面孔

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。

Cassavetes on Cassavetes by Cassavetes, John Carney

Page 165

As in Shadows, and as would be the case in all of his subsequent films, Faces’ actors were encouraged to draw on the deepest aspects of their personalities and attitudes in their playing. Cassavetes’ secret to making this work was to operate in such a deep way that the actors didn’t realize what was going on. Their performances became explorations of parts of themselves they didn’t know were there, and which would only be discovered later, if ever. The characters Cassavetes created were sufficiently different from the actors in superficial respects that the actors didn’t recognize the similarity to themselves, which meant that they played their roles unselfconsciously and unguardedly. But, at the same time, the roles tapped into deep structures of feeling and personality that enriched their performances and made them profoundly revealing.

As Cassavetes mentioned above, Seymour Cassel did follow women home and make love to them (and had gotten into a lot of trouble because of it). He was a kind of ‘beach boy’, and aspects of Cassel’s personality and attitudes deeply informed the character of Chettie. Lynn Carlin played a housewife with problems and, at the point she made Faces, she herself had ‘some severe personal problems’ (in Al Ruban’s words). Her marriage was falling apart; she had lost her job; and she had a lot of mixed feelings (both positive and negative) about her life and the men she knew, even as she still maintained a degree of innocence that contrasted with the externals of her situation. Cassavetes got her to draw on her pains, confusions and vulnerability in her portrayal of Maria. Similarly, Cassavetes drew on parts of Val Avery that Avery himself didn’t understand to deepen his performance of McCarthy. Avery’s characteristic bluster and swagger – and the vulnerability that the big talk covered up – became his character. (Avery the person is the very definition of a lamb in wolf’s clothing – hiding his genuine gentleness under a gruff exterior.) As a comic illustration of the overlap of life and art, at one point in the shoot Avery invited Cassavetes to ‘go outside and fight when he got upset with him, exactly the same way his character does with Richard Forst. Cassavetes similarly drew on aspects of John Marley’s personality. As a seasoned ‘pro’, Marley did have a high opinion of himself and felt superior to the less experienced actors – particularly the beginner, Carlin. He intimidated her, patronized her and criticized her acting. He was occasionally testy when Cassavetes asked for another take (feeling that his performance had been good enough). Cassavetes knew not to ignore this dynamic but to use it to enhance Marley’s performance as a high-powered businessman and to energize his acted relationship with Carlin. (By way of contrast, Marley’s very different feelings towards Gena Rowlands, his respect for her as an actress and a person, are drawn on in the altogether more responsive performance he gives when he is playing with her.

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.