llock focuses on a more personal and fanciful aspect as it creates a somewhat fictional account of the early life and influences that helped to develop Pollock in the way that he did. A heavy focus upon his alcoholism and the level of psychological trauma he suffered as a tortured genius is specifically engaged. Although this might in fact be true, the effect that such a representation has is first and foremost engaged for dramatic effect. Finally, the third film, Who the Fuck is Jackson Pollock, is an adventure film told with on the backdrop of Pollock’s life and contribution to art. Although it should not be dismissed, this particular film cannot be viewed as authoritative as Pollock is only an “aside” to the actual intrigue and primary interest of “finding lost treasure” that pervades the film.
By means of comparison and contrast to one of the clips that was viewed as compared to one of the films that was viewed for this section, the two that have been chosen are “F is for Fake” and “Who the Fuck is Jackson Pollock”. The first film focuses upon the fact that the world of art forgery is a developed industry; leveraging the “artistic” abilities of master forgers who are able to adequately mimic the techniques, colors, patterns, and approach that well-known and highly sought after experts were responsible for crafting. By mean of comparison, “Who the Fuck is Jackson Pollock” depicts a much more magical interpretation of artwork as something that only Pollock could have been responsible for. The differential between these two has to do with the fact that one assumes that Pollock must be the master painter of the artwork in question; whereas the other clip maintains the fact that even some of the most convincing pieces are in fact forgeries.
Henri Cartier Besson’s “Images a la Sauvette” engages the reader with the understanding that art, whether photographic or within some other genre, must not specifically be engaged in the