[deleted]
no, it was drawing restraint 9. it was *beep* bad. just my opinion.
shareWell, that's a complete and thorough analysis of the film:
«*beep* bad as hell»
I was going to watch it, but now that you explained so well that it's «*beep* bad as hell» - I guess I won't see it after all. I mean, it's "bad", right?
This... is chemical burn.
[deleted]
your an idiot.
shareThat is "you're".
shareOr perhaps "your *comma* an idiot", but that makes even less sense...
shareIf you didn't like this film, it's probably because you don't have an eye for art. It's not really a movie, it's an installation piece captured on film. So if you know nothing about art, you're not really qualified to make crude judgements about one of the most respected artists of our time, Are you?
DR9 = *beep* disarmingly brilliant.
*beep* I have a degree in art and the film is pretentious crap. "It's not really a movie, it's an installment piece." Wrong dumbf()ck. It's a film. It's nothing like an 'installation' piece, and seeing you bandy about terms like that shows you clearly don't know anything of 'art' and you're just gonna drool and crap for this tripe like any other common sheep who takes this drivel for 'artistry' when the best thing about it is probably the visuals on a purely superficial level, but the 'points' he's trying to make are weak and prideful.
And he's hardly a 'respected artist', most people in the art field don't find him brilliant but rather they find most of his work redundant. Have you seen the one with the guy masturbating in the giant industrial machine? *beep* lame. I don't know a single artist who would call him a genius, unless they are a magazine shill or someone else in the industry who kisses the ass of these pompous asses.
'Cause I ride like Kelly Bundy, Yo I keep that *beep* nasty~ (Spank Rock)