Condo Painting (2000)
John McNaughton's spotlight on George Condo and his art. The film, which follows the progress of Condo's large-scale oil painting Big Red over the course of one year, features an appearance by Allen Ginsberg, as well as footage of Condo collaborating with William S. Burroughs on paintings the two made together at Burroughs' Kansas home in the mid-1990s.
Watch Trailer
Free Trial Channels
Cast
Similar titles
Reviews
What a waste of my time!!!
Good start, but then it gets ruined
Boring
This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.
George Condo is a modern master of antipodal psychedelia .Often misunderstood by the mainstream surface dweller crowd unschooled in the finer aspects of cosmic consciousness.In this film you will be bedazzled by george's interpetations of what lies just below the surface of human consciousness.Jewel encrusted antipodol beings from dimensions uncharted by western pseudo-science.A must see for those interested in furthering one's own understanding of the transcendental aspects of psychedelic art.At first I had no idea of what to expect a film about a guy painting condminiums,not my idea of a good time.I was actually instore for quite a surprise a psychedelic master I had never had the oppuortunity to gaze upon.Vibrant textures and special appearances by some of New York City's beat generation top this documentary off.
This movie should make Republican Art-funders ecstatic. A portrait of a genuinely untalented and anti-intellectual non-artist, blathering uninteresting, untrue, and banal platitudes about how "Art" is created, and what "Art" IS. All the while, we are treated to HIS "art": gluing pictures of the Beverly Hillbillies and Ben Cartwright onto the Old masters; painting giant cartoon pictures on canvases, that would be better represented in finger-paint and grade-school tempera on butcher paper by more talented preschoolers. And all the time condescendingly lecturing the filmmaker and his art theater audience about "how a painting must come together on the palette before it will ever come together on the canvas"... and other pseudo-intellectual hogwash. The painter himself is an unbelievable no-talent, and nobody should care what his opinions are. He has no validity as an artist, and will make the Republicans in Congress thrilled that they have a new artistic fraud to trumpet, to replace "Piss Christ". The artist should certainly never receive any subsequent art grants, and one hopes that the filmmaker should be likewise ignored, ridiculed, and reviled. Just more "postmodern", glib new wave posturing, by non-artists, who wish to advertise their own lack of vision and lack of artistic talent. To be ignored.