free counter with statistics Art School Confidential | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

confidential.jpg


To Me You Are a Work Of Art,
And I Would Give You My Heart.
That’s If I Had One.

Art School Confidential / Jeremy C. Fox

Film Reviews | May 19, 2006 | Comments (33)


It’s hard to believe that it’s already been 11 years since I was an idealistic freshman art major, a naïve rube fresh from a homogenous small town and suddenly adrift in a sea of hippies and goths, skateboarders and punk rockers. It was a tricky adjustment, but before too long I was fitting in just fine: listening to too much Morrissey, dying my hair a new color every couple of weeks, dropping acid in the sculpture garden, dating angsty drama majors, and painting Eric Fischl-inspired masturbating teens. My experiences as an art student at a big state university dominated by its engineering program and its football team were less cloistered and solipsistic than they would have been if I’d gone to a proper art school, but they were close enough that I found myself dangerously over-identifying with Jerome Platz (Max Minghella), the protagonist of Art School Confidential. Though far prettier than I have ever been (with his bottomless brown eyes and inner-tube lips, Minghella is the male Angelina Jolie), Jerome is a lot like I was at his age: talented but unfocused, easily distracted and led astray, and just begging to be disillusioned. And there’s no doubt that he will be; he’s in a movie written by Daniel Clowes and directed by Terry Zwigoff, the gleeful cynics behind the laugh-out-loud bleakness of Ghost World. This is the first time that Zwigoff, who also directed Bad Santa and the documentary Crumb, has had a protagonist who started off as an innocent, and he approaches Jerome’s descent (or would Zwigoff consider it an ascent?) into cynicism with relish.

Clowes’ script is an expansion of a four-page comic-book story he wrote, but it bears as strong a resemblance to the scenes in Illeana Douglas’ summer-school art class in Ghost World. The fictional Strathmore Institute is populated by wannabes, poseurs, hangers-on, and has-beens, just like a real art school, but the satirical caricatures, though grounded in truth, strain credibility. The jokes hit their targets mercilessly, and they keep hitting them, pounding them into submission with the willful merriment of a pair of filmmakers who really need to get revenge on those who have underappreciated their talents, but the characters are a series of straw men, cliched stereotypes of pompous and pretentious art-world figures that we’ve all seen before. Even those who are marginally sympathetic (and none, save Jerome, are more than marginally sympathetic) are types, not individuals, and bear a tenuous relationship to reality: Witness Audrey (Sophia Myles), the beautiful figure-class model with whom virginal Jerome quickly becomes infatuated. In all my drawing classes, we had exactly one attractive nude model and, to give you a sense of what she was like, one day in class, in the middle of a standing pose, she reached down, scratched herself, and plucked a crab from her pubic hair. Audrey isn’t like that; she straddles the perennial virgin/whore line with such equipoise that it’s impossible to guess which side she falls on or, for that matter, to figure out much else about her. There’s even a lingering question of whether or not she’s bisexual: Her friend Candace (Katherine Moennig from “The L Word,” appropriately) introduces herself to Jerome by explaining “Audrey and I used to bump cunts. … Just kidding.” Audrey never ventures a response. After the complex, ambivalent Enid and Rebecca of Ghost World, it’s a letdown to see Clowes and Zwigoff deliver a female character who’s so unformed, but perhaps this abstractness is what allows Jerome to fall for her so quickly and thoroughly: He’s able to project onto her any idea he wants.

Imagining Audrey as the woman of his dreams may be the only way that Jerome can exert any control over his experiences; he’s otherwise hopelessly at the mercy of those around him — his fellow students who reject the sturdy, if somewhat bland, craftsmanship of his work in favor of the supposedly honest and raw scribblings of a no-talent whiner; his professors who either ignore him entirely or compare his work unfavorably to that of a student who draws high-school-notebook-style profile views of muscle cars and Sherman tanks, because he’s “unlearned all that art-school bullshit.” (As Professor Sandiford, John Malkovich has found the role he was born to play; for once all his strange effeteness and actorish pomposity feel just right. But the filmmakers’ desire to attack everybody needlessly undermines others in the cast: It just feels cheap and lazy when even the regal Anjelica Huston, playing a smart, sincere art history professor, has to be embarrassed by a vacation photo that somehow got mixed in with her lecture slides. There’s no satirical point to it and no follow-through; it’s just that every character is required to be humiliated.) Even when Jerome has a brief success it’s quickly undercut: Just as he’s ready to celebrate over the “A” he got on his semester portfolio, he sees that everyone in the class got an “A,” regardless of their ineptitude or laziness. Zwigoff and Clowes are incisive about the intellectual vacuity and general shoddiness of much contemporary art and about the mindless glomming onto trendy, meretricious crap over work with more traditional, accessible esthetic values, but one can’t help catching a whiff of sour grapes. Clowes is a gifted (though uneven) comic-book writer/illustrator who responds to the sneering superiority of the “high art” crowd by throwing their pretensions and intellectual laziness back in their faces. They’ve earned his scorn, certainly, but he does himself no favors by acting like a petulant adolescent pissed off that the cool kids don’t like him. To achieve its ends, satire needs to have a little bit of affection — or at least ambivalence — toward its target; satire as an act of revenge reduces the satirist along with his enemies.

Thus, it’s ironic that the movie Art School Confidential most reminded me of was one made by a genuine star of the contemporary art world. In 1997, the brilliant photographer Cindy Sherman co-wrote and directed the unbrilliant Office Killer, an uneven horror/comedy/satire about a mousy proofreader (Carol Kane) at a big consumer magazine who goes off her nut and becomes a serial killer, bumping off her obnoxious co-workers one by one. Art School Confidential has a serial killer too — and trust me, you’ll know who it is from the character’s very first scene — and in both cases we find ourselves rooting for the killer, even selecting the loathsome characters we’d like to see garroted next. The two films also have a similarly unwieldy blend of black comedy and attempted social commentary, but Zwigoff is a more experienced and proficient director than Sherman. He just about manages the balancing act, though the film’s shifts in tone can be disorienting. What pulls it all together, oddly, is a pure through-line of genuine cynicism; even when it seems that Zwigoff might be about to go soft on poor Jerome or get tangled up in the complications of the murder-mystery plot, he always manages to bring off a nasty zinger that whips the story back into line. It’s not a strategy I would necessarily recommend to other directors, or one that many would even be able to duplicate but, when what you’ve got to work with is a soul brimming with misanthropy, you might as well make the most of it.

Jeremy C. Fox is a founding critic of Pajiba and a member of the Online Film Critics Society.You may email him at jeremycfox[at]gmail.com.

ofcs.gif


Hoot | Proposition, The



Comments

I go to a "proper" art school, and I'm so excited to see this movie!! I happen to be, well, normal, and thus tend to see the weirdo art school stereotypes wandering around my college with a distant annoyance that the main character of this movie will probably experience after a few years of being trapped in a studio. I don't expect a mind-blowing, cult-classic film, but I definitely hope its worth enough laughs to buy the DVD in a couple of months.

Posted by: Blondi at May 18, 2006 12:21 AM

kudos for the title of the article! i'm obsessed with that moz song right now.

Posted by: mal at May 18, 2006 8:27 AM

You had me at pubic crabs.

Posted by: TheIdleReceptionist at May 18, 2006 10:09 AM

equipoise

STOP USING BIG WORDS!

Posted by: Nairb at May 18, 2006 11:08 AM

You want small words? Read the Drudge Report, dumbass.

Posted by: Derwood at May 18, 2006 11:27 AM

Did you just say solipsistic? I love that word.

Posted by: Syd at May 18, 2006 12:56 PM

Can't wait to see this. Looks like one that will be fun and entertaining whether it has faults or not. Faults in a masterwork like say Amadeus would be inexcusably jarring, but in something like this they can almost make it more fun and interesting.

Posted by: Eep at May 18, 2006 1:03 PM

We called one of our figure models the Nude Ninja, he used some kind of "martial arts" moves to change poses...he is probably a serial killer now.

This kind of sounds like the movie that had "the Breather" in it...what the hell was the name of that movie? The killer uses horse head book ends...

Posted by: MRod at May 18, 2006 1:06 PM

was the ninja man at art student league, cause i swear there was a male model there who brought in weapons as "props." scary...

Posted by: me at May 18, 2006 2:41 PM

I don't think so this was at East Texas State (now A&M Commerce)...which should be embarassing, but James Earl Jones is an alum, so that makes it the school Darth Vader went to.

One of the Nude Ninja's poses was a head stand...oye, where do they find these guys?!?

Posted by: MRod at May 18, 2006 3:17 PM

MRod, you are thinking of "Student Bodies".

Posted by: Anonymous at May 18, 2006 3:20 PM

I wasn't prepared at all for this movie, since I hadn't checked Pajiba before my friend and I trolloped to the theater. (I swear, I trust this place for its reviews before I go to the theaters.) However, I found it to be both right on the mark, and yet failing somehow. There was just a lack of life at every turn, kind of like (dare I say) Napoleon Dynamite, except this had a plot.

I felt no sympathy or love for Audrey, although the reference to Little Audrey, and not Audrey Hepburn, was classic. However, much of her character is underdeveloped, and we don't see a lot through Jerome's eyes to assume that's how he sees her. It's still an outsider's p.o.v., and it makes Audrey look quite boring and bland. While the movie seems to lack in some aspects, such as character development, it's almost as if they know they lack something. I think that's shown when Bardo (Joel Moore) proceeds to point out every stereotype imaginable on the first day of class, but not landing a stereotype for Jerome, because, in the art world, Jerome is a "machine."

You have to admit, though, the performances were hilarious. My friend and I (she's an art major, I'm a graphics design major) kept rolling our eyes, because there's people like that everywhere. Not only that, Steve Buscemi's appearance as Broadway Bob was an excellent cameo.

Posted by: duckandcover at May 18, 2006 4:15 PM

Im a SVA art geek (graphic design turned toy designer sell out) cannot wait to see this in such a twisted way. Really need to see it with an "artsy" crowd...somehow I think that my auditor and pre-law friends are just going to scratch their heads and wonder...Hopefully it will be good enough to hold my attention for a while.

Posted by: Nancy at May 18, 2006 4:49 PM

I'm about to go to SAIC, and I'm a little afraid to watch this one. I'm expecting pretention, of course, but at least maybe I can have some hope for the summer if I pass on this one in the theatres. Definetely will rent it, though... I'll probably get a dada enthusiast for a roommate.

Posted by: Alicia at May 18, 2006 7:00 PM

Oh man, this brings back memories... we had one model who looked like a cross between Stalin and Hitler with a potbelly, so all our sketches turned out as crepy as hell.

We also had a guy who did ninja poses, but he used the old broom handle to do it.

Now I'm really excited to see this movie. I want to see the living cliches that are art students roasted.

Posted by: naive_charm at May 18, 2006 8:15 PM

I had a professor who kept CUBES OF HIS BODY HAIR on his desk. Cubes. Not spheres, not pyramids, cubes. I feel that really says something, don't you?

Posted by: Jenn at May 19, 2006 7:31 AM

That he intended to use them to make bouillon?

Posted by: Tim at May 19, 2006 8:16 AM

I attended art school for a couple of years, but left for business school once I'd had enough of the pompous vacuity and intellectual pointlessness of the former--not to mention my overwhelming doubts about its career value. So when I saw the trailer for this film I was giddily slack-jawed--it's as if they modelled it after my sour experience; even without seeing the full film it seems to ring true on every irritating hippy and irrelevant failed-artist prof I had to deal with. I can't wait to see this!

Posted by: Brian at May 19, 2006 2:02 PM

Seems kind of weird that a protagonist who is struggling to make inroads in the art world is played by the son of the guy who directed The English Patient. That's not to say that he isn't talented, maybe he is. But if he's a pretty kid, it's probably because he's never had to worry about jobs or money, or all of the other things that most artists have to think about. Having majored in poverty myself, I know about the paralytic fear that often accompanies thoughts of the future. Please don't interpret that statement as some preachy testimonial about how I've suffered for my art, it's not.

At any rate, someone with such an exponential advantage over everyone else in that world doesn't strike me as the type of person who would be able to connect with the fear and disillusionment of that community.

But all told, that's why it's called acting, I guess. I should see the film before throwing more stones.

Posted by: M at May 19, 2006 3:17 PM

ASC is really awesome. I saw it with another recent grad, her fashion, me studio art. We were cracking up from beginning to end. I laughed at myself a lot because of the parodies and the lumpy tone, which reminded me of my own uneven art-making, art school attempts. I thought that some flakiness was perfectly appropriate.
Most people who went to art school are going to love it, many marks and costumes are bang on.

Posted by: AKR at May 20, 2006 12:54 PM

This movie took all the easy shots at art school kids. The beginning (all the talk about hooking up with 'art school skanks')seemed like a formulaic teen movie weakly tailored to the RISD crowd. Audrey was the flattest, blandest female character I've seen in a while. Did she ever say anything interesting? And when you're doing a figure study, you're not lusting over the model. You're thinking about lines and forms, not tits and ass. So that part sucked.
This movie found its humor in all the obvious stereotypes, and the least 'insidery' art jargon. Juxtaposition, anyone? I go to a top art school, and sure, we've got all the types. Nothing in this film was analyzed, subverted, or even explored, though. I wasted $10 on something I could've seen on any Monday morning for free.

Posted by: N at May 20, 2006 1:14 PM

This movie took all the easy shots at art school kids. The beginning (all the talk about hooking up with 'art school skanks')seemed like a formulaic teen movie weakly tailored to the RISD crowd. Audrey was the flattest, blandest female character I've seen in a while. Did she ever say anything interesting? And when you're doing a figure study, you're not lusting over the model. You're thinking about lines and forms, not tits and ass. So that part sucked.
This movie found its humor in all the obvious stereotypes, and the least 'insidery' art jargon. Juxtaposition, anyone? I go to a top art school, and sure, we've got all the types. Nothing in this film was analyzed, subverted, or even explored, though. I wasted $10 on something I could've seen on any Monday morning for free.

Posted by: N at May 20, 2006 1:15 PM

cubes of pubes... genius

Posted by: KJam at May 20, 2006 1:22 PM

Uhm, whoever mentioned the "Ninja-model" who uses martial arts moves to change poses... you're talking about Omni,
right?
RISD pride, unite!

Posted by: Tea at May 20, 2006 9:21 PM

"I go to a top art school, and sure, we've got all the types. Nothing in this film was analyzed, subverted, or even explored, though."

No wonder you were disappointed--they were making fun of you.


--an art school dropout, whose work subsequently improved.

Posted by: Vi at May 22, 2006 4:19 PM

Darth Vader "attended" ETSU he "graduated from" Michigan.

Posted by: MRod at May 25, 2006 10:02 AM

I seem to recall a female nude model of yours that was quite attractive (clears throat)....and crabless.

Posted by: Misha at June 6, 2006 7:01 PM

I haven't seen this movie, but judging by its' title, I can tell it's an artsy type of film. I'm sure it will have a record run at some dumpy old vintage movie/art film cinema, and be up for Best Screenplay Award at every peckerhead film festival known to mankind.....How many are there now? And every wannabe Tarantino/Picasso/Warhol lame-o will be transferring his emotions to the main characters, and saying to his waif-like, Bohemian bodies, "That's how it was, for me man!"

Posted by: C.J. at June 7, 2006 4:57 PM

this movie was as boring and monotonous as john malkovitch's voice and his stupid triangles..and i had to drive out of my way to some art house theater because it wasn't playing at any major venues..i was really pissed i went..
and whats her nameaudrey wasn't all that, and jerome was short..the preppy guy was not that delved into, much too much time spent on rich fat guy making grandads movie..that character belonged in a Van Helsing movie..and the sterotype ughly hippie girls wer way too one dimensional...the only value this movie had was introducing us to teh name shiloh...

Posted by: leslie at June 10, 2006 2:12 AM

"she straddles the perennial virgin/whore line with such equipoise ..."

INDEED, STOP USING BIG WORDS.

This review is pretentious, whereas the film is not. This review smacks of envy.

And by NO MEANS are the characters caricatures. The critic missed the satyre, which is the genre of this film.

The jokes in ART SCHOOL are not overdone, neither are they 'pounding'

The anecdote of the reviewer about the crab in the pubic hair of the model reveals something about him, and nothing about the movie.

He should review Broke Back instead, or some angst-packed film on misguided dudes.

Posted by: Maria Mayer at August 31, 2006 7:35 AM

I enjoyed this film, but it definitely was a slight dissapointment coming from Terry Zwigoff. I attend an arts high school and am used to the kind of crazy characters who are pictured in the film. And the hilarious part? The guy who played Eno in this movie is one of my teachers at said arts high.

Posted by: Nat at September 25, 2006 9:18 PM

I don't understand people who call for the discontinuation of "big words". It would be one thing if you were having a conversation with somebody and they kept dropping words like "equipoise" and "meretricious" (I love that word!).. in that case, I think it would be appropriate to say something like "what the hell are you saying? STOP USING BIG WORDS" But what's the point of saying that to someone who is writing an article, or writing anything for that matter? "Big words" are how we add spice and flavor to our writing, instead of using the same boring ones over and over. If you're going to complain about the review, stick to the point, which is your opinion that the reviewer's opinion is wrong. Don't go off subject by trying to tell him how to write.

Posted by: squiggly at March 5, 2007 7:51 PM

I just sat through this one tonight - what a HUGE disappointment it was. I can't believe the ineptitude of some of it (for example, after we see mom and dad in the kitchen hugging, why does the daughter need to make the remark about being gay - it's redundant!). I was a big fan of Ghost World, Bad Santa and Crumb, but this is nowhere near as good as any of those shows.

ps: what's with the argument over big words? Puhleeze.

Posted by: Dot at May 1, 2007 8:46 AM