Artivels Undescribable Perfection

Grimerlana Plenty to Like, Plenty to Dislike

ShangLuda Admirable film.

Humbersi The first must-see film of the year.

Ersbel Oraph This is the story of a magic trick. By the half time I was rooting for Tim. I knew he would finally get the good product. Or else there was no movie. So the happy end is obvious once you get past the introduction. But there were nice twists. And the building of the background, than of the painting were made interesting, when they were quite boring. So probably the showbiz skills of Penn and Teller are weighting in quite a lot. But it is a cheat. The description, including the extra mirror were already described by David Hockney some 7 years before this documentary project even started in the book called Secret Knowledge: Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters. Me, I was left with the impression that Tim did it all, when in fact his merit might be limited to a 3D description of the original painting (improbable) and for coming up with a simple device known from the late Middle Ages called Camera Lucida. No, in fact, he was the director of the whole construction site and he did the very impressive 130 (?) days of paint including an attempted suicide involving carbon monoxide. He did prove that David Hockney is right and the books comparing Vermeer's so called style are pure bull.Which reminds me of the Bullet Catch trick done by Penn and Teller. It is only a trick. Like Tim who did not discover the device, Penn does not catch a bullet shot from a gun. But it is a good show. And it is still there to prove something: that science could win over the ignorance of art critics.Contact me with Questions, Comments or Suggestions ryitfork @ bitmail.ch

tindaleroad This film has to get at least three stars because it does show some of Vermeer's lovely paintings, if only momentarily and in close-up. Apart from that it seems to be a film about a guy who thinks that Vermeer used mirrors/machines to get his paintings so lifelike. Really? What about all those other lifelike painters. Durer, Holbein, Ingres, Velasquez .... the list could go for ages. He seems to know absolutely nothing about art. The fact that Vermeer did not use pencil or other sketches on the canvas, before putting on the paint, means nothing at all. Plenty of painters use oil paint heavily diluted. Anyway, perhaps it is all saved in the last half. Perhaps there is new evidence, wonderful arguments, wit and brilliance. I wouldn't know. By then I was fast asleep.

ritsn I have visited great museums and seen gorgeous Vermeer paintings and been so impressed by the art. I've also recently tried my hand at painting, and seen how much easier it is to copy than to create. This movie really provokes thought as to what is art and what is technology. What Tim created was so impressive as a first painting, and it is better than any Paint-by-Numbers I've ever seen. Whether it comes close to showing the heart or creativity of the original is left unsaid and unseen, as we don't have the luxury of seeing the original, in the whole or even in the the brushwork. I don't think Tim was trying to say he could totally recreate the art; he was simply positing the theory of how Vermeer could have created it. I found it very plausible. And that does not take away from whatever beautiful technique Vermeer used in putting down each stroke of the brush. I read one Guardian critic who lambasted it, but could not put in words exactly how this painting was different than the original. I wish he could have enlightened me. I found the film fascinating, but was left wishing there was more of the original I could have seen, too (granted, they probably could not get permission).

Sergeant_Tibbs Penn & Teller are most well-known for their entertaining and often edgy magic act. While Teller's documentary Tim's Vermeer is unrelated to his own work, though Penn and himself are active participants in the project, it does have a type of magic involved. The film follows wealthy inventor Tim Jenison's attempts to re-create a painting by Johannes Vermeer using methods that he theorises that Vermeer most likely used. Jenison is no painter, but he has a mechanical mind. To many, Vermeer represents when art started to become more realistic and three dimensional, almost like a photograph. While some art historians believe that he used optics such as a camera obscura to project an image onto a canvas, others implore that it was from sheer talent. It's a hot debate in the art world and one that Jenison is deeply involved in outside of his primary interests and business in contemporary computers, cameras and television. The film thus studies the relationship between art and technology and how creative expression can be manufactured by machines, though it can be argued that through Jenison's obsessive attempts to re-create a Vermeer he in turn learns the skills in order to do it, rather than prove his theory of being able to re-do it in a clinical objective way. Jenison is a fun figure to watch, he's thoughtful and practical with a sense of humour about his preoccupation. He's kind of like a mix between Dan Harmon and Philip Seymour Hoffman. Sometimes the mission does seem quite frivolous when this time and money could be put into more productive and urgent matters but it does somewhat justify itself. However, while it has all the ingredients for a great doc, Teller's direction just can't keep up. It suffers from choppy editing, a really rough production and a lack of structure. Perhaps a finer editor would have improved it significantly, but Teller's work makes it a much cheaper picture. Still very much worth the watch.7/10