The Positive and Negative reviews for "Painting" by Francis Bacon

Review #1:

For the painting that started Francis Bacon’s career, Painting fails to impress. Not only is his macabre surrealist style pretentious, but he is also incompetent as a painter. Bacon’s brushstrokes are incredibly sloppy, making the painting seem more like a doodle than an actual work of art. He also has no interesting patterns or symmetries in the painting, which makes the piece lack the focus that it desperately needs. This lack of focus bleeds onto the color palette as well. His muted blacks and his gaudy pinks contrast in the worst way possible, and the very miniscule amount of other colors don’t make the painting any less of an eyesore. Bacon’s style, while unique, is actually quite ridiculous. Although he has a lot of horrific images in the painting, Bacon takes away all the emotion from these images by adding silly details that don’t really make sense. How can one take a corpse with an umbrella directly above what’s left of his head seriously, let alone call it art? It’s images like this that make the painting seem amateurish, as well as extremely ostentatious. Of course it’s not supposed to make complete sense due to its surrealist nature, but its abstractions just aren’t interesting enough for us to care. With no real artistic value and an annoying style, Painting demonstrates that Bacon may not be as great or as important as art history leads us to believe. More importantly, Painting shows us that Bacon can be as lazy with his art as he is with his titles.

Review #2:

With Painting’s macabre surrealism, it is easy to see why David Lynch said that he wants Francis Bacon to be his best friend. Historically speaking, Bacon pretty much was the Lynch of his time. Not because they were both “weird” or “dark”, but because they both transported you to worlds that no one really had seen before. In Painting, Bacon creates this otherworldly vibe through intricate details, beautiful surrealism, and a morbid yet passionate style. At first glance, the painting may seem crude and unrefined. The brushstrokes are sporadic and the color scheme wears on your eyes. However, it is this coarseness that makes Painting unique, for it makes the painting seem like it was made in a fit of creative passion where being emotionally honest was just as important as the technical aspects of the piece. Not to say that the details are overlooked. In fact, the details in Painting are what make it interesting. Every element, from the green and red rug to the hanging meat sculpture, helps take you into Bacon’s world where everything feels as real as it is fantastic. And it is fantastic. With such insane imagery as a half decapitated corpse with meat, bones, and an umbrella surrounding it, Painting seems straight out of Salvador Dali’s nightmares. This nightmarish aspect of Painting may disappoint or frighten some, yet it is one of the many aspects that make Bacon’s work special. Through exploring such dark imagery, Painting makes surrealism personal and human instead of just a concept. While Lynch may have taken his place as the art world’s weirdo, Bacon’s Painting proves that his work will live on for years to come.

Black Dogs - A Book Review

Black Dogs is the perfect novel for when you're bored at the airport. It can easily be read in a bored afternoon, and it is incredibly easy to digest. However, the book sacrificed a lot for these qualities: thrilling prose, dynamic characters, exciting plot twists, etc. These traits could’ve made Black Dogs engaging and fun, yet would it be the same piece of young adult fiction posing as historical fluff that you instantly forget about after reading it? The short answer: No, it wouldn’t.

The long answer, however, is a little more complicated. The book sounds great on paper. The story follows a group of urban Baltimore punks who want to become big time thieves. The protagonist, Patrick, comes up with the idea to steal money from Led Zeppelin (the book takes place in 1973), which leads the band of hooligans to go off on a wacky quest that involves Christian biker gangs, robbing pawn shops, and even Jimmy Page himself! Sounds pretty cool, right?

So why isn’t this book cool, or even interesting? Well for starters, the characters are all boring and two-dimensional. Jason Buhrmester, the book’s author, gives each character just enough detail to help the reader visualize them. However, after the first few chapters Buhrmester seems to abandon character development altogether, making his characters turn into soulless humanoid tools used only to further the plot. For instance, instead of giving the reader an explanation on why the protagonist is so hell-bent on becoming a thief through characterization, Buhrmester just tells the reader that Patrick is a Black Sabbath fan and from there makes the reader guess everything else about Patrick. This is what the author does with every character, making the reader not care at all about anyone in the story.

Yet it is the story that drives this novel, which is apparent as soon as the plot begins to unfold. Buhrmester fills each chapter with the needed plot devices to make the story go at an incredibly fast pace, but he never takes a break to reflect on the story or it’s characters. This flaw could be looked over if the plot itself had exhilarating twists and turns. However, like the characters, the plot remains flat and monotonous, making the concept collapse under Buhrmester’s boring story. These factors not only make the reader feel detached from the story, but they also make you wonder if Buhrmester even cared about what he was writing. As you whip through the book, you can almost picture the author writing the novel as fast as he could so that no one would take his “cool” concept.

As “cool” as the concept of seventies historical fiction sounds, the rapid pace and uninspired prose makes the book seem more suited for a high school book fair instead of a Barnes and Noble. The writing is just that fluffy and amateurish. These flaws may make the book a lackluster product, but they also make Buhrmester’s creation into the best damn book to have when you’re bored at the airport. Why? The short answer: Because Black Dogs is a waste of time.

The Social Network- A Film Review

Ever since The Social Network got the reputation of being “the film that defines a generation”, people seem to treat it as an epic tragedy that is an instant classic. While this is an arguable opinion, they seem to miss an important aspect of the film. If you forget about all the hype surrounding the film and see the film for what it is, you will notice two things. Not only will you see that The Social Network is a great film, but you will also notice that the film is more of a low-concept crime drama than an epic tragedy.

The first thing the audience will notice in the film is how all the actors spit their dialogue at an incredibly fast pace. This may seem unrealistic at first. However, you quickly learn that not only is this acting style needed to get through the ridiculous amount of dialogue in this film, but that this style adds a certain old Hollywood charm that makes the contemporary story feel classic.

That being said, this dialogue style couldn’t have worked without a good cast and crew. Luckily, the film has the best cast imaginable, a legendary director, and a screenwriter that is so talented that it’s sickening. Jesse Eisenberg plays Zuckerberg brilliantly, and the supporting cast keep up with his performance with relative ease. The direction, camerawork, and editing are impeccably done, yet the viewer will barely notice these aspects because they will be so engaged by the story/screenplay itself. The script is as engaging and entertaining as it is complex and well written, making it a screenplay brimming with pure virtuosity and style.

At its simplest, the film is about the true story behind the invention of Facebook. However, it is where the film goes in between the factual events that really make the film. The Social Network’s story-arc is very similar to the story-arc in the 1983 crime drama classic Scarface. They are both about socially inept men who start out at their lowest point before finding their true calling in life. This calling leads them both to fame and fortune, yet they both still have unresolved issues that torture them. The men soon betray their true friends, which lead both men to their inevitable downfall. The only differences in these story-arcs are the endings and that Mark Zuckerberg was a programmer instead of a criminal. This crime drama structure creates drama out of an otherwise dry topic, making the film thrilling as well as intellectually stimulating.

While The Social Network may not be “the film that defines a generation”, it never seems to want to be that film. It is a complex story about a boy becoming a billionaire on accident, and that’s all it tries to be. It doesn’t try to speak for a generation, nor is Fincher trying to be the next John Hughes. The film is just a story about interesting characters that represent no one but their real life counterparts. This straightforward storytelling is what makes The Social Network easily one of the best films of the year, and why it could one day become a modern classic.

PS: I couldn't get the indentation to work right, so I apologize for the paragraph formatting. Why is it so hard to indent on this website? I really have no clue.