; i was one of them. I bought a $100 Cassavetes set released by Criterion on a hunch that i would like his work, at first, i was so absolutely convinced that i had just wasted hours of my life watching, money i could have used at a strip club, cardboard and plastic that went into the packaging of the set, not to mention the hours i wasted at my minimum wage job ($5.75 at the time)… what the fuck was i thinking? what had i done? what had i done.
I was too busy trying to see something like a Kubrick that i couldn’t see what Cassavetes was about. Though lacking in making each frame a moving painting, he makes up for in spades with pure, raw emotion; so much so that it turned me off upon first viewing. In fact, i still don’t like some of his films, i can’t muscle through the first 30 minutes of a couple of them. Never even attempted to view others based on scenes i’ve watched from them… but i’ll view them when i need them the most in my life, i’m sure. But the Cassavetes films that i have seen and have developed to love and feel for, stick with me more than any Kubrick will.
Cassavetes, for those unfamiliar, is very hard to describe. Cinema Verté (shaky handheld camera) is one way, but that is so limiting to a person who gave his entire life to the pursuit of human emotion and experience. He immersed himself in theatre, rehearsing over and over, breaking through, finding a unfamiliar grounds for an actor but so familiar in life. Sometimes confusing, unrealistic, unmotivated, slightly disturbed (as we all are), but after time, you see none of the afore mentioned are true, and you wonder how or why you ever did before… sometimes. You can see how much he cared for each character, their reserve, their intensity, their pain, their sadness, their joy, their love, their growth, their hope. He didn’t like acting, he loved people in situations. You can tell by his films that this is true because he didn’t care if the focus was off, just as long as he got the emotion invested in those characters in frame. The best way to describe him i guess, is a humanist/artist, in the truest sense of the words. And although all of his films are verily tumultuous, in the end, you shouldn’t be depressed, you should have a good feeling of what you have just witnessed. Usually a happy ending, which is not seen today in most “indie films”, most of which nowadays are produced with studio backing anyway.
Kubrick, is an artist too, not so much of a humanist (though i’ve read he was very fond of certain people and animals.) His films are very plot oriented, leaving a sensitive person very distant from emotion in his pieces, but all are very entertaining, even his less known films like Barry Lyndon. Kubrick is very good at making the fantastic a reality, very intelligent in framing, acting and story. I liked all of Kubrick’s films from day one, the more i saw them however, the more i noticed how much he distanced himself from the characters he was capturing on film. He used the actor or actress to convey the idea that he wrote in a script. He was very into the ideas of his, when he visualized them into a reality, it is a sight to behold. Although i admire his work, i can see a divide when i try to find answers in life in his work, they simply do not provide them (to me at least). Even as an early photographer for a magazine, he still looked upon the subject instead of being the subject, even when he was the subject in a self-portrait. 
If you haven’t seen a Kubrick, you’ve been living somewhere evil or you’re one of those intellectual types who are proud to say “i’ve read the book, never seen the movie” or “i don’t own a t.v.” Either way, it’s somewhere evil.
For those who have never seen a Cassavetes film, i’m both very excited and as cautious as a mother who wants their baby to experience life on your own, but doesn’t want you to be misguided. My best advice to you is start toward the middle of his career, the beautiful 70’s, gradually, working your way to his earlier stuff, while throwing in his 80’s here and there. Something that i wish, i was told when viewing Cassavetes for the first time. For those who have seen Cassavetes once and never again, good, more for me. They are not films that do the work for you, i hope you have better second viewing, if you choose to. For those who love Cassavetes and studied the man, you know what i’m saying and i don’t have to convince you, why are you reading this? Possibly because, like me, you hope that John Cassavetes will one day be available at your local Lackluster Video, or at least a household name, even if it is like almost every other great artist, posthumously. And with the work of all of his offspring (Nick, Xan, and Zoe), he will be in no time.
Suggested Viewing order of John Cassavetes for the person who is used to the current movie method:
Opening Night (79), Killing of a Chinese Bookie (78 version), A Woman Under the Influence (74), Minnie and Moskowitz (71), Love Steams (84) Husbands (70), Gloria (80), Faces (), Shadows (59 version). there are allegedly two versions of Killing, Faces and Shadows, the Cassavetes estate prefer you watch the ones he intended as final cuts.
Filmography of Stanley Kubrick:
The Killing (56), Paths of Glory (57), Spartacus (60), Lolita (62), Dr. Strangelove (64), 2001: Space Odyssey (68), A Clockwork Orange (71), Barry Lyndon (75), The Shining (80), Full Metal Jacket (87), Eyes Wide Shut (99)
Filmography of Nick Cassavetes:
John Q., The Notebook, Alpha Dog
Filmography of Alexandra Cassavetes:
Z Channel: A Magnificent Obsession
Filmography of Zoe Cassavetes:
Broken English
Feel free to use the above as a checklist of movies you must see before you DIE!
Have Pencil Will Travel 