I am proud to say I now have a six degrees connection to Bucket of Blood. A friend of mine knew an actor who was in a number of Roger Corman's movies including something called Wasp Woman. Wasp Woman is about the dangers of beauty products, just as Bucket of Blood is about the dangers of art.
The film doesn't really have anything to due with art once you strip the film down to its framework. Art, particularly sculpture, is not the story. The only other visual art in the film was shown in a alleyway behind a building outside. Acceptance and Fear are closer factors to what the film is about. It did remind me loosely of another film called "the Shape of Things". "Bucket of blood" left me vacant on the viewpoint of connecting it to other artist to relate it to. Except, The only artist that came to mind was Carl Andre (as he was cited to be the murderer in the case regarding the murder of fellow artist Ana Mendieta). This can be a touchy subject as many people have opposing views on the subject. Other artist may include those who have taxidermy (namely Rauschenberg) and others who plaster dead animals to create their works of art(the artist Not Vital).Combining all these things together I can not place for a single moment why we would watch such a film on our opening day of class?
I think it made sense to show the film...It wasn't so much about art itself as it was about the art world, or someone who desperately wants to be apart of the art world. I feel like the main character was dealing with a lot of the issues we as budding artists are struggling with or will face in the future...Questions like, how do I become a "real" artist? or, is my work "good"? How do I earn acceptance? I feel like these are really scary things sometimes...and the film kind of shows that horror in its own funny way. I really enjoyed it for that.
"Bucket of Blood" is a reduced but entertaining portrayal of how the art-world hierarchy can grab an artist from the outskirts of society and socialize them with a different breed, transforming the artists' "mission" (this is obviously a generalized theme). We see the main character's naivete gleefully take him for a ride as he is used, abused, and dumped. A heavy and sad subject is lightened with the use of campy humor, plainly stating that art is too serious to be taken seriously.
I agree with some of the previous messages that assert that this movie’s focus was not on art or the art world, yet that does not detract from its relevance to the course as it does appear to have a theme based on incompetence as well as the need to be successful in a given area. When most people feel inadequate at something they may decide that that particular thing is not for them or they’ll simply try harder. The main character in this film took the motivation to be successful to an extreme, in which case he was making drastically immoral decisions in order to produce highly praised works of art. I think this film represents the constant pressure that artists are under in order to produce successful works, it just shows a humorously exaggerated example of the toll in which that strain can have on an individual.
There is a nice play in the movie between the audience's expectations of the artist and the realities of the situations presented. This is all in front of a real audience, and a movie audience. Our character's assimilation of the "artist" is funny, though inspires some uncomfortable introspection by us as artists. Do we also live up to the artist stereotype in order to convince ourselves that we are artists? It also inspires us to ask was Walter an artist? There is an unusual relationship between the artists (which would be us, the viewers) being the audience while watching acting artists and audiences interact with each other.
It may sound sadistic but I really liked the way in which he made art after killing his victims. It gave a new perspective on how to preserve the human body. If he could have continued, I'm sure he would have made more wonderful art. There is a small understanding on how a dead body is a piece of art. Similar to figure drawing, dead bodies is just another model without any movements.
I guess I would consider this an exploration of the context of being an artist. A sarcastic approach wherein a person ascribed, or adhering to, the traits and expectations of what an artist is can thus be thought as such. If this is the criteria by which one becomes an artist it is certainly a misstep to take one's self too seriously.
"A Bucket of Blood," in my eyes, creates a hilarious metaphor for the world of high art, in which a "nobody" sterotypically achieves fame by the support of another famous artist because of a hyped or gimmicky style of art... I think this is about the horrors of meaningless, selfish creation-- and that at the same time, maybe we shouldn't take it so seriously.
This movie was deffenitly in my area of interest; Horror mixed with art. Horror films greatly inspire me, and a film that incorperates high art and death gets a golds star from me. It kind of gave me this feeling that the movie was staying something about high art, about how extreme artists can get with their work, and in this case a bit too extreme. Perhaps this is a lesson to be learned, that there is a limit to art.
Bucket of Blood is ‘a slice of life’ film that portraits the Beatnik life in early sixties. Contrasting the Avant-garde values against that of the common man. Namely Walter, the busboy, who wants desperately to become an artist, instead, he is ridiculed by the members of the elitist salon. Until Walter proves them wrong, by using creativity and horror! Good film.
I am proud to say I now have a six degrees connection to Bucket of Blood. A friend of mine knew an actor who was in a number of Roger Corman's movies including something called Wasp Woman. Wasp Woman is about the dangers of beauty products, just as Bucket of Blood is about the dangers of art.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe film doesn't really have anything to due with art once you strip the film down to its framework. Art, particularly sculpture, is not the story. The only other visual art in the film was shown in a alleyway behind a building outside. Acceptance and Fear are closer factors to what the film is about. It did remind me loosely of another film called "the Shape of Things". "Bucket of blood" left me vacant on the viewpoint of connecting it to other artist to relate it to. Except, The only artist that came to mind was Carl Andre (as he was cited to be the murderer in the case regarding the murder of fellow artist Ana Mendieta). This can be a touchy subject as many people have opposing views on the subject. Other artist may include those who have taxidermy (namely Rauschenberg) and others who plaster dead animals to create their works of art(the artist Not Vital).Combining all these things together I can not place for a single moment why we would watch such a film on our opening day of class?
ReplyDeleteI think it made sense to show the film...It wasn't so much about art itself as it was about the art world, or someone who desperately wants to be apart of the art world. I feel like the main character was dealing with a lot of the issues we as budding artists are struggling with or will face in the future...Questions like, how do I become a "real" artist? or, is my work "good"? How do I earn acceptance? I feel like these are really scary things sometimes...and the film kind of shows that horror in its own funny way. I really enjoyed it for that.
ReplyDelete"Bucket of Blood" is a reduced but entertaining portrayal of how the art-world hierarchy can grab an artist from the outskirts of society and socialize them with a different breed, transforming the artists' "mission" (this is obviously a generalized theme). We see the main character's naivete gleefully take him for a ride as he is used, abused, and dumped. A heavy and sad subject is lightened with the use of campy humor, plainly stating that art is too serious to be taken seriously.
ReplyDeleteI agree with some of the previous messages that assert that this movie’s focus was not on art or the art world, yet that does not detract from its relevance to the course as it does appear to have a theme based on incompetence as well as the need to be successful in a given area. When most people feel inadequate at something they may decide that that particular thing is not for them or they’ll simply try harder. The main character in this film took the motivation to be successful to an extreme, in which case he was making drastically immoral decisions in order to produce highly praised works of art. I think this film represents the constant pressure that artists are under in order to produce successful works, it just shows a humorously exaggerated example of the toll in which that strain can have on an individual.
ReplyDeleteThere is a nice play in the movie between the audience's expectations of the artist and the realities of the situations presented. This is all in front of a real audience, and a movie audience. Our character's assimilation of the "artist" is funny, though inspires some uncomfortable introspection by us as artists. Do we also live up to the artist stereotype in order to convince ourselves that we are artists? It also inspires us to ask was Walter an artist? There is an unusual relationship between the artists (which would be us, the viewers) being the audience while watching acting artists and audiences interact with each other.
ReplyDeleteIt may sound sadistic but I really liked the way in which he made art after killing his victims. It gave a new perspective on how to preserve the human body. If he could have continued, I'm sure he would have made more wonderful art. There is a small understanding on how a dead body is a piece of art. Similar to figure drawing, dead bodies is just another model without any movements.
ReplyDeleteI guess I would consider this an exploration of the context of being an artist. A sarcastic approach wherein a person ascribed, or adhering to, the traits and expectations of what an artist is can thus be thought as such. If this is the criteria by which one becomes an artist it is certainly a misstep to take one's self too seriously.
ReplyDelete"A Bucket of Blood," in my eyes, creates a hilarious metaphor for the world of high art, in which a "nobody" sterotypically achieves fame by the support of another famous artist because of a hyped or gimmicky style of art... I think this is about the horrors of meaningless, selfish creation-- and that at the same time, maybe we shouldn't take it so seriously.
ReplyDeleteThis movie was deffenitly in my area of interest; Horror mixed with art. Horror films greatly inspire me, and a film that incorperates high art and death gets a golds star from me. It kind of gave me this feeling that the movie was staying something about high art, about how extreme artists can get with their work, and in this case a bit too extreme. Perhaps this is a lesson to be learned, that there is a limit to art.
ReplyDeleteBucket of Blood is ‘a slice of life’ film that portraits the Beatnik life in early sixties. Contrasting the Avant-garde values against that of the common man. Namely Walter, the busboy, who wants desperately to become an artist, instead, he is ridiculed by the members of the elitist salon. Until Walter proves them wrong, by using creativity and horror!
ReplyDeleteGood film.