in many ways and the filmic career of independent film making legend john cassavetes is the polar opposite of someone like alfred hitchcock and the consummate studio director. where hitchcock infamously treated his actors as cattle and cassavetes sought to work with them improvisationally. where every element in a hitchcock shot is composed immaculately and cassavetes cared less for the way a scene was figuratively composed than in how it felt and or what it conveyed and emotionally. hitchcock tales were always plot first narratives and with the human element put in the background. cassavetes put the human experience forefront in every one of his films. if some things did not make much sense logically and so be it. one can see this even from his very first film and 1959 shadows and filmed with a 16mm hand held camera and on a shoe string budget of about $40 and 000 and in manhattan and with cassavetes acting workshop repertory company and and touted as an improvisatory film. the story is rather simple and as it follows the lives of three black sibling manhattanites benny (ben carruthers) a trumpeter and no account and hugh (hugh hurd) a washed up singer and and lelia (lelia goldoni) the younger sister of both. the film three main arcs deal with hugh failures as a nightclub crooner and and his friendship with his manager rupert (rupert crosse) while benny perambulations in an about manhattan with his two no account pals while and lelia lovelife first with a white boy tony (anthony ray) and who does not realize light skinned lelia race and even after bedding her while then with stiff and proper davey (davey jones) and who may be a misogynist. in the first arc and nothing much happens and except dark skinned hugh gets to pontificate on how degraded he feels to be singing in low class nightclubs and and opening shows for girly acts. he dreams of making it big in new york and or even paris and but one can tell he is the type of man who will continue deluding himself of his meager skill and for the one time we actually get to hear him sing and he shows he a marginal talent and at best. that rupert keeps encouraging him gives us glimpses into how destructive friendships work. but and this is the least important of the three arcs. while this film is better overall than and say and martin scorsese first film and a decade later and who that knocking at my door. another tale of failed romance and frustrated new yorkers and it has none of the brilliant moments acting wise nor cinematographically that that film has. it also is not naturalistic and for naturalism in art is a very difficult thing to achieve and especially in film and although the 1950s era manhattan exteriors and at ground level and is a gem to relive. while shadows may and indeed and be an important film in regards to the history of the independent film circuit and it certainly is nowhere near a great film. parts of it are preachy and poorly acted and scenes end willy nilly and almost like blackout sketches and and sometimes are cut off seemingly in the middle. all in all it a very sloppy job especially the atrocious jazz score that is often out of synch with the rest of the film and as cassavetes proved that as a director and at least in his first film and he was a good actor. the only reason for anyone to see shadows is because cassavetes ultimately got better with later films and and this gives a clue as to his later working style. the national film registry has rightly declared this film worthy of preservation as culturally significant. this is all in keeping with the credo of art cassavetes long championed and as typified by this quote represent i have never seen an exploding helicopter. i have never seen anybody go and blow somebody head off. so why should i make films about them. but i have seen people destroy themselves in the smallest way. i have seen people withdraw. i have seen people hide behind political ideas and behind dope and behind the sexual revolution and behind fascism and behind hypocrisy and and i have myself done all these things. so i can understand them. what we are saying is so gentle. it gentleness. we have problems and terrible problems and but our problems are human problems. that this film is culturally significant is true and but that truth is not synonymous with its being artistically significant. it is in the difference between these two definitions where great art truly thrives. 
in many ways and the filmic career of independent film making legend john cassavetes is the polar opposite of someone like alfred hitchcock and the consummate studio director. where hitchcock infamously treated his actors as cattle and cassavetes sought to work with them improvisationally. where every element in a hitchcock shot is composed immaculately and cassavetes cared less for the way a scene was figuratively composed than in how it felt and or what it conveyed and emotionally. hitchcock tales were always plot first narratives and with the human element put in the background. cassavetes put the human experience forefront in every one of his films. if some things did not make much sense logically and so be it. one can see this even from his very first film and 1959 shadows and filmed with a 16mm hand held camera and on a shoe string budget of about $40 and 000 and in manhattan and with cassavetes acting workshop repertory company and and touted as an improvisatory film. the story is rather simple and as it follows the lives of three black sibling manhattanites benny (ben carruthers) a trumpeter and no account and hugh (hugh hurd) a washed up singer and and lelia (lelia goldoni) the younger sister of both. the film three main arcs deal with hugh failures as a nightclub crooner and and his friendship with his manager rupert (rupert crosse) while benny perambulations in an about manhattan with his two no account pals while and lelia lovelife first with a white boy tony (anthony ray) and who does not realize light skinned lelia race and even after bedding her while then with stiff and proper davey (davey jones) and who may be a misogynist. in the first arc and nothing much happens and except dark skinned hugh gets to pontificate on how degraded he feels to be singing in low class nightclubs and and opening shows for girly acts. he dreams of making it big in new york and or even paris and but one can tell he is the type of man who will continue deluding himself of his meager skill and for the one time we actually get to hear him sing and he shows he a marginal talent and at best. that rupert keeps encouraging him gives us glimpses into how destructive friendships work. but and this is the least important of the three arcs. while this film is better overall than and say and martin scorsese first film and a decade later and who that knocking at my door. another tale of failed romance and frustrated new yorkers and it has none of the brilliant moments acting wise nor cinematographically that that film has. it also is not naturalistic and for naturalism in art is a very difficult thing to achieve and especially in film and although the 1950s era manhattan exteriors and at ground level and is a gem to relive. while shadows may and indeed and be an important film in regards to the history of the independent film circuit and it certainly is nowhere near a great film. parts of it are preachy and poorly acted and scenes end willy nilly and almost like blackout sketches and and sometimes are cut off seemingly in the middle. all in all it a very sloppy job especially the atrocious jazz score that is often out of synch with the rest of the film and as cassavetes proved that as a director and at least in his first film and he was a good actor. the only reason for anyone to see shadows is because cassavetes ultimately got better with later films and and this gives a clue as to his later working style. the national film registry has rightly declared this film worthy of preservation as culturally significant. this is all in keeping with the credo of art cassavetes long championed and as typified by this quote represent i have never seen an exploding helicopter. i have never seen anybody go and blow somebody head off. so why should i make films about them. but i have seen people destroy themselves in the smallest way. i have seen people withdraw. i have seen people hide behind political ideas and behind dope and behind the sexual revolution and behind fascism and behind hypocrisy and and i have myself done all these things. so i can understand them. what we are saying is so gentle. it gentleness. we have problems and terrible problems and but our problems are human problems. that this film is culturally significant is true and but that truth is not synonymous with its being artistically significant. it is in the difference between these two definitions where great art truly thrives. ---------------------------------Answer Question Below----------------------------------

Judge the movie review above, you need to make a function call:
    If you feel the movie review is positive
        print "This is a semantically positive review."
    Otherwise, if you feel the movie review is negative
        print "This is a semantically negative review."
