|
|
|
|
|
by brianmcdonough
4384 days ago
|
|
Just my humble opinion, but it doesn't matter how the artist achieved the results. The work speaks for itself. Tim's Vermeer is probably a lot like watching a behind the scenes video. If you enjoy consuming information for information sake, you might find it interesting, but a lot of work and money goes into making a feature documentary and it should be a work of art itself. If it doesn't have broad appeal, it's referred to as a vanity project. The Cove is a good example of a documentary that is also a work of art. The story has a beginning a middle and an end and they are all made big through the story telling. The same could have been true of Tim's Vermeer if the story was told differently. I apologize if my original comment came across as negative. I sometimes feel let down if stories are told in lazy or inexperienced ways and the article makes the story play like an episode of this old house. |
|
I don't know if it will have broad appeal, but it only had a limited theatrical release, and I think it will be suited better to DVD and VOD like Netflix.
As far as vanity goes, I mean it certainly seems like Tim painted the Vermeer more to scratch his own curiosity than to make a big profit. Making the documentary might also have been a way to help him give himself incentive to finish the project, indeed in one part of the film he says "If the cameras weren't filming right now, I would just give up."