Banksy C/D

why becuase its intresting

what a promotional tool for a fucking tool this is. destroy.

Sicinski:

http://academichack.net/reviewsMay2010.htm#Exit

he is SUCH a douche, could not get through first par

it's really not good enough to say 'i have studied art history therefore i'm right'

that's not what he said, but I can see how a douche could think so

that's exactly what he said, though i can see that getting through this long patch of heavy-handed sarcasm would be a chore:

It seems that my academic background in art history and visual culture has resulted in my inability to "properly" enjoy certain art-centered documentaries aimed at more mainstream audiences, my specialized knowledge placing my reactions outside the mainstream of both popular and critical reception. I, being the naive nerdboy that I am, truly believed down to the very bottom of my pocket protector that my unique perspective on pictures like My Kid Could Paint That or Sketches of Frank Gehry might prove valuable, rather than nitpicky and uselessly outlying. But we scholarly types are famous for living in a haze of blinkered privilege, oblivious to just how feckless we really are to those around us. Sadly, though, if there's anything that characterizes academics even more than total irrelevance in the Real World of hot-dog and popcorn consumption, it's our tragic inability to change. You don't just spend 10+ years shinnying up an ivory tower, forgetting how to think like a regular feller, and then go back to breezy watercooler chat as the need presents itself. That'd be like trying to forget how to tie your shoes. Except, having your shoes tied is very helpful, so it's kind of the other way around. So anyway, you have been warned. This review finds fault with the Banksy film on the basis of my own specialized knowledge of the visual arts. We're both just going to have to deal with it.

well, you can deal with it, i'm audi-five.

mebbe u shd address what he actually said abt the topic, but hey it's enrique

Make no mistake: this is not just a quibble, or asking Exit to be a different film that it is.
uhm yes it is

second para is "the filmmaker doesn't come off as a cool person ergo this is not a good film", third is "i want a different film"

the 'film' is such fucking fucking shit. who CARES if it's a hoax?

If Guetta really is a bad artist, don't his friends have some responsibility to, I dunno, offer him critique, or tell him he's not ready to do this huge show, or intervene in some way?

yeah coz telling artists/FILM BLOGGERS AHAHA DO YOU SEE WHERE THIS IS GOING? they suck always makes them stop

it's kind of sweet, actually, that he's disappointed in Banksy, that this is not an examination of the history of street art.

as for this moral 'responsibility' -- this is just typical academic hack po-facedness; there isn't a moral case against bad art and stupid art consumers

MBW is happy and hecka paid, and i guess so are his stupid patrons

do u only use film in regard to celluloid or what the fuck morbz

gonna have to see this now as my sis gave me teh banksy book for xmas, it's p strangle-worthy but i had a good lol at some bits.

Only a complete killjoy like Morbs wouldn't have found this movie at least a little amusing. MBW at the very least struck me as a completely charming character.

I'd rather watch a movie about him than the dry as fuck definitive street art doc that academic hack seems to think Banksy should have made. I guess that's cuz I didn't go to fine art school for a decade and a half though.

I did cringe when Rhys Ifans described street art as "the most important underground movement since punk," but there really wasn't a whole lot of that kind of thing.

I wanted to take two bricks and bring them together very rapidly around Thierry Dingbat's head.

A film that meant to be entertaining would have, say, provided a clear shot of the Disneyland "piece." (was it Mickey Mouse in a Guantanamo jumpsuit? too far away and facing 3/4 downstage)

To each their own, I guess. I found him an extremely engaging subject.

But you're right failing to give a clear shot of that "piece" totally undermined the entire entertainment value of the film. Once they looked back at that footage and realized its wants they should have just packed the whole thing in.

any reason would have been a good one.

If the film is legit, why isn't Brainwash suing? it calls him a retard.

You should totally ask him that question.

Also the film is clearly "legit". The only question is if Thierry is in on the joke. If he is, he's possible the greatest actor this side of Marlon Brando (</CATFISH>) and if he's not, well he's even more clueless than the film makes it out to be.

I'm not entirely clear what grounds he'd have to sue anyway.

he would have had to have signed a release etc, he can't sue: this is all crocodile-tears stuff

i never used to feel this way but i'm now pretty certain that i will love virtually anything morbs hates

Well not the Phillies.

true, true

howbout Bono?

Everyone hates Bono.

see all we have to do is find common ground.

someone calling you a retard is not grounds for a lawsuit when you are a public figure.

but that doesn't stop people from initiating em. (esp if they are as dumb as this guy appears to be if he's not acting)

and really, his "art" is not THAT much worse than some of the shit in that big Banksy show in the first half of the film. Just less clever.

"and really, his "art" is not THAT much worse than some of the shit in that big Banksy show in the first half of the film. Just less clever."

Wow ya think? Might that not be part of the joke? Nah.

^^^ exactly

lol

tbf clever is p much the whole deal when it comes to banksy

which is why that entire sphere of the art scene shd be nuked

i don't disagree. this is what gr8080 means about the film appealing to bansky fans and haters alike.

I only saw his disneyland guantanamo prisoner stunt. I hadn't heard about him for a while.
― Steve Shasta (Steve Shasta), Tuesday, September 19, 2006 12:08 PM (4 years ago)

haha, was i wrong on this.

i don't disagree. this is what gr8080 means about the film appealing to bansky fans and haters alike.

― moholy-nagl (history mayne), Thursday, December 30, 2010 9:35 AM (35 seconds ago)

meh, that's like saying Heavy Metal Parking Lot appeals to both Judas Priest fans and haters alike, kinda missing the point very widely imho.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260720844294&ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT#ht_500wt_1128

If you win this auction I will mail you a piece of paper revealing the true identity of "Banksy".

I have uncovered his identity by matching up the prices of his sold pieces to corresponding tax records. I will reveal no more details.

The winner of this auction is the only person I will ever share this information with. The piece of paper will say his name, nothing more.

I give you 100% assurance that it is most certainly the full name of the street artist known as "Banksy".

Ebay previously ended this auction because I was selling something that was not "tangible".
It is now tangible.

hahaha perfect

100% assurance

liked this movie

the final interviews felt pretty wink-wink nudge-nudge to me that MBW was fake

like Fairey's comment that "Warhol took pop icons and repeated them until they were meaningless ... and then he became an icon ... so Mr. Brainwash repeated his themes until they REALLY were meaningless"

even the name Mr Brainwash is a big "do you see" on the gullible art world

I mean obviously he's a real guy, seems to me he came to Banksy and Fairey with all this footage and they said "hey we're gonna set you up to play this role in real life and that's how we'll finish the movie"

or something

I really want to see Life Remote Control.

^This

this movie was amusing but it got really boring when it became about another la dude w/ bad ideas

Getting at the truth of 'Exit Through the Gift Shop'

Saw Banksy working tonight a block away from my house. He has a beard now. Will take pix of the piece in the morning.