Jackson Pollock

[voodoo1313]

this is NOT jackson pollock

[DickMcChristopher]

I feel beaten and cheated on by a man I never agreed to cocksuck and have assfuck me.

[CrazyJustin2006]

Asshole you're not Jackson Pollock! Pollock may have been fat before he died but he wasn't as fat as your fat ass!

[h2k6]

This was what a commercial?

[h2k6]

Terrible terrible commercial

[edcerc]

why? i kind of like it

[friggod]

i really love the way he worked! the action paiting thing with all the dripping.. i practice a lot myself but im curious what materials pollock used, what kind of paint.

[alexitin]

enamel house paint. A lot of Long Island company called Sapolin

[elsa8001]

When I see a Pollack I don't see art. I see expression....but not art. There is a difference.

[alexitin]

what is the difference?

[elsa8001]

To me the difference between art and expression is that expression does not try to capture something found in fantasy or transcendent of the artist himself. That is the best way I can put it. That fantasy can be romantic,mythic, idyllic, etc and transcends the artist in that everything is not a "self-portrait" or a mode of catharsis.

[elsa8001]

Expression on the other hand, is strictly based in a desired outcome: political ideas, shock, offense, debate or personal statement on one's self or for one's self. I think Pollack's work falls into the latter.

[elsa8001]

He painted the drip style almost in response to being rejected as an artist from schools of fine art, if I am not mistaken. His work was a personal statement, but it was not art in the sense that it spoke of fantasy or transcended him. It was all about Jackson Pollock. Each is a self portrait of him and for him.

[edcerc]

maybe there is but not in this case.

[RobinsonWith]

His painting looks like John Coltrane's music, that's what is in the backround, and it's so fitting

[Geritopia]

There goes that Jackson Pollack again, wearing his raw emotions on his sleeve to sell shoes.

[edcerc]

i dont think he recorded this with the intention of making it a commercial. he just happened to be wearing converse so it made sense.

[valentinerome]

Bellissimo Jackson Pollock !!!

[adx1rulez]

This shit is NOT art. Any fucker can do this. Drawing lines all over a pice of paper and selling for 150 million dollars... how sad can people to be to make it and worse buy it.

[tomMIKOS]

in the 40s and 50s when he started to do this, NOONE at all had the audacity to do it and also do it with skill: he used specific colors and created layers so subtle and yet so directly connected to the viewer's feelings... you have no clue buddy. you spell 'rules' with a 'z.'

[adx1rulez]

whats that got to do with anything. You havn't even started your names with a capital.

[NYCJuggalo]

This is so art, you are just ignorant. What do you want him to do, be like everyone else and paint a landscape? I think its better that he was unique and bold.

[adx1rulez]

I am not ignorant, I am giving an opinion which many people will support. I bet hes laughing in his grave at the amount of money people have spent on these paintings which really do not require an exceptional amount of skill

[edcerc]

it takes a tremendous amount of technique to do what hes doing. You can see by how the paint lands that he has total control of what is happening.

[adx1rulez]

ok fair enough maybe not anyone could do it but I do not know how people can justify it being worth all those millions

[richardyingren]

Thats right - the paint performed as Pollock wished it to, in the recent biopic there are blumders, Pollock always knew his materials.

[Geritopia]

It's not exactly shit but it does kind of show how essential timing is in a career. It takes audacity, timing, devotion, and a moody bastard to pull it off.

[adx1rulez]

I suppose but I just cannot agree with people saying it is good

[uwazz]

hmm interesting.. i take it you are an expert..

looser..

[adx1rulez]

What, and you putting crappy responses like that doesn't make you a loser. Pathetic

[WaterCoolerNews]

On a positive note, the production quality here is well done.

[WaterCoolerNews]

? Stay true...meaning, paint with your shoes on? I don't get this shit. It's an untruthful disgrace to the legendary Pollock and classic shoe that doesn't need a false reference to be appealing.

[WaterCoolerNews]

So, in a campaign about staying "True" there is a portrayal of history that is completely inaccurate. And let's talk about Pollock for a moment. Here's a guy that was a complete tortured soul, an alcoholic and suffered a tragic early death. Yes, he is and was one of the most successful artists to date, but what exactly is the "Stay true" referencing here?

[WaterCoolerNews]

Let's take a second and ask what this commercial is about. Pollock never wore Converse. In the film this imitates, he's wearing boots. So, Converse had an idea to forge history, for fun and for the sake of product placement, to associate Pollock's "True" style (whatever that means) with their brand slogan "Stay True." The whole thing stinks like yesterday's diapers (RR). The TRUTH is that Pollock never wore Cons. What the hell?

[prelan]

lol, stay drunk more like

[emtube]

Thanks for this, even this snippet is most welcome -- why isn't Namuth's entire film available?

[DoonRothmani]

this is not pollock, its a Converse sneaker commercial, with an actor playing pollock

[emtube]

Thanks for pointing this out. I noticed after posting, but still wonder why the Namuth film is not available...

[outlawjesus]

sure it's a commercial, but that's pollock.

[DoonRothmani]

pollock didnt look like that. that's an actor

[gregrunnels]

it's not pollock. It's a friend of mine. i shot the commercial.

[outlawjesus]

your friend looks a lot like him. thanks for the correction.

[ThomGreen666]

yeah that's NOT pollock. they should emphasize this on the commercial. pollock didn't just throw paint on a canvas like this imposter was.