Roman Sampson One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

Ezmae Chang This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Payno I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

bandw The story opens in the middle of a situation that, without context, makes for total confusion. We are introduced to Robert Harmon (John Cassavetes) and a gaggle of young women. Harmon is supposedly a writer who specializes in sexually-themed novels and is currently gathering data on urban night life. Odd that throughout the movie we never see Harmon writing. The first part of the movie is constructed from disconnected scenes. Sarah Lawson (Gena Rolands) is in a scene that is a divorce hearing trying to settle on parental rights. Sarah says she spends most of her time going to funerals and attending the sick. We never see her doing any of the things that she claims occupy her.The first half of the movie gets into understanding Robert and Sarah a little. The movie is half over before we know if there is any connection between Robert and Sarah. What was established in the first half was that Robert is a heavy drinker and a philandering ass. Sarah is seen as not playing with a full deck and at one point tells her ex-husband the she thinks she is almost not crazy. The movie takes a different turn when a woman shows up at Robert's door with an eight-year-old boy and tells him the boy is his son, and would he take care of him for a weekend. Just to indicate how far from how any real person would react, Robert's reaction to this appearance of his son, whom he has not seen since the kid's birth, is along the lines of "Sure, come on in." Some interest is developed in seeing how a wastrel like Robert reacts to having his son on board. He does boot out the young prostitutes from his house, but then encourages the kid to drink a beer and takes him to Las Vegas.After a trip to Europe where Sarah carries around a train car full of luggage, and has a stereotypical argument with a Frenchman who doesn't speak English, she returns to the U.S. and winds up at Robert's house where we finally learn that Robert and Sarah are siblings. Once Sarah and Robert are together the movie gradually abandons any attempt to stay on this side of reality and ultimately zooms off into the ozone. The signature scene that has Sarah bringing a menagerie of animals to Robert's house in a taxi (including a couple of horses, a goat, a duck, a parrot, and some chickens) struck me as just absurd. I suppose it was meant to be humorous, but it fell flat for me.Almost every scene struck me as lasting too long. What was to be gained by seeing Robert stagger drunkenly down a hotel hallway for about a minute? The aggregation of the overly long scenes makes for an overly long movie.There are some interesting scene compositions and lighting techniques and that is why I give this more than one star.This is my third Cassavetes movie and I think it will be my last. He is on a different wavelength from me.

ewillhark After "Faces", the Cassavetes' experiment that created a revolution of form (cinema verite used for fictional narrative when this was absolutely 'unacceptable' in Hollywood), "Love Streams" gets my vote for his very best work, and one of his two or three true masterpieces. Both John and Gena give the performances of their lives, using their history with each other to create a natural intimacy as brother and sister that is second to none. John also knew he was dying and gave everything left of himself for the camera, and as filmmaker. The project was developed from a play and performed many times in front of audiences with Jon Voight in the lead: another experiment that delivered a unique depth to the material; and after seeing both the play and the movie, I'd say John taking over for Jon was an inspired decision by both of them. When the movie came out, it only played about a week (to comply with a contract with Cannon) before being shelved, not even put out on the art theater or revival circuit. I actually worked at Cannon, where rumor had it that Golem was punishing John for not cutting even a minute out of the long movie. Imagine cutting a masterpiece for just a few more screenings! "Love Streams" should eventually find its way to the recognition that it is one of American cinema's greatest achievements.

acmebooks having seen and studied all of cassavete's films repeatedly i must say this is my favorite and one of his very best. there is such a wonderful array of emotions going on here and complex character development. we have his amazing camera, the stunning long takes of faces smiling staring really in the moment like no other acting i have ever seen on the big screen. each series of decisions by the protagonists gets us further involved in their struggles and triumphs. this film is very challenging for first time cassavetes' viewers, but well worth returning to year after year. cinema just doesn't get this good. if you like to think and want something really unique and special check this out.

stickler-2 This is a late great work of a master director. It is one of the most original films I have ever seen, though Cassavetes work was mostly improvised and so always had a spontaneous and creative feel. Love Streams is so good because it is the work of a highly creative mind at the height of his talents. It is haunting in its depiction of an unusual brother and sister and their love for each other and for family (in the case of the sister played by the great Gena Rowlands in a beautiful, though at times scary, performance.) More than anything it is a study of the meaning of love itself. The look of the film and the editing alone make this one worth watching.