Pokerface11

I've read through the reviews of fans of this film. All I can conclude is 1) they are reviewing Lou Gehrig, not the film, 2) they love Lou Gehrig so much that they are willing to forgive this film everything, and 3) they really saw a different movie.

This is a terrible film, hastily rushed to the fans who lost their hero the previous year. Cooper plays Gehrig as a rightie (take note of how he signs everything); a sportswriter (?), not his wife or parents are with Lou when he finds out he's dying (what an ego Gallico had); and Babe Ruth makes sure he's in the frame at the start of Gehrig's final address to the fans at Yankee Stadium (what a jerk!). Just about every fact--all available to the writers at the time--was toyed with for no apparent reason. I could go on and on about the problems with this film. Gehrig deserves better than its cheap sentimentality.

I am absolutely dumbfounded that people think this film is a masterpiece, better than "Kiss Me Deadly" and "Baby Doll". I wasn't offended by its absurd treatment of a rape victim--obviously she had Stockholm Syndrome. There can be no other explanation for why she ended up with Meeker. Oh, and the fact that they were both nuts! But, because they were EMOTING internally, we were supposed to believe that this is a deep movie. It could have been great if she had jumped off the bridge and that was the end of the film--or any plot other than love conquering all. And what a lame dream sequence! What a waste of a psychologically complex and beautiful score by Aaron Copland and great NYC locations. What a waste of Baker and Meeker! That script never should have gotten out the Actor's Studio workshop. What a complete muddle.

Opening Night is my favorite Cassavetes, and I feel it is my duty to debunk the notion that those or any of his films aside from Shadows was strictly improvised. In fact, his films were tightly scripted after actor improvisation was used to contribute to his ideas. The coherence of a film like Opening Night, the development of the themes of aging, vanity, and hope, could not just spring from the improvisational head of even the very fine actors in the movie. If you pay attention to the dialogue (outside of the lines in the play), it is obvious that much care was taken to craft them (e.g., the scene where Myrtle explains to the playwright what problems she is having with the character and script).