Rate EXIT THROUGH THE GIFT SHOP

[abcdefz]

I'd never heard of Banksy before this, and I do have moral problems with much of what he does. But he's undeniably got talent and wit.

There's speculation that some of this film is a hoax, but I don't care about that. It's really entertaining and thought-provoking. And funny and unpretentious.

8

[yeahwho]

Haven't seen it yet, I really like Banksy and documentary film-making is right up my alley. I'm pretty sure I'll give it a 9 or 10 but I'm going to have to wait for DVD due to the limited release. I've watched a few snippets here and there.

Glad you enjoyed it. Sneaky business that fellow is.

[abcdefz]

A lot of the footage is poorly shot, but it's still a terrific document.

[roosta]

I'm not a huge fan of Banksy, but i really liked this.

Its really a giant piss-take on the art world if you ask me. I think the whole thing was a hoax set up by Banksy to make a point about the nature of hype/fame.

[gbsuey]

I'd never heard of Banksy before this, and I do have moral problems with much of what he does. But he's undeniably got talent and wit.


8
Just curious, what are the problems you have with him??

I just love what he does,i think it's awesome that he's kept himself totally private, never been caught.And i will most definitely be seeing this film as soon as i can.

Yay Banksy (y) (y) (y)

[abcdefz]

Much more "what he does" than "him."

I think there's a sturdy argument to be made that one shouldn't paint on someone else's canvas, so to speak.
It's not his property. And just because it comes off well doesn't negate that. If you awoke one morning and realized
someone else had decided to accessorize your property, you might object. Odds are, it wouldn't be a masterpiece,
but that's not the principle either.

Banksy demands anonymity, too. Isn't that property of sorts? And, hoax or not, he became the director so that
HIS version of the scene would be the one that used what's pretty surely the real footage of some major work.

Just another anarchist who still wants things on his own terms.

[gbsuey]

I had this conversation with my son recently, he didn't think a friend of mine should be allowed to go out and grafitti, and i would agree with him did i not consider what he does is art, well thought through and intelligently humorous. so i tried to explain how i felt about it and then left him by the side of the road for disagreeing with me(!)

And yup, if someone decided to come and spray a massive cock on the side of my house or "so and so is gay" i'd be pissed off. But i'd welcome some proper graffiti art,allthough i can see how the average man/woman wasn't too happy to wake up to a Banksy on the side of their house(until they discovered they could make a mint from it, that is!!)

He's gotta be raking it in, we don't know who he is and so don't really know his philosophy. He could be a total twat.

[nodanaonlyzuul]

I reeeeally want to see this!

I was lucky enough to the gallery show Barely Legal in LA. Whether you love his stuff or not, he certainly gets conversation going. I do like the message in most if not all of his work.

[abcdefz]

Gbusey--

I guess thing is: It ain't his. Whether it's art or not doesn't matter.

I mean, I could paint a really cute puppy on your door with all good artistic intentions, but if I never consulted you in the matter, it's not right.

[na§tee]

banksy is from bristol (i live in bristol) so we have a lot of his stuff around the city. street art central a go go. there's lots of the city in the film. i work for an indie cinema and of course we wanted it when it was released here a few months back. umm. [edit long story about how his publicist was really hard work etc etc but i'm paranoid about google, dude]

my opinion on the film (and that of many other people) is that mr brainwash is all a big banksy piss-take and it's not for real. he's poking fun at the art world and it's pompous, mass produced, team assembled ridiculousness (well, at least in the sort of 'art' mr brainwash ordered his minions to rip off uhhh 'made'). do you honestly think it's a genuine document? i seriously think it's a clever hoax. i read this review when it first came out (http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/film_reviews/article7050126.ece) and it puts it pretty succinctly...

whether it's real or not i think it's hilarious. and entertaining. and that gets my vote for a good film.

[abcdefz]

I think a lot of it's the real thing, but Mr. Brainwash, I dunno.


I'm not the first one to point this out, but it's similar to Orsen Welles, F FOR FAKE. Worth a look. Welles just gets more explicit about it by the end, but the subject matter and form are almost identical to EXIT.

[roosta]

I used to like Banksy but some of his work annoys me, it just seems like 'subversion-by-numbers'...stick a McDonalds symbol on a tank or something and you've got a message. Maybe i'm just bored of it. I like to see him do new things (like the sculpture stuff)

The other thing is he is kind of biting the hand that feeds him. Mr. Brainwash and the show was kind of ripping alot of his fans too.

[mathcart]

Best movie I've seen so far this year hands down! LMmfAO!

A-Z- you have a few interesting points and I will def have to check out that wells flick/parallel.
Do you feel this way about all graffiti artists? (from your comments I would assume you do). Curious if its a philosophical point of contention for you or just the particular artist.
Also theres an interesting argument to be made in looking at this specific issue in a historical context, ie, graffiti on abandoned/neglected buildings during the height of worldwide urban decay was a willful act of neighborhood reclaiming and beautifying via art. Its less clearcut to me in that context that artists are acting disrespectfully to property. Everyone thats come up out of that culture since then (as the urban landscape they paint on has changed dramatically) usually starts there out of deference and respect to the culture.
I think, dont really know that much about that world, but i definitely have a deferent pov on it. Would like to know what you think...

[abcdefz]

I thunk you could make an excellent case for beautifying abandoned spaces. There was a spot in Sacramento I photographed often: It was the basement of a hospital that had been torn down so it was just this cavity in midtown that took up about half a block. Artists would do their thing so it was constantly changing. Not as public as one might like but to me much less reproachable even though, yes, someone owns it. But abandoned is abandoned, so I don't have unilateral reservations about that.

My problem is with imposing changes upon owned, inhabited or used property someone else owns, permission not secured. No matter how subjectively artistic it might be, IT AIN'T YOURS. That's pretty simple. And if want to live in a decent world, we need to exhibit decency and civility.

When I was a facilities manager, we had a very public wall high on a neighborhood hill where lots of traffic passed. We offered that wall to a handful of kids who did good work. No takers. That was sad, and I don't like the implications.

[mathcart]

I thunk you could make an excellent case for beautifying abandoned spaces. There was a spot in Sacramento I photographed often: It was the basement of a hospital that had been torn down so it was just this cavity in midtown that took up about half a block. Artists would do their thing so it was constantly changing. Not as public as one might like but to me much less reproachable even though, yes, someone owns it. But abandoned is abandoned, so I don't have unilateral reservations about that.

Agreed, but we start to get into murky areas here as many non-abandoned bldgs can or have certainly the ability to look it. Also while I completely get your point, I think I have a hard time saying that art should be judged on any other merit than itself.


My problem is with imposing changes upon owned, inhabited or used property someone else owns, permission not secured. No matter how subjectively artistic it might be, IT AIN'T YOURS. That's pretty simple. And if want to live in a decent world, we need to exhibit decency and civility.

One of the most interesting quotes in the movie of this thread (u know- the reason we is here in the first place!) was when Bansky said that his art didn't last for more than a day or so, and he didn't expect or particularilly want it to (he said that when he was explaining why he wanted to take on MBW as his official videographer). These guys don't expect to own their art perhaps for just the reason you are so adamant about them being dicks for doing it. Its not their property.
Look its not exactly the same as this but it sort of reminds me of the Japanese calligraphy you do on with a wet brush on dry ground, art for the sake of it that you release into the universe and then it disappears (from you for the sake of this analogy). I know its not the same but it does have a mildly similar feeling to me.


When I was a facilities manager, we had a very public wall high on a neighborhood hill where lots of traffic passed. We offered that wall to a handful of kids who did good work. No takers. That was sad, and I don't like the implications.

This is sad, sort of, but understandable. They're kids, they didn't want permission. Perhaps thats the bit you object to, and I have to say, it does creep me out personally when (crappy) graffitti shows up on my bldg or wherever, but I also recognize that at the same time I find it distasteful I also think theres something sort of amazing about what it says for the power of artistic expression.
Or something- I know I think something along those lines but I feel like I'm not conveying it well. I guess I'm saying that while I completely understand and agree with your point, theres another level I am willing to engage graffiti on as a form of art that is (or has historically) been put in its palce because it borrows its canvas instead of creating it itself (not surprising its so intertwined with hip-hop actually when you think of it that way, huh!).

Ok my thoughts.

Again, I really liked the movie.
:)

[abcdefz]

Thanks for engaging in this discussion. Very cool.

Yeah, I understand that the art doesn't last, but why is that? Because someone now has to take the time and go to the expense of removing it. When my building manager has to do that it cuts into his study time. If it's an emergency, he has to miss class. Yeah, it's what he signed up for -- being a building manager -- but it's a completely unnecessary inconveinience because someone else feels it's okay to impose.

I don't think they're dicks for doing this (you've twice sort of interpreted what I'm saying as a personal judgment); I understand the impulse. I understand appreciating it. I just think there's a flaw at the very core of this form if it happens without consent. You don't fart in the elevator, either, you know?

And, yes, I really liked the movie, too. Probably the second or third best I've seen so far this year.

[mathcart]

Yeah, I feel like I am in "heated agreement" with you here...
There is absolutely a way that it is an extremely juvenile and somewhat obnoxious art form, when looked at through the lens of the people who have to deal with it (especially if they didn't want/ like it).
And yet every once and a while I find myself completely captivated by certain pieces I see in the street or wherever. I guess thats all I was saying.
My bad for misinterpreting you, I looked back and you were on point, I was totally overstating.
:D

[abcdefz]

Cheers. I love intelligent, reasoned discussion.

[yeahwho]

There is this fellow who wrote much of what banksy does back in 1991, his name is Hakim Bey, he is a template for the banksy style.

I was listening to KEXP FM (http://kexp.org/) today and they played a spoken word piece of Hakim Bey's Poetic Terrorism (http://sniggle.net/Manifesti/poeticTerrorism.php). After hearing it I went yeah, sure this is banksy's code.



An exquisite seduction carried out not only in the cause of mutual satisfaction but also as a conscious act in a deliberately beautiful life - may be the ultimate PT. The PTerrorist behaves like a confidence-trickster whose aim is not money but change.

Don't do PT for other artists, do it for people who will not realize (at least for a few moments) that what you have done is art. Avoid recognizable art-categories, avoid politics, don't stick around to argue, don't be sentimental; be ruthless, take risks, vandalize only what must be defaced, do something children will remember all their lives - but don't be spontaneous unless the PT Muse has possessed you.

Dress up. Leave a false name. Be legendary. The best PT is against the law, but don't get caught. Art as crime; crime as art.

[Splashleigh]

awesome to find this discussion on here! especially smart, informed and respectful discussion at that.
i'm currently writing a bitch of an essay for my honours in art history on why contemporary painting isn't dead and the main thread of my argument is that it isn't because of people like Banksy who's pulling art out of museums and onto the street. I get what you're saying about disrespecting other artists's works but i love that his disrespect is intensely political and subversive towards art wankers, i don't think it is art for art's sake i think it's art for Banksy's political-personal-shouting-even if it's unreasonable sake.

p.s. notice Kate Moss's place got broken into whilst she was home so the thieves could steal a Banksy piece she owned?? publicity stunt much?

[abcdefz]

The way I see it, just because the result is "art" doesn't excuse the crime. I've stolen for art before, and it was wrong. I was weak and impatient. Heck, one of my all time favorite movies was shot with a camera the director stole. That doesn't give him the right he believes he had.

When people impose their will upon others, it's that much less genuine freedom we have.

[yeahwho]

When people impose their will upon others, it's that much less genuine freedom we have.

That last sentence is a doubled edged blade. Like the cartoonist (http://www.king5.com/news/Draw-Muhammed-Day-94543404.html) recently in Seattle who innocently made a cartoon and started a movement that eventually caused Pakistan to shutdown facebook & youtube.

"What started as something about censorship has ended in censorship. It's a full circle situation,

"I regret my cartoon the way I made it. I wish it would have said 'Everybody draw the CEO of Viacom Day,'" says Norris.

[nodanaonlyzuul]

finally saw it last night. Brilliant, hoax or not, it still works. (y)