Universally acclaimed art/artists...that just don't do it for you
For me: Bob Dylan.
I just don't get it, no matter how hard I've tried. Sure, the lyrics are interesting, but except for a handful of songs, they mostly bore me musically.
And although I will listen to a few of his songs if they happen to come on the radio, I have never willingly put on a Bob Dylan song or album.
****
David Hockney
![](https://s3.amazonaws.com/twoplustwo-actually-definitely-helping-stud/userimages/8IrKxB4.jpg)
Seriously, what is this crap?
I've seen better art on the walls of a middle school hallway.
****
What are yours?
1. Woody Allen is not overrated
2. He didn't do it
Sent from my Pixel 7a using Tapatalk
Woody Allen.... hmm interesting. I like everything he did up to Annie Hall, I think that body of work is terrific. I cannot comment on the rest cos I've barely seen any, other than 3 movies, which were all good to great.... Zelig, Broadway Danny Rose and the outstanding Crimes and Misdemeanours.
Just to be clear. Woody Allen is NOT overrated. Blue Jasmine is really good.
Sent from my Pixel 7a using Tapatalk
Woody Allen.... hmm interesting. I like everything he did up to Annie Hall, I think that body of work is terrific. I cannot comment on the rest cos I've barely seen any, other than 3 movies, which were all good to great.... Zelig, Broadway Danny Rose and the outstanding Crimes and Misdemeanours.
Agreed... but also Manhattan. that intro is to die for.
curious what template people use to separate the artist from the person
That can be tough... certainly when we see woody interact with teenage girls in his films, it can be cringe worthy given the light of time.
I think what I do is look at the art and not the man that produced it. Judge the work on its merit and not the person that produced it for their flawed humanity.
I know I have said before that you can not separate the man from their art... but I don't mean that in a literal sense. When I say that I mean the art will always have the elements of the man inherently and inexorably in it.
Zendaya
Rothko. I'm OK with contemporary art more or less. I could even hang one of his paintings in my home. They are pretty, but at the same time, I don't really see a lot of substance.
Christopher Nolan. Sort of the In N Out of filmmakers I guess. In N Out is good for fast food, but I think the people who rave about it are used to eating McDonald's and BK all the time.
Can't believe nobody else has said Bob Dylan yet.
That can be tough... certainly when we see woody interact with teenage girls in his films, it can be cringe worthy given the light of time.
I think what I do is look at the art and not the man that produced it. Judge the work on its merit and not the person that produced it for their flawed humanity.
I know I have said before that you can not separate the man from their art... but I don't mean that in a literal sense. When I say that I mean the art will always have the elements of the man inherent
Just in case someone is bothered by it, I think all the big me too guys I can remember are guilty, but Woody is almost certainly innocent of molesting his daughter. It's amazing that so much exculpatory evidence could exist in a he said she said case.
He did hook up with Sung-Ye when she was 20 and he was much older. She was Mia's adopted daughter, but not his. Adre Previn was her father figure. Mia found naked pictures of Sung Ye and that's how she learned. So it was pretty sleezy, but they're still married.
So feel free to enjoy his films.
Edit: Mia, on the other hand...
Steely Dan
Who was also in the Doobies for a while.
Not sure they fit for "universally acclaimed,", but there's a few popular bands that will make me go across the room and switch the channel: The Doors, The Cars, Eurythmics. Others I'm not thinking of, I'm sure.
hear hear
Red Hot Chilli Peppers: Really these guys are a gaggle of vile Hollywood street trash with derivative music and incomprehensible word-salad lyrics.
Basquiat: Just, whatever. IMO many who make their careers in the fine arts have reputations (and prices) which far outweigh the talent of the artist or the quality of the work. Basquiat is just the first that came to mind. Jeff Koons is another. The idea that some mish-mash that Basquiat tossed off in an afternoon while nodding on heroin is now worth $Millions$ baffles me.
Clint Eastwood (as an actor.) He had 3 gears: Neutral, Frown, and Scowl. He made some good films obviously, like Unforgiven or The Good The Bad The Ugly or Josie Wales, where his lack of expression and wooden delivery worked for him, but IMO for the most part his career as an Actor is just a bunch of violent nonsense. As a Director, IMO he has done some good work but I think his catalog is pretty uneven: A masterpiece, a couple of very good films, and and a bunch of others that are maybe not that good.