There's a reason Hollywood hates to work with kids or animals: they can rarely act. In this case, the kid, the main driver of the plot and the motivation for our heroine to get involved, sucks so hard that he could suck a golf ball through a garden hose. He ruins every single scene he's in. Every. Single. Scene. He's so annoying, that it's a real effort to sit through the movie.
I think Cassavetes painted himself into a corner: he wanted a moll (played by the wonderful Gena Rowlands, his wife) to take on the mob and he wanted a noble motive for that to happen (maternal instincts). Problem is, that meant taking care of a kid for the entire running time of your movie. With the right child actor, it could have worked (see Leon, the Professional). But not here. It's cringe worthy to see the kid try to follow the director's instructions (and fail, spectacularly).
On the plus side, when the kid is not involved (or is pushed to the background), you get some good scenes (these are quite rare). Also, 80s New York is amazing looking: no extras here, only regular New Yorkers. You could almost touch the grime that's covering everything.
Oh my, oh my, what could have been ...
I think Cassavetes painted himself into a corner: he wanted a moll (played by the wonderful Gena Rowlands, his wife) to take on the mob and he wanted a noble motive for that to happen (maternal instincts). Problem is, that meant taking care of a kid for the entire running time of your movie. With the right child actor, it could have worked (see Leon, the Professional). But not here. It's cringe worthy to see the kid try to follow the director's instructions (and fail, spectacularly).
On the plus side, when the kid is not involved (or is pushed to the background), you get some good scenes (these are quite rare). Also, 80s New York is amazing looking: no extras here, only regular New Yorkers. You could almost touch the grime that's covering everything.
Oh my, oh my, what could have been ...