Pollock (2000)
Do you have to be unstable to be a great artist?
Presentation:
Another film about an artist dealing with mental instability. Jackson Pollock is a painter with a very unique style, though the film focuses on dramatic aspects to give us the same cliché presentation. Ed Harris directs and stars in his own film and bears believable resemblance to the painter, but he also commits the same mistakes of focusing on the artist’s torment to convince audiences of genius, rather than through their work or method.
Conclusion:
A pretty lukewarm presentation that is a heavy drama at its core. It’s a bit quiet and subdued, with not many exciting elements to keep the audiences invested in the story. For someone that isn’t particularly universally known, there should have been more emphasis on character development so we can build a connection with the protagonist. Unfortunately, I finished the film feeling the same was as I do about Pollock’s art, ambivalent and esoteric. I felt bored and I might have rolled my eyes. But for the artists watching, perhaps you can revel in what seems to be a universal anguish that every Hollywood artist seems to share.
Recommendations
Can a painting be famous enough for an entire movie?