This
film is a lot different than the ones we have seen so far. This film was set up
more like a movie than a documentary. Instead of visiting the paintings, using
dramatic elements, and one person explaining all the details, this film used
media and interviews to compare the artists. The five best ways that Glimcher
delivered information were film clips, personal interviews, comparisons of each
artist, the paintings themselves, and work by other artists. The most effective
was (1) personal interviews, (2) film clips, (3) comparisons of each artist,
(4) the paintings themselves, and (5) work by other artists.
The “mountain
climbers” are Picasso and Braque. A man named Guillame Apollinaire introduced
them. These two artists worked together, rather than against one another. They
never worked on the same painting; rather they used each other’s criticisms and
ideas to finish their own. This is different than any other story we’ve heard because
the films are usually putting two artists against each other instead of
together. The films about Da Vinci and Michelangelo and David and Goya were
about how different each was and the competition between the two. Picasso and
Braque were paired together as a team rather than against each other as
competitors.
All of
these artists are interviewed in the film and have some sort of background in
Cubism. Some of them have been involved in cinema, like Martin Scorsese, and
others are artists themselves. Each one is successful as well. They are in the
film to give a little bit of background knowledge about Cubism and also to show
different aspects of it. Scorsese brings a unique look into the film-making
aspect and Close explains how Cubism is artificial in artwork.
Chuck
Close gave me the most insight to Cubism. He explained that he didn’t want
color to get in the way of what the objects in his paintings were representing.
He talks about the artificiality of Cubism. He says, “It is not about space,
atmosphere, or the way we see things in nature. It is consistently flat and we
are always aware that things are on a flat surface.” Emerging from this is Cubism.
The pieces of imagery that begin to form in your mind is the notion behind Cubism.
In the process of Cubism, it comes down to your experience and the art. This
insight made a lot of sense to me and it gave me a little bit of insight as to
what Cubism really is. It is more than just a bunch of random objects thrown
together. The imagery represents something more allows the art to jump off the
flat surfaces.
What is your personal opinion of Cubism? Do you like it?
What is your personal opinion of Cubism? Do you like it?
I like Cubism, I find it interesting sinc it was the first abstract art. I like the different textures, colors, the different shapes that are involved. You can definitely find more than one shape in an abstract painting, hence why its called abstract because you can combine more than one kind of shape in the painting.
ReplyDeleteAgain, your responses were great and I always enjoy reading them. I like the picture you chose because it is so colorful.
ReplyDeleteI definately agree with Jennifer. I, too like the assortment of shapes, colors, and textures that are placed in each image. I like it ecuase at one point you feel like you're viewing a bottle, but in another you may be viewing a telescope. (LOL that may not be a good comparision, but you get my drift). I love the idea of looking any many different aspects of one or many objects.
I agree with both of you in that cubism is interesting to look at and gives a lot of different meanings behind the paintings, but sometimes how disorganized they look makes me crazy. I like things to be neat and have some sort of organized purpose. This is definitely not what cubism represents. After watching the film I have a better understanding of what it is and why artists paint them, but I also have a hard time liking Cubism. Sometimes I don't like that a bunch of squares and circles are thrown together on a canvas. haha it's just a personality thing, but Cubism was one of the styles that I could just not get into.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I'm not a huge fan of cubism. I can appreciate the idea, and I do enjoy the colors and shapes. However, I'm a bit of a realist, soI'm partial to things when they look the way they "should" look. That being said, I can appreciate the uniqueness and the messiness of the artwork. I wouldn't hang a cubism piece on my wall, but I'd like to look at it on other peoples walls.
ReplyDeleteThat's exactly what I was saying in my post. I like when things are how they should be as well. Cubism is definitely a different spin on things, and I appreciate that, but for personal preference I'm not that big of a fan.
ReplyDeletePersonally I think that Cubism is alot like Communism. Sounds weird I know. But think about it.....
ReplyDeleteEach seems like an amazing idea on paper and in thought. Cubism wanted to put new dimensions into painting which is an incredible leap. Different angles and perspectives at different times. HOWEVER, neither works in practice. Communism is clearly not the answer to economic and political problems. Similarly, Cubism sounded like an awesome idea on paper yet the end product was something that boggled the mind. At times there is no way to see what is going on or what the subject is supposed to be. Personally I do not care for the end result of Cubism but I do appreciate the steps it was taking and the boundaries it was pushing.