MovieChat Forums > Art School Confidential (2006) Discussion > a great movie - why has it gotten such p...

a great movie - why has it gotten such poor reviews?


After viewing Art School Confidential, I am as perplexed by the critical bashing it has received as I was by the near unanimous praise for such recent mediocrities as United 93, L'Enfant and Thank You For Smoking. According to rottentomatoes.com, Art School Confidential has received 32% positive reviews (2% less than Scary Movie 4 !?!). It's all the more strange when you consider that the creators' previous effort, Ghost World, a film very similar in tone, style, and quality, was critically lauded. While some of the characters in ASC may be overdone (the film student and Broadbent's), it's a hilarious, truthful and even moving film. I'd have to see Ghost World again to determine which is better, but ASC is certainly right up there. I notice that much of the criticism has focused on ASC's supposed misanthropy, yet it seems that Thank You For Smoking was praised for the very same thing. Could it be because TYFS ridicules corporations, politicians and do-gooders, while ASC mocks artists and academia(whom critics identify with)?

reply

Your kind of all over the map on this one. While I happily agree with you that ASC is being bashed way too much for my liking - personally I thought it was a brilliant film worthy of a 9 to a 9.5/10 in my books. That being said, Thank You For Smoking was truly deserving of all the praise it got, and to suggest critics are siding with one film, and bashing another, because of a 'political agenda' that directly relates to their profession and attitudes is simply absurd. All I can say, is I'm glad you phrased that opinion in the form of a question, becase the answer is simply no. Continue to show your love for ASC on this board, as will I, but please don't try and take down other great films with it, as well as in the process, giving film critics a lot more bad credit than they deserve.

reply

I thoroughly enjoyed both. Two different styles, two different subjects, both very sharp-witted, pointed and funny.

reply

God forbid anyone should express an opinion on this message board other than yours, highroller. I wasn't aware that you owned imdb. And how exactly am I "all over the map"? I liked one movie and not the other. What is your explanation for why a "9 to a 9.5/10" got such bad reviews? I never stated that it was due to a "political agenda" (your term, not mine). I suggested that critics might feel more of a kinship to the characters parodied in Art School Confidential than those in Thank You For Smoking. If you're going to call my supposition absurd, you should come up with a better counterargument than 'you're wrong'. Judging from the spelling and grammatical mistakes in your reply, I wonder if you're even capable of understanding my original post.

reply

Neither were great, but TYFS seemed like it was trying to be an intelligent comedy while ASC seemed like a joke how trashy it was.

I mean, Jerome serving alchol at the party, him not realizing Jimmy was a killer, A cigarette killing Jimmy, the fact that all the teachers were burn outs and all the students were idiots. There's so much more, it was almost embarassing to watch.

reply

Thank god someone else feels the same. It DID feel embarassing to watch at times. And please don't try to tell me - whoever it was who said it - that you feel Art School Confidential is a better film then United93, as I will be forced to laugh in your face, lots and lots.

reply

Well, gee, I guess you must be right, then.

reply

As much as I can't believe I'm saying this, any movie is better than United 93 ( and I thought that Clowes's and Zigoff's Ghost World to be caca.)

reply

Well then you are stupid

reply

Tough luck for you, I don't like crap movies about 9/11 that don't show the real truth about it.

reply

Yeah, I'm not sure why ASC is getting generally lukewarm-to-chilly reviews. While it has its problems (as did TYFS, which I liked as well) and it's not as sharp as "Ghost World" was, it was still nonetheless worth it. Of course, I'd much rather see a daring/edgy but flawed film than a well-made but generic/derivative one. And I only see movies I'm sure I'd want to see again, anyway.

reply

You're spot on with the notion of the major being reason for criticism. After all, art is a major sub-section of the Liberal Arts & Science conceptration. Another major element is journalism and a third is of course English/Writing/whatever you want to call it. LAS majors havealways cast a negative perception of outsiders (in conjunction with an overly protective tone with regard to other LAS concentrations). So its only natural to assume that movie critics jump all over anyone who elects to critique their sacred disciplines. Movies critiquing the art world, where people on average earn SO much more than LAS majors is accepted as a form of backlash for the dominance of Corporations in the US. I think the critics have two main categories: 1) How DARE that director insult our own major and 2) How close the film's stereotypes are to reality. If every film poiking fun at the office environment grossely exagerates the mundane lifestyles and cliches of "the cube world" *beep* "Office Space" is still the dominant perception of the IT industry) then this film hits a lot closer to home with the redundant nature of art school. So naturally, it warrants a hate-filled critique.

reply

> and 2) How close the film's stereotypes are to reality.

Actually, I thought this was the only thing the film had working in its favour. What a great movie! I know those people! I do those things! It's all so FAMILIAR!

reply

[deleted]

Thank You for Smoking was a film that I found both challenging and refreshing. I can't really say that for Art School Confidential. ASC was clever, sure, especially how it took care of the self-referencial type casting of its characters and the wonderful role played by Malkovitch but in the end it was predictable (we all saw the slovenly guy as the killer before it was 'revealed' and we all knew that cigarette was going to burn the place down, and even the comedic roomate actually turned out to be gay...), trite (he did it all for the unrequited love of some girl who made decisions about men based on status and not her better judgment) and anti-climactic as he never even consumated his love for her....and it's not like she was at all shy about her body..

reply

I don't know why some are comparing these films anyway. They are completely different, and both good. One featured Katie Holmes faking unusual sexual positions with a brilliant, ultra-successful lobbiest/ MOD Squad member, the other about a lovesick college freshman/strugging artist. Not much common ground there...
One might as well compare this film to L.A. Confidential.

reply

>>Could it be because TYFS ridicules corporations, politicians and do-gooders, while ASC mocks artists and academia(whom critics identify with)?<<

Bingo!

reply

I loved ASC, but I didn't find it to mock artists so much as it mocked the pretentiousness of artist wannabes (art students, art teachers, art critics). The reason critics turned on this movie is beyond me. I will also have to disagree with the original poster on his opinions for TYFS and United 93. I thought all three of these films as well as Wim Wenders' Don't Come Knocking are the best movies to come out this year so far.

reply

Does anybody really even read the graphic novels, like ghost world or this one. What about American Splendor

reply

I have to agree with you. Having just seen Art School Confidential I thought it was brilliant and was completely surprised afterwards to find that it was blasted by most critics. Upon reading most of the reviews I think that a lot of them just missed the point. One review couldn't understand why the main charactor would give up on his dream of being the greatest artist of the 21st century only to plunge headfirst into trying to outdo his classmates. What they didn't get was that the main charactor was so achingly naive that he never stopped to think that maybe his Professor snd most of his classmates were full of *beep* From there I think that the frustration was more than enough to turn him into the embittered drunk he becomes without it seeming trashy or far fetched. As for Daniel Clowes interpretation of Art School as a former Art School student I'd say he hit the nail right on the head on both this film and the comic that he produced of the same name. Sure it might have been exaggerated a little, but what fictionalized film doesn't. Just one more thing I think this movie blew Ghost World away and I loved Ghost World. Any critic who claims that Art School Confidential is just a transparent outlet for Dan Clowes own bitter rants should try taking another look at Ghost World and try to say it isn't the exact same thing, but hey I'm not complaining in either case bitter ranting is what Dan Clowes does best.

reply

Possibly because it's a movie about a student trying to find his originality in the art world and yet the film itself has not a shred of originality. I think it scores a 9/10 on the irony scale but not many others.

reply

it got some good reviews, it didn;t get like bad reviews, the crix pretty much say that its trying to hard to be 2 diffferent movies, which it kind of is, the whole serial killer thing was good, but you know its kind of odd how it merges with the main story. i liked it personally a good deal, though ti reminded me less of ghost world, and more of pecker and cecil b demented. (although a more deeply felt pecker) in that it seemed to be more hit and miss and less constant the way ghost world was. I liked the characters and liked the main character and his relationships with the girl and his friends and the drunk mentor and of course the shop teacher (i DON"T CARE!) great
I liked it overall, and was certainly glad to have seen it, (been trying to see it for the last 2 weeks or so) but......

the crix said it kind of lacked focus and while i don;t necessarily that;s true,

my complaint about it was that while there was a lot of good material here, too many scenes seemed like a lot of set-up, with too soft or not much (or in some cases not at all) follow through, no real punchlines to end the scene on. You know like what was the point of having Steve Buscemi there if they weren't gonna have him do anything particularly memorable or defining, he was just there for the sake of being there, not that there's anything wrong with that, but i kept waiting for him to do something, and it was kind of that way if a lot of the scenes in the movie. You know, cut to a new scene, some potentially funny stuff, soft ending, cut to the next scene.

and that;s why its not getting the same great reviews that ghost world got, its not as laser sharp or as finely tuned. its more hit or miss basically. I liked it but even I wouldn't go about recommending it to just anyone and everyone.that said everyone go see it!

reply

I'm happy to say that at least one mainstream critic (Roger Ebert) gave a pretty good review (3 stars) and seemed to understand what was happening (as opposed to most of the Mr. Jones's who didn't have a clue).

reply

MBS articulated very well what I was feeling about the film that I couldn’t quite place. There is a disconnect between the light comedic mocking of the art world and the strangler element. Part of the film is self-referential and jokey and then you watch a woman getting strangled and think “this isn’t funny”. Juxtapositions like that *can* work (think American Psycho) and may have worked in the comic version, but in the ACS movie the tones seemed incompatible.

I still don’t think the film deserved all the harsh reviews it has received but I doubt it has any connection with critics feeling attacked “ASC mocks artists and academia (whom critics identify with)”. I went to art school and I could recognize all the stereotypes spot on (including myself), and I was laughing louder than anyone. I just think critics are often tougher on quality films than they are on the fluff; people who go to see Scary Movie 4 pretty much know what kind of movie they’re in for and if the director delivers the slop up reasonably well, then they have done what it set out to do. Plus, it’s not as much fun ripping apart a movie that no one expected to be any good in the first place.

Ironically, that was how I felt in art school, like my instructors were a lot tougher on my work (which they thought was good but maybe failed to communicate at the level I was striving for) than they were on the students who were pathetically devoid of talent (whom they lovingly patted on the back or gently ignored). Which reaction would you rather receive?

reply

dude, you said, "a more deeply felt pecker"...huh, huh, huh, huh...

reply

heh heh, YEAH! heh heh...PECKER! PECKER! PECKER!

"Dammit, Sulik died again! I'm taking back my Mega Powerfist, worthless tribal!"

reply

I have to say, Ghost World was a masterpiece, one of my favorites by far. Surprisingly, I've become a fan of comic based movies over the past few years. I was highly anticipating this film, not only as a Zwigoff fan, but as an art student. Having been in college for some time now, and having taken some awful art classes, I was craving some art class satire and irony.

It brought some of my expectations. The art teacher who thinks he is the greatest, but his art sucks, the suck up, the person everyone likes, but really sucks, the one who is good, but everyone hates, etc. This happened for like 10 mins of the film, it got old fast and was not that funny. The satire aspect of this film was executed poorly. It was like they didn't even care about making this movie at all. The main character sucked so bad.

He was a whiny jerk off, who was a bad artist himself, and was a total moron, and not even in a funny way. In fact, none of the characters were good artists, when at least one should have been, and should have been crapped on, and the bad art was not witty or funny in the very least. The car painting was somewhat funny, but that was about it. No theme in the movie had any importance, even without that, it was not redeemed by anything intelligent or really that sarcastic.

The film was plain boring, and I can even appreciate boring films, if there is something meaningful, beautiful or humorous in some way. There was nothing to even hold on to in this film. Nothing! All the characters sucked, the acting was terrible. There wasn't even any irony at all. It was a pointless story. It made me just feel gross. In fact, I think this was one of the worst films I have ever seen in my life. I like experimental films, but this was not clever at all. It kinda made me feel like *beep* being an art student, maybe not really, but it made you feel like art in general is disgusting. Even that as being the ultimate objective of this film, it was made in the most grotesque and thoughtless way.

reply

I've just watched the movie, knowing very little about it. I figured it was a comedy more than drama. In the beginning it was very much a comedy but somewhere it changed to a quite cynical and dark drama. I don't know if I liked it yet.

///Axel

reply

It was a good movie although subtlety could have been explored lol... Jesus talk about going extreme all of a sudden.

-
There's more to evolution than a little DNA.
http://corporate.skynet.be/zen/

reply