Pollock (Special Edition)

I purchased this movie two and a half years ago on the recommendation of an artist friend. I honestly did not know much about Pollock, and the few times I had a brush with his art I honestly did not understand it. This movie filled me in on both the man and the artist, but also gave me insights into his art.As a bio pic this is pretty realistic, down to the uncanny resemblance between Pollock and Ed Harris. Many of the scenes are not exactly pretty, and Pollock himself was - to put it mildly - socially and emotionally challenged. There is also a fair resemblance between Lee Krasner, Pollock's wife and muse, and Marcia Gay Harden.Having actors that look like their subjects is a nice touch, but the principle roles were acted so realistically that it was as though I were a fly on the wall in most scenes. After watching the film the first time I did some research and the film unfolds in a totally realistic manner. If there were any liberties taken they are subtle.Instead of going into the gory details of the film I want to focus on how it led me to actually 'get' Pollock's art. There is a sequence where he is being photographed by Hans Namuth who captured details of Pollock's drip technique that, in turn, revealed the logic behind Pollock's art. That, alone, made the movie worthwhile to me because I began to understand and appreciate Pollock's art as genius and something unique.For me it was an interesting bio pic that is pretty accurate, and a mini lesson in art appreciation. While I came away with an appreciation of Pollock's work, I cannot say I admired him as a human. I did find Lee Krasner to be a near saint, and loved the way both Ed Harris and Marcia Gay Harden brought them to life, warts and all.

Based on "Jackson Pollock: An American Saga" by Steven Naifeh and Gregory White Smith, this film is a portrait of a destructive, self indulgent man who though brilliant, was nonetheless a double-distilled jerk. Was it self-interest that motivated the ambitious Lee Krasner to stay with him ? Perhaps the need to nurture, and be a part of a talent greater than hers ? Who can tell what drives such complex relationships, and had she not been at his side, it is doubtful that he would have achieved his current place in art history; perhaps it was a fated, infernal partnership, all for art's sake.Ed Harris as director and actor brought this story to life with believability and his chemistry with Marcia Gay Harden is superb; he received Oscar nomination for Best Actor, and she won for Best Supporting Actress, and both deservedly so. There is a fight scene towards the end of the film that is so real it sounds as if it is actually happening. I find myself lowering the volume, so my neighbors don't call the police.Also excellent is Sada Thompson as Pollock's mother, and Amy Madigan (Mrs. Ed Harris in real life) as Peggy Guggenheim.The cinematography, set, and costume design all capture the look of mid 20th century America, and the soundtrack by Jeff Beal is lovely; I particularly like the sprightly theme that seems sometimes to connect one scene to another.I thoroughly enjoyed seeing the depiction of the creative process, like when he discovered his drip technique, and also loved the representation of the 1950 exhibit at the Betty Parsons Gallery, with the final camera shot zooming into the paint itself.Though he struggled long and hard for fame, once it was his, he said "I feel like a clam without a shell". Lee survived him by by 28 years, and hopefully, found some peace and joy in life, along with the wonderful work she was to do once on her own.This is not something to view on a date night, or for fun, but it is a fascinating film, especially for someone in the arts.

as a painter i thoroughly enjoyed this film, not least for the acting chops of ed harris, who wonderfully captures pollock's range of vulnerability and anger, inspiration and hopelessness, clarity and insanity -- and incidentally shows amazing physical assurance reenacting pollock's painting and drawing techniques.the unexpected beauty is in the evocation of painting itself, which is often as mysterious to the artist as to everyone else and as compelling as a sexual passion. the scene where pollock "discovers" the drip method will be instantly recognizable to real painters, who often speak of "following the painting" or "taking the painting where it wants to go." the script also delves the tragedy of trying to control this mysterious process (which is in its evolution like a love affair), and the inexplicable ways the process affects and attracts art critics, finances, marital happiness, and the touch of fame. the new york art scene is evoked lightly, only to show pollock's lack of control over it: the scene where he reads aloud an italian art review while his visiting family sits by neglected and offended shows both his own puzzlement at fame and his utter lack of the skills necessary to manage fame intelligently.the tragic climax, where pollock's repetitively staged paintings for a filmmaker reduce him to drink, artistic decline and suicide, are a metaphor for the heartache that happens when the paintings are no longer about the art, and everything about how the art looks to other people. a remarkably insightful film with splendid acting and photography throughout.

Ed Harris gives an outstanding performance as Pollock and Marcia Gay Harden also gives an outstanding performance as his wife, fellow artist Lee Krasner. If you're interested in this artist then this is a must see movie.

Good dramatic tension, story follows along a very predictable line, though. If you’re familiar with a lot of artists’ stories, you will recognize there’s a lot of madness with perceived genius. Harris captures this in a way that doesn’t push you away, but draws you in.

Jackson Pollock a maverick of American contemporary art history, A volatile and gifted painter,wgo created some of the most memorable art ever seen. This film is based upon the book "Jackson Pollock,An American Saga" which won many awards. Ed Harris funded and directed this powerful film himself. And really captures the artist's vision and torment. It uses the actual house and Barn where Pollock himself painted. and for many months prior to making the film Ed learnt't to paint and set up his own studio, he studied the famous films of the artist in action by Hans Namuth. Marcia Gay Harding is also astounding as Lee Krasner, Pollock's wife and also and artist and it captures their volatile relationship. Ed actually looks like the artist and the sequences of him painting as Pollock are amazing. It captures a period of american art history, Ed Harris's wife plays Peggy Guggenheim the patron and art collector who helped and nurtured Pollock and made the world take notice of him and the other artists who were part of the Abstract Expressionists, she was a pioneer herself and really believed in Pollock's genius. It's an astounding film, hard to watch in places, but shows the price of fame and of battling with personal demons too and the effects on those around you. Ed Harris lived and breathed this persona and it shows in his amazing performance, and Marcia Gay Harding is equally as amazing,two very powerful and emotive performances for sure. Krasner loved Pollock deeply though he didn't always treat her well and it tore her apart when he died. She sacrificed her own life as an artist to help push Pollock into the world's viewing eye but paid a heavy price in the end and this film captures all of this. The whole cast in this film really capture the people they play and it comes together in a powerful tour de force of film. This was a labour of love for Ed Harris, but it really works on every level. If you love modern america art, you will love this film.The first time I saw it at the cinema I felt drained afterwards as it does really touch you and is gut wrenching in places. Pollock was a visionary and a tortured genius and this film captures the man superbly. A must see film for sure.

This is an engrossing film about the American abstract expressionist painter Jackson Pollock. It can be approached in several different ways. It can be seen as a tale about a heroic, flawed American, who temporarily overcomes his personal demons to gain global success. Then his demons destroy him. Alternatively, it can be seen as an important contribution to the history of art. Finally, it can be seen as the story of a woman’s love for a struggling, wounded man and her successful campaign to get him the recognition he deserved. In fact, it is all three of these. It is also a very responsible film. It avoids any Hollywood myth-making and recounts faithfully the later part of Jackson Pollock’s life from meeting his future wife through to his untimely death.The mass media of the early 1950s slotted Jackson Pollock into an area they had already populated with James Dean and Marlon Brando. Pollock joined these demi-gods through the publicity of an article in Life magazine, followed by the photographs and films of him at work by Hans Namuth (1). This was the Cold War and Abstract Expressionism was quietly promoted by the CIA as a Free World alternative to the Socialist Realism paintings of the Communist bloc. Ironically, most of the Abstract Expressionist were left wing and some of them were Marxists.The film starts with a young woman waiting at a glamourous art gallery event for the newly famous American painter to sign her catalogue. He signs it, but in his eye he looks like a trapped animal. This cuts to a few years earlier with a drunken Pollock and his brother arriving back at his brother’s walk-up downtown New York apartment, to the dismay of his brother’s pregnant wife. Pollock is a mess. Soon this messed-up Pollock will meet another New York Abstract Expressionist painter, Lee Krasner, who introduces him to Peggy Guggenheim, a gallery owner. Pollock’s fortunes are on the up. They marry and move from the city to rural Long Island. Pollock stops drinking and finds fame and fortune. But it cannot last. He starts drinking again, continually argues with his wife and drives drunk as if he has a death wish. His painting and reputation suffer. In the end his drunken driving means his death wish comes true.SPECIAL FEATURES: It is worthwhile to look at the Special Features option on the DVD. The section about the making of the film is divided into: Pollock: Behind the Scenes, The Script, The Director, The Character, The Painting and The Artist. The section “The Painting” explains that they re-created more than 150 paintings for the film. These were mainly recreations of paintings by Jackson and his wife Lee, but some other painters used in the gallery scenes. At first they tried a sophisticated process using digital transparency transferred to silk screen printing, then rendered to give texture to the final results. Unfortunately, despite all the technology, the final results were lifeless. So they turned to the film’s scenic designers and to other artists, who re-created the paintings. Ed Harris played Pollock, and Harris himself was an amateur painter. He could watch the films of Hans Namuth to see Pollock creating his action (drip) paintings. Harris was able to capture the physicality of Pollock’s method, the Tai Chi of his Shamanist painting method._______________________________________________________________________________________________(1) Search the Web for “youtube jackson pollock hans namuth”.

I've just finished watching this through the second time around, and have enjoyed it just as much the first. Loving attention to detail and fine performances all round characterise this moving biography of the tortured American painter, Jackson Pollock. Ed Harris, who stars as well as produced and dircted, gives possibly his lifetime performance as the broodingly taciturn artist, alternately afflicted by bouts of crippling alcoholoism and periods of elemental creativity. Marcia Gay Harden gives an equally oustanding performance as his heroically long suffering wife, who sidelined her own career as a talented painter in her own right, to devote herself to the Sisyphean task of keeping her volatile husband on the wagon and in production.The works feature large in the film, as does the process by which Pollock creates them, which makes it an altogether more earnest artistic biography than is typical of other Hollywood attempts at the genre. The attention to the details of daily life in 40's and 50's America adds to the film's almost tactile impact. Sets, lighting and cinematography are of an order suitable to the subject matter, sometimes to rival in beauty the canvasses that are their theme. Some of the shots of the New York sidewalk and studio interiors are rivetingly beautiful.A crucial feature of the film for me is the original music composed by Jeff Beal, who's work has since gone on to become ubiquitous. This score has a unique dynamic and rhythmic quality that perfectly complements the energy of Pollock's paintings. This is particularly effective in the sequences where Pollock is seen at work, creating some of his more epic canvasses. There is a special moment in which he is brooding over a canvas, when suddenly he notices how his brush has dripped onto the floor. This is the point where lightning strikes and Pollock's famous version of abstract expressionism is born. The musical accompaniment to this process is so perfectly appropriate as to raise goose pimples. It could be argued that this handling is somewhat corny, but something like this must have actually happened, for the man to find his mature landmark style.If I have any complaint, and it is a minor one, it is that the dialogue in matters of art can seem a little crass in th early part of the film. However, this is made up for, insofar as it matters, being by a very long way a primarily visual film, later in the film, where we hear some of Pollock's own efforts to articulate his thoughts on art, which are more cogent, if characteristically incoherent.This is a superb and beautifully crafted and acted film about the dramatic and troubled life of a true American genius.

SAFE READING - NO SPOILERSI seem to remember reading somewhere that Ed Harris had waited years for this project, developing ideas, gathering a team and garnering the financial backing. It was worth the wait.He obviously enjoyed himself in this role and created a believable character. As the blank page is to the writer, blank manuscript is to the musician, so blank canvas is to the artist. Filling it with something new is the artistic challenge to which some can rise, some fall but many seem to hover between in a semi-state of madness, eccentricity and/or lethargy.For many, the world of abstract art is a journey into the unknown from which they may never emerge. Pollock had the vision, courage and talent to create something entirely new which looks easy to copy - "Anyone can do that!" - but, in fact, it is not easy and only he did it. Harris captures all of this very effectively.A very enjoyable film, recommended to anyone interested in art.PS A mathematical theory proposed for the aesthetics of Pollock's work is that his "dripped paintings" are fractals, found everywhere in nature in various forms, "rough or fragmented geometric shape that can be split into parts, each of which is (at least approximately) a reduced-size copy of the whole," a property called self-similarity. Roots of the idea of fractals go back to the 17th century and beyond. Look at a Pollock, look closer, then closer still ...

He might have been a great artist but he certainly wasn't a very interesting or likeable man. The film is okay i suppose but we sure didn't find it interesting or really very informative about what made him tick. Still, it has been well received critically so i'm sure lots of other folk got much more out of it than we did. I think it needed a better script and a more detached director. For Ed Harris it was a labour of love i'm sure....