The film opens with clips of some of Maier’s former charges, now fully grown, puzzling over how to describe her. They use words like “paradoxical”, “bold”, “mysterious”, and “eccentric”. But if there was one thing they could all agree on, it was that Vivian Maier was very, very private. Following this is Maloof’s exposition of his first contact with Maier’s work. During work on a history project in 2007 for the city of Chicago, he went searching for photographs in an auction house, where he bought one box out of a set that was filled with negatives. Although he ended up not using the photos for his book, he eventually goes through them and begins to notice a pattern of rather phenomenal shots. Having been told the box belonged to a ‘Vivian Maier’ he tried looking her up and found nothing. Then, as the documentary shows with rather typical screenshots of a computer screen, he uploads some photos to Flickr and the work takes off. Before he knows it, he has a mystery to solve. Who could have taken so many photos and then just left them in a box unprinted?

Alternating between interviews with the parents and children who interacted with Maier and shots of her photographs, the documentary begins to explore the puzzle she left behind. Maloof finds his way to a storage unit that is practically overflowing with boxes filled with anything you could imagine. People said she kept everything—and they meant it. Newspapers, clothes, undeveloped film, uncashed income checks, even teeth! Maier was a pack rat, who it seems felt she had to keep everything and take it with her too. Families that hired Maier all described a similar situation; she would arrive with stacks of boxes that could fill a room. Another consistent memory from her charge is that she always had a camera around her neck, and she was always taking pictures. Despite taking hundreds of thousands of photos, nobody ever saw them. All the evidence seems to point to a very secretive woman who would not have wanted anyone to see her work. But then why take so many photos?

Maloof seeks to answer this question as he works to piece together her life’s story. His amateur sleuth work brings him into contact with the New York Public Records office, and he uncovers that Maier did not have much family, but the records that could be found suggest they were equally as private. The limited information that was uncovered about her family leads him to a small town in France where he comes into contact with an elderly cousin, who appears to be Maier’s only living relative. Very few people seem to know anything about Maier or remember her with any real clarity, but Maloof does his best to interview all of them in the documentary.

Maloof interviews other prominent photographers and gallery curators for an insight into the quality of Maier’s work and each of them praised her skill. They spoke of a humanity in her photography that is rarely seen. Her work displayed a sense of humor and a sense of tragedy. Maier appeared interested in what it meant to be human. Her work exemplifies the qualities of street photography. Her subjects were often individuals caught unawares or lightly posed in daily scenes of life. Maier shot in both black and white and color film. Maier seemed to revel in discreetly photographing her subjects and seems to reveal an affinity for the poor; possibly because like them, she struggled to get by. Demonstrating an awareness of politics and society, she addressed tough topics like the Watergate scandal through short films.

Audiences have the ability to see a range of different shots as Maier’s work has been interspersed throughout the documentary. The accompanying by a score of lilting, mysterious music that feels like it speaks to Maier’s character. Despite such beautiful works, the documentary highlights how she, at the time of the film’s release, had yet to be accepted by much of the art world. A number of artists became famous posthumously, yet Maloof faces push back as he tries to bring her the recognition she deserves. As a result of the way she sequestered her work the film and negatives remained incredibly well preserved. As the film ends, Maloof is still pressing on with the development of her film and spreading awareness about her talent.  

Overall, the film does a wonderful job of answering many of the questions raised concerning the secretive nature of her work. The technique of interspersing interviews with scanned works allows audiences to experience it for themselves. However, much like the circumstances around her work, Vivian Maier remains an enigma. Interviews throughout the film told conflicting stories of her character going so far as to reference abuse and neglect. Viewers are left with several questions, including, why did she never reveal her work? Why take so many pictures and preserve the work so well if you intended for them to fade into obscurity? The driving force behind this enormous body of work remains unknown. As a result, despite what the title suggests, Vivian Maier remains as stubbornly elusive in death as she was in life.

New York City sets the stage as now elderly Ushio and Noriko Shinohara reside in a dingy apartment. We are introduced to the more well-known Ushio Shinohara, who is creating an art piece in the hopes of selling it in an upcoming exhibition. His unique style of painting presents an exciting twist. Ushio puts on boxing gloves and punches paint onto the canvas from right to left. We learn that innovative styles such as action painting and his sculpture made Ushio among the best of the Japanese avant-garde. Since leaving Japan, he has found moderate success, having work shown in museums such as the MoMA and publications such as Art in America.

Energy and passion are very important to Ushio’s work. Instead of using a brush for calculated movement, he punches paint onto the canvas to fly freely where it will. He names an exhibition “ROAR!” because that is how he views his art. Loud and full of energy. He says “Art is a demon that drags you along. It’s not something that you can stop even if you should.” His desire to portray things as explosive and in-your-face makes his works much more riveting. However, having an unconventional style meant that often Ushio’s work went underappreciated. The Shinoharas experienced fame, but this did not translate to a lot of money.

The relationship between the two is very loving, but their poverty undeniably puts a strain on it. Even within the first few minutes, we see signs of unease between the two. They are constantly bickering, which seems to be consistent throughout their 40-year marriage. A fact that led to the creation of Cutie, a cartoon character created by Noriko. Cutie is representative of Noriko herself and is accompanied by her husband “Bullie” who represents Ushio. Noriko uses Cutie as a type of catharsis, a creative outlet to express frustration about her husband and her life in a new country.

Cutie reveals nearly everything about the couple’s past. From the first moment a 19-year-old Noriko met middle-aged Ushio, to the Ushio’s crippling alcoholism that nearly tore their family apart. The highs of being featured in galleries, and the lows of becoming poor and questioning pursuing art. Through all the good and bad though, the art demon drags the couple along and they continue to move forward.

Perhaps this documentary has two boxers to offer because even in her old age, Noriko has to fight to prove that she is an artist. Getting pregnant with her son forced Noriko to temporarily give up her art. This combined with the fact that she often forgoes her work to help assist Ushio, leads him to view his wife as an assistant and “the average one.” Throughout the documentary we see Noriko making creative efforts, completely independent of her husband. She even goes out of her way to provide her best work to an exhibitor interested in Ushio’s work. Noriko, though, comes out of this fight a winner as she is included in her husband’s art exhibit. Going so far as to alter the title according to her artistic vision. She is self-empowered and confident and uncompromising. You love to see it.

The final exhibition featuring both Ushio and Noriko perfectly shows two sides of the same coin. Ushio expresses passion in his work with the energy that he pours in, while Noriko does the same but with compassion and love. Throughout the documentary, we get to see how “love is a roar.”

Overall, I would highly recommend watching this documentary. Because of the themes and execution, Cutie and the Boxer would make an interesting watch even for those with no prior interest in art. It provides a very sincere look at the lives of these two artists, never shying away from the negative aspects of their lives. One of the most beautiful things about the documentary is that it shows how the Shinohara’s immigrant story was wrapped up in their art. As well as displaying how these artists were able to manifest the American dream for themselves through art.

At the beginning of the film, Margaret is seen leaving her first husband and heading straight for San Francisco bringing only a few suitcases and her daughter with her. She then meets Walter Keane at a street fair where she is doing portraits of people on request. Walter is a few stands down sweet-talking two ladies into buying artwork. He then approaches Margaret and flatters her into going on a date with him. The two eventually get married and both become Keanes. At the time, neither artist is successfully selling their artwork. Margaret paints young children with disproportionally large eyes and Walter is known for artwork scenes of Italian streets as he claims to have lived in Italy for a while. Walter and Margaret’s personalities are very different. Walter is a big talker and con man while Margaret takes pride in her work and feels connected to each painting. Multiple times throughout the movie, she states how artwork is a personal and emotional matter. Walter convinces the owner of a club to allow the Keanes to hang their artwork on the walls. Much more interest is expressed in the big eyes than Walter’s street artwork. When someone notices a big-eyed painting, Walter happens to be nearby. He then jumps in and offers to sell the artwork claiming that it is his. Once Margaret’s work rises in popularity, Walter continues to take credit and convinces Margaret that the work will not sell if he says it’s hers solely because she’s a “lady painter.” Because Margaret is not a fighter and enjoys seeing her work being appreciated, she agrees to go along with the fraud although she is not happy about it. Walter becomes very famous and wealthy by selling Margaret’s work. He opens his own gallery, goes on TV, sells her work as copies in supermarkets, and makes his way into big events. When an interview was scheduled with Walter to discuss is motive for the work, he quickly realizes that he needs to fabricate a back story. He claims that he spent time in Europe after the war and was heartbroken by all of the orphans on the street. He also says that orphans of the world are his inspiration for the paintings. In the meantime, Margaret has been working so hard creating the art that has led to their wealth while hiding her accomplishments from her daughter, friends, and the world unable to enjoy her fame. Margaret eventually finds the power to leave Walter after she realizes that she is not the first person he has done this too. The Italian streets that he claimed were his were done by a different artist. Walter then gets filled with rage, and alcohol, one night and tries to harm Margaret and her daughter. This is where Margaret draws the line, moves to Hawaii, continues to paint, and eventually tells the truth about Walter to a local radio host. She then takes Walter to court and wins the acknowledgment for all of her artwork of the past and future after the judge holds a “paint off.”

Big Eyes has a few underlying themes that were appreciated by the audience. The film has a feminist theme as Margaret fights against being overpowered and dominated by the men in her life. At first, she felt so undermined and didn’t know how to be independent and think on her own. Eventually, she realizes how much she enabled this and fights against both marriages, which was not common in this time, and move to a completely different state fighting for what she feels is right. The film also questions the significance of art, fame, and popularity. It showed how art is only considered “good” if it is craved by the public. Although Big Eyes is not one of Burton’s most famous films and doesn’t follow his traditional themes, the film was well done. It’s a very emotional and personal look into Margaret Keane’s life and all that she faced along the way before her, quite literal, claim to fame.

Margaret draws and paints kids, such as her daughter, as well as adults and animals on canvases, the figures have regular sized bodies, yet big, abnormal sized eyes, which is what makes her paintings so different and unique compared to others. Just like many artists, every drawing and painting that Margaret makes has a story behind what is going on when you look at it. In the film, when the camera shows Margaret painting, they show all the little detail that she puts into her paintings and drawings that make them look so visually realistic and very nice to look at in my opinion. As you see her paintings in the movie, you see how she puts so much detail into the background of her artwork. She blends certain colors of paint so she can get the right color she needs for the painting she is working on. You can visually see very detailed figures such as creases in their skin, along with most of her paintings having a very serious face, almost as if the child and or adult is angry or going through something personal or tragic. Walter takes credit for all his wife’s paintings and refuses to let her put her mark on her own work.

There are many artistic techniques shown in this film, such as the detail and shadowing in Margarets paintings. The detail in the skin  and the outfits of the children and adult figures are wearing in each painting, along with the animals that Margaret paints next to the kids in some of her paintings where the dogs even look sad because their faces are straight with no emotion or expression. When Margaret paints her children with big eyes, it is clear that each child looks different, each has a different appearance and the children are a mixture between boys and girls. Some have long hair, some have short hair, but two of the things that the children have in common are how serious they are, and their posture is straight and firm. Although, the movie was well produced and directed, credit should be given where it is due. For example, Margaret paints every painting that Walter decides to sell or give away. During these actions, the people he would talk to about the paintings would tell him that they were very nice and he would take full credit for paintings that were not even his. Therefore, he should have given Margaret credit for her paintings that he is selling and giving away.

A few things that I really enjoyed about this film were how the audience could visually see how passionate Margaret was about her paintings. The audience could tell that if she was credited, she could have been famous for her artwork, which technically she was because she painted the paintings, but everyone knew them as her husband Walter’s works. Margaret was passionate about her painting and liked the way she did what she loved because when Walter would suggest a new style to her, she would brush it off and continue to do the style she was comfortable and familiar with. Now, when it comes to aspects of the movie that I did not like, that would include, Walter not giving Margaret any credit for all the hard work that she put into the paintings that she would spend months working on. Along with not realizing how passionate she was about painting. He would sell or donate her paintings, like they were nothing at all just to make money from them. He sold one of her paintings that he claimed as his own and got a $5,000 check for one of the paintings that Margaret had painted. While watching this film, I did not agree at all with the fact of Margaret not getting any credit due to her for everything she had worked hard for. Everyone deserves credit for their work that they had created. Walter should have given Margaret credit for the paintings he would ask her to make for him to sell and give away, but he did not. He would tell everyone that he is the one who painted everything he sold and gave away.

In the end, Walter never accepted the facts. He went on for the rest of his life insisting he was the true artist of the big eyes paintings and the other paintings that Margaret had made. He said that he only took credit for the paintings because he needed money and Margaret’s paintings sold for a lot so he would sell them without her consent. He kept the money for himself but later on, gave the money to Margaret because it was supposed to be hers for the paintings she made for him, after she had filed for a divorce from him. Walter passed away in 2000, angry, homeless and broke because he did not want to be honest with the people he was lying to his whole life. He never made another painting after that. After Walter passed away, Margaret found happiness within herself  and remarries. After living in Hawaii for many years, she decided to move back to San Francisco where she previously lived and decided to open a new art gallery. To this day, she still has the passion to paint every single day despite what she went through with Walter.

I feel as though in some ways, Margaret is a role model to young artists. I say that because even though she went through a lot in her marriage, with her husband taking all the credit for the work she would spend countless hours and months working on, she never found the need to give up or stop standing up for what she had a passion for. She proved her point after so long that she was the one telling the truth and that she was the one behind all these paintings that Walter was taking the credit for, selling and donating. I feel as though most artists back then would not have stood up for painting the way Margaret did, and for that a lot of people should look up to her if they don’t already. The movie made me feel this way because I feel as though most artists back then would have let people criticize and take credit for their work then give them credit for what they had created with their talent. As shown in this film, Margaret chooses to stand up for herself and bring Walter to court because he refuses to give her credit for the beautiful paintings she has made and to divorce him because he was a drunk and physical with her. There is a scene in the film when Margaret is in her painting room and Walter walks in and sees that she is painting in a completely different style. He asks her why she decided to change it up and she tells him she wants to try something different. In this scene if you watch Margaret’s hands carefully while she is painting, you can see how she uses this brush strokes to make the outline of the faces.

Ushio and Noriko met when Noriko was visiting New York from Japan to study art. Ushio was 41 and Noriko was 19. Noriko stopped chasing her dreams of art to become Ushio’s assistant. She fell in love with him instantly and didn’t think about her future with him or her future with art. A couple months later Noriko becomes pregnant with Ushio’s child making them struggle even more. With Ushio in a big spiral of alcoholism and Noriko always worrying about money their son was raised poorly and became an alcoholic himself. However, Noriko and Ushio’s love were still unbreakable. When Ushio goes to Japan to sell his sculptures at lower prices Noriko is annoyed with him because she wants him to earn more. However, when he returns from Japan Noriko come running down the stairs showing she doesn’t hold a grudge and she will always love Ushio even though she’s not happy most of the time.

Throughout the movie Noriko is faced with the challenge of helping Ushio with his work and not working on her own. She also goes through the conflict of having to take care of their baby almost by herself and cook dinner and clean while Ushio works on his artwork that doesn’t sell. Their whole time together they live paycheck to paycheck struggling on rent and utilities while trying to sell pieces to get by month by month. The unstoppable struggle of the art industry drags them down all until Ushio turns 80. After Ushio’s 80^th birthday things start going right for them. Ushio gets more exposure while his wife has a coming of age and realizes who she realizes she is after creating Cutie and Bully, a cartoonish story type painting that is about Noriko and Ushio and how Ushio is mean to her and isn’t responsible for his actions. As Noriko is coming to these realizations, she becomes more straightforward and starts getting more exposure for herself.

Ushio meets an art dealer that wants to show his work in his gallery. Ushio sets up all of his work and Noriko ends up getting her work shown in another room in the same gallery. When Ushio is looking at Noriko’s work, he admits he’s jealous and asks about Cutie and Bullie and finds out its about him and Noriko. After that Noriko tells Ushio that she works better when he is not around, and he gets offended and leaves in a storm yelling “Goodbye!”. Ushio works on a big piece in his studio called the octopus and puts a lot of effort into it. Noriko comes around and he asks Noriko what she thinks about it. She straightforwardly said it is not good and walks away. Ushio becomes determined to make this piece better coming to the realization that his wife is going to achieve his dream before he gets to. He eventually makes the piece better to show his wife he is not a bad artist and he can do works by himself. This scene especially is very inspirational because he just wants to make his wife happy and doesn’t want her to look at him like a low life lazy artist, so he tries to prove himself to her with the thought that she is better than him in the back of his head.

Getting closer to the end of the movie there are cinematic shots of Noriko and Ushio painting and working on pieces with them talking about their experience in the art industry saying how the art industry is a struggle and there is always a lingering struggle in the art industry. The Cutie and Bullie paintings in the gallery are shown with hearts drawn around the section showing how Cutie has finally learned to tame the bull meaning Noriko has finally learned how to tame Ushio. The ending really surprised me because I didn’t expect for Noriko to be unhappy the whole relationship. I also didn’t expect to be such an emotional ending, it went from Noriko and Ushio struggling with money to having their work shown in a gallery with conflicts between the couple.

The movie portrays the realistic life of the two struggling artists, with both of them living in a smaller apartment and Ushio having a drinking problem. Noriko had to give up her dreams of being an artist temporarily after getting pregnant and having to raise their young son Alex. Noriko would portray her emotions through her art at this time. She would paint dreary scenes of her life, her anger with her path and how Ushio would put drinking before his family and self-care. During this time Noriko’s works showed Ushio leaving their family behind to go out with friends and drink all through a comic strip format style of painting. She would use real-life events and depict herself and her husband in a cartoon style to tell her story and the emotions that came along with it. These become the works that Noriko gets discovered for. While showing her works to her friend, Noriko is encouraged to show her works in an exhibit. Noriko does an exhibit with her husband Ushio, where Noriko puts her private life on show for everyone. This put Noriko’s name into the artist spotlight, and she becomes well known in art circles for her work. Instead of Noriko being known as the wife to a famous artist she was able to be known as an artist herself. This is reminiscent of other artist couples such as Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera, with a young woman marrying an already established artist and eventually becoming a known artist on their own.

Another connection that can be drawn between the relationships of Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera, and Noriko and Ushio Shinohara are that the females’ works depicted emotional context, while the men portrayed little emotional context in the works. Ushio’s works had techniques that were considered revolutionary in an abstract sense. Ushio would set up a large blank canvas, put on a pair of boxing gloves, dip them in paint, and begin forcefully punching the canvas to create his works. 

Even though the film is about the relationship between Noriko and Ushio, the movie takes place mostly through the perspective of Noriko. This allows us to know the perspective of Noriko and her feelings while driving the plot forward. The movie uses her artworks as a way to move the story along and provide some emotional contexts to the scenes. This allowed those watching the movie to interpret the emotional context more easily without having to make the characters cartoonish in their exaggerations of emotion. The film does a good job of portraying the struggles that occur in the lives of artists. But also, the struggles that occur in the life of an everyday person. Despite these artists being well known, and their emotional struggles were well documented through their art, the story can still be related to many people today. Those struggling in their relationships, and those struggling to make a career out of something they love can look up to stories like these. Despite the couple having issues with alcoholism and living in poverty, the couple was able to look past their problems and work on them together, creating a strong relationship and working through all their issues. Noriko was able to learn to deal with Ushio’s drinking and eventually Ushio had to stop altogether (Which was a blessing to Noriko) The film also shows the struggles of doing what one loves despite the hardships that occur. Noriko always dreamed of being an artist and despite poverty and having to put her career on hold, Noriko was able to make it as an artist and became famous for what she does. This movie overall is a great movie with many life lessons to teach while also telling the life story of artists not known to the general population. I would recommend this movie to all people who are willing to experience something new and have an interest in art. I believe that the director did a great job directing the movie and telling the story accurately of Cutie and the Boxer while adding a flair that would inspire even Noriko Shinohara.

The documentary follows Basquiat’s history and development with his art and also touches on some important events and artists for the entire history of art. For example, the documentary starts off with the beginning of Basquiat’s journey, where he would spray paint around New York City with another artist as a duo called SAMO. While other spray paint artists would simply tag their names, SAMO would spray paint their name with a different message each time to express their thoughts and feelings about things such as culture and politics in the world. Even in the early stages of Basquiat’s career, it is obvious that he was searching for things that went against the grain of the current art culture. Basquiat, unlike all of the other spray paint artists, wanted to send a message to the people viewing his work, rather than just tag his name to claim that he was there. It is because of this that Basquiat and SAMO became well known locally and beyond. Basquiat, with no money, came up in the art world using whichever materials he could scavenge from the streets of New York City. This is yet another way that Basquiat made himself stand out. By using random objects and materials that he found on the streets, he was able to express himself even more. This also showed his true passion for the art of creation and imagination, rather than simply applying paint to canvas.

A decent portion of the documentary was dedicated to showing the influence that other earlier famous artists had on Basquiat’s work. The documentary shows Basquiat’s paintings next to paintings of earlier artists, such as Picasso, and they talk about how Basquiat drew from these earlier paintings for inspiration. Basquiat was inspired by these paintings, and would only use them as a reference, then let the idea flow through his mind, where he would then modify it and make it his own version of the painting by recreating it. Some early artists that were mentioned in the documentary that influenced Basquiat’s work include Pollock and Picasso. Both very famous household names and inspirational early artists for modern art.

Basquiat was also very inspired by his own life and surroundings. Once, as a young boy, Basquiat was involved in a car accident. His mother gave him an anatomy book to fill his time and pique his curiosity. This anatomy book, and the car accident itself, were evidently influential to Basquiat. Some paintings show cars crashing and some paintings, including his most famous works of art, include abstract paintings of skulls, faces, and heads that resemble the diagrams in the anatomy book that his mother gave him. Basquiat’s history also includes comic books and cartoon drawings. As a young kid in New York City, Basquiat was drawn to the world of cartoons and wanted to be a cartoonist when he grew up. This influence is extremely evident in his artwork. At first glance, the first thing many people think of when they see Basquiat’s artwork is that it is in fact cartoon-like, with scribbles and abstract figures that would not be considered realistic looking in any way. This child-like appeal is what I think Basquiat was going for though. While other artists focus on making realistic paintings of the world, Basquiat had a plan to stick with simplicity and let his mind wander as he creates each piece of artwork. He often writes letters, randomly placed and spaced out, which may or may not have a real meaning. Only Basquiat himself would know what he was trying to convey.

The documentary conveyed a similar feeling that Basquiat’s work does, with the jazz and early hip-hop vibes and music to accompany visuals and the filming and editing style that suits a Basquiat documentary perfectly. The documentary does a great job of taking the viewer through a journey of Basquiat’s life from start to finish and covering all of the key details that make Basquiat who he is.

We are introduced to the main character Hal in his normal pre-king state, hungover laying in his bed being woken by friend and companion John Falstaff. His father summons Hal, and while there informs him that his brother Thomas of Lancaster would inherit the throne instead of him and that he was to go to battle the next day, against the Hotspur rebellion. This battle is interrupted by Hal who wins a duel against its leader Sir Henry Percy ending the battle before it begins. This angers Thomas, as his glory was stolen by his eldest brother and prepares to seek glory in whales, where he is killed in combat. It is with this death that Hal is once again summoned to his dying fathers’ bedside where his father’s last words reinstate him as inheritor to the throne, and it is with this Hal’s transformation truly begins.

Henry is now officially crowned giving him the title of king, and the throne of England. At his coronation celebrations, the Dauphin of France sends a play ball, sent originally as an insult to his reign Henry takes it as a reminder of his life before kingship. This, however, is only the beginning as later in the movie, Henry confronts an assassin sent by King Charles VI of France. This would be followed by a swift declaration of war by King Henry and the rest of the movie is there off about the conflict between the two nations. The movie’s conclusion begins at the battle of Agincourt with a decisive English victory, the Dauphin of France killed, and John Falstaff found dead in the mud. Charles VI of France would eventually surrender to Henry, granting him lands and his daughter Catherine’s hand in marriage. The movie ends with Henry discovering the falsehoods of the past actions taken by the French and is seen holding Catherine’s hands while people cheer “King Henry” to celebrate his victory over the French.

I fervently enjoy the coronation ceremony dinner as we see the now King Henry being bestowed with gifts from other leaders from foreign countries, such as the king of Bohemia giving him a chalice, the serene doge of Venice giving him a mechanical bird from Constantinople, and the Dauphin of France. In this scene, Henry gifts all the presents to family members giving the chalice to his sister, queen of Denmark, and giving the bird to his Cousin, except for the ball from France that he keeps. I enjoy this scene because it is the last time, we see the old Henry before the pressures of kingship and war consume him forever. However, the importance of this scene is both the set design and the clothing worn by the actors. The set design of this scene is very basic in its design in the middle of the room is a table filled with chests and gifts. Flanking it are tables full of nobles, the clergy, advisors, and King Henry. Hanging from the walls are canvases bearing the crest and shield of England, and some historical drawings of past crowning’s of English kings, as well as Saints, and preachers most likely famous in ancient English history. However, not much detail can be seen as the camera does not stay in place long enough and the set is too dimly lit for any major details to be made out, almost as if the paintings are to serve to add to the aesthetic of the scene and make it more historically legitimate. Secondly, the dress even though more fancy is quite plain and simple with it being mainly long flowing robes in simple dark colors. This style of clothing, while simple shows nobility as it has a more vibrant color than traditional shades of brown that is common among the peasantry of medieval cities, and towns. This shows more historical accuracy as during those times bright vibrant colors were not cheap so the poor peasantry and even some of the less wealthy nobility could ill afford brightly colored dress and clothing.

The musket was introduced into European battlefields until the 1500s but before that battles were fought with shields, swords, and battle armor with the last two being important to militaries to function. However, as known now, swords and armor were a type of artform for blacksmiths and weaponsmiths. As each took time to make, and are vitally affected by the skills, and technique of the smith in question. During the movie, we see collectors after the battles picking up swords from fallen soldiers indicating a value associated with the weapons. This would also include armor and even a nobleman’s garments were looted by the victorious army. This act would also be committed by local peasants who would pick whatever remains including broken swords, and damaged armor for its metal. Now while swords can be mass-produced by a set of skilled blacksmiths a true weaponized art form would be plate armor, as all plate armor was customized, and custom-fitted for the wearer. Another way plate armor was deemed art was the addition of custom emblems, crests, and other memorabilia. 

I highly recommend The King to anyone who is a huge history buff, someone who enjoys political intrigue, and a medieval time frame. But while it is true to history in some parts some factors must be considered, one being that this was adapted from a Shakespearean play, which may have had some biases into what goes into the script. Another conflict would be the addition of made-up characters such as Falstaff who was just used for comedic relief in the original play script. Another inaccuracy will come from the problem that is the genre of the movie, as it is a dramatization of real events it focuses less on the overall accuracy and more about the story arch and the plot. While this movie had some inaccuracies and was not based on true history but instead a play, I loved this film and I’ve re-watched it countless times for my own personal enjoyment.

Tamra Davis, the director, was very close to Basquiat and filmed him in his different studios during the peak of his career. These bits of footage offer the most honest view of Jean-Michel throughout the whole film. An honest, hardworking, driven artist who strived to push the boundaries of his work. The one-on-one interviews give you this glimpse into the mind of the genius. These interviews more than anything felt honest and comfortable and help the viewer start to understand the struggles and frustration of the artist. They feel very personal and helps you understand that despite being this incredible artist, he was flawed as well. Jean-Michel struggled with depression and addiction. This is evident in the interviews later in the movie where he is clearly in pain.

Another thing the film does incredibly well is pacing. The movie essentially profiles primarily his life between ages 20-27 before his death. With each introduction of a new part of his life, the filmmakers show work of his from around the same time. At the beginning you see his work is sparse and done on found materials. Once he gets money and space, he is able to paint at leisure in a real studio. The film does a great job of flashing in between showing snapshots of Jean-Michel’s life and showing the work he was producing around that time. These moments, though short, give the viewer the greatest understanding of what Basquiat was going through. The narration partnered with the images of his work helps you understand his rise to fame and how he struggled with that fame. This becomes even more important towards the end of his life. His depression and struggles with creating show in his last exhibitions. His techniques got more and more abstract and withdrawn the older he got. A really great perspective that the movie offers is the opinions and testimonies of famous art dealers and collectors. For viewers who do not understand Jean-Michel’s work from the start, these interviews help aid the viewer in understanding why Basquiat’s work is groundbreaking.  The art dealers explain in detail how Basquiat was more so than anything, emulating and paying homage to his favorite artists. He used techniques longstanding in contemporary art, focusing on pushing the boundaries of abstraction. He uses words to create messages by repeating them or crossing them out. It forces the viewer of the painting to almost find the story in the painting. Basquiat drew most of his inspirations from books, poems, and multimedia he viewed at the time.

One thing about the film I did not particularly care for was how they actually portrayed most of the art. Most of the paintings shown only appear for a few seconds at a time. Now I understand that it is a movie and there is the necessity to keep things moving, but I would have appreciated a few more in depth looks at his greatest works. Often times in the movie, the narrator would mention an extremely famous painting, the film would show it for a second and then move on. I just would have appreciated a little more focus on the paintings themselves. Despite being a biography and not an adaption like Frida, Radiant Child hits the same pitfalls. I felt the focus could have been centered closer to his artworks.

Nevertheless, Jean-Michel Basquiat: Radiant Child is an excellent film. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Tamra Davis, being a close personal friend of Basquiat’s, pays perfect homage to one of our era’s greatest painters. The film does a great job of juxtaposing his art and the way he is feeling at the time. The personal interviews and conversation with Jean-Michel really make the movie. He was a complex person but did not come off that way. Basquiat was extremely young and yet so mature. He was thrust into this worldwide fame at such a young age, and struggled with the ups and downs of this recognition. The only thing that could have really improved the movie would have been greater focus on the paintings. The film glosses over them too fast and makes them feel less significant than they really are. Radiant Child is an awesome documentary for anyone who wants to be introduced to modern art.

Art during this time period was very modern. It had a very dull color palette diversity and detached brush stokes and one lined work. The painting was supposed to uplift this inspiring abstract perspective within yourself though simplistic and unpersonalized painting. I picked up on the connection that the art didn’t make sense just like how this male dominance power trip didn’t not as well. People tended to go with what was considered normal both with art and status quo. 

At the beginning of the movie; Margaret  Keane was trying to escape her first husband with only her daughter and her paintings. Being a woman who is divorced and with a child was not a good look so she needed a solution quickly if she wanted to survive. Shortly after she met Walter Keane. Walter is a businessman who can sell anything down to a simple black pen like a wolf on wall street. Jordan Belfort was a motivational speaker and former stockbroker who plead guilty to fraud and related crimes in connection with stock-market manipulation and running a boiler room as part of a penny-stock scam. He sold people lies in broken promises just to build himself an empire just how like Walter sold himself to Margaret as a reliable honest man who wanted nothing but just to showcase his wife`s underestimated works. Walter fooled the masses, the press, and even himself. 

Margaret’s artwork was unique. Her artwork had a woman’s touch; it was vulnerable and had a personal connection and attachment because it was based on a unified daughter and mother relationship.  This is why her artwork was so loved because it has a sense of realism and a legible aesthetic of emotion and reason. The big eyes were inspired by her childhood experience of temporary deafness when she had to rely on sight to understand and communicate. In the movie, you can see that Walter couldn’t explain the actual context of the artwork because he had no actual connection to people and love. His whole life was a facade, from his intentions with Margaret to his life as an “artist”. He was also a deranged and greedy person. People like that lack empathy for the lives of others and are selfish. 

The cultural value of traditional gender roles and status quo was very evident thought the movie. While frustrating to watch, it gave me a view of the foundation of feminism and women’s rights. I got a “ Rosie the Riveter” sensation from the portrayal of women entering the workforce and gaining independence. That feeling you got of “ Yes, Margaret, you go girl” is what the movie is trying to stimulate and make you aware of.  The movie focused on Margaret and did not incorporate much cinematic drama and exaggeration for audience appeal. There was very little nudity and the story focused on the big issue at hand which was a lack of women’s power and control in society. Positive attributes that came from this movie also included its focus on Christianity. Margaret goes to the Christian church with a feeling of disgrace from lying to her daughter and causing her to feel sinful. The movie portrays Margaret’s redemption as coming through her conversion to the Jehovah’s Witnesses, when two members of the Watchtower Society visit her home and share their beliefs with her. Some people call Jehovah’s Witnesses as a cult to the New Testament but, for her, it was a sisterhood and a group driven by feminist power, and leading to uprising of feminist strength through Christ. They mention how God values a man as the head of household but for Margaret, Christ gave her the willpower to be both mother and father. 

On the other hand, there were a lot of unanswered questions. The movie never explains fully why she fled her first marriage. But  Margret also had a lot of unanswered questions regarding Walter so it could have been a method by the director to add to the theme of hidden secrecy and lying in a marriage. Overall I think the movie did an amazing job showcasing  Margaret’s emotion and how she challenged the art world, male dominance, and found female empowerment and independence. The movie is inspiring and leaves you wanting more. You leave with a sense of satisfaction knowing that Magaret got what she deserved all alone in the end; courage, happiness, and recognition. It also gave a look into extreme abusive relationships which was a great perspective as well. I must also add that the director took advantage of the landscape of San Francisco and Hawaii, and the richness of color was appropriate to the film’s subject. It was amplified by the vivid period detailing of Rick Heinrichs’ production design and Colleen Atwood’s costumes. The movie itself, therefore, was also a piece of art; personal and with purpose.