Why You Shouldn't Be An Artist Or Should You?
Why You Shouldn't Be An Artist is a short film directed by Simon Cade that explores some of the reasons a person should not become an artist. In listing these many cons of having a creative career, the film actually comes up with a monumental reason for creating and putting art out into the world. The questions gradually become a type of answer in trying to decide whether art is worth all the trouble and inconvenience it demands at times.
Something I liked aesthetically about this film was how minimalist the structure of it was. This film is just two minutes and 34 seconds of a monologue. The words could've easily become too lengthy or sounded too commanding to be taken seriously. Instead, the entire monologue has this beautiful rhythm and flow to it. It actually sounds more like a poem and not just because of the moments certain words rhymed. There was this brilliant strength to what the narrator was saying and how the words tied together naturally. It didn't sound like someone …show more content…
The film's background is gray skies. Gray is such a dull color that often encourages the feeling of limitation rather than possibility and opportunity. So, I believe that image was chosen to express the negative side of creativity. There are no characters and no plot in this film. It's all one art piece that is sending a message about the purpose and the struggles of art. That message is that the questioning and doubting are all irrelevant and small in the presence of raw passion and creativity. When someone creates something, whether it's a song, a poem, a drawing, or a film, there is a little spark that ignites. It really isn't and shouldn't become about attaining other people's approval and praise. It's about physicalizing emotion, taking all the craziness that is brewing on the inside and turning it into physical form and sharing it with the rest of the
Why You Shouldn't Be An Artist is a short film directed by Simon Cade that explores some of the reasons a person should not become an artist. In listing these many cons of having a creative career, the film actually comes up with a monumental reason for creating and putting art out into the world. The questions gradually become a type of answer in trying to decide whether art is worth all the trouble and inconvenience it demands at times.
Something I liked aesthetically about this film was how minimalist the structure of it was. This film is just two minutes and 34 seconds of a monologue. The words could've easily become too lengthy or sounded too commanding to be taken seriously. Instead, the entire monologue has this beautiful rhythm and flow to it. It actually sounds more like a poem and not just because of the moments certain words rhymed. There was this brilliant strength to what the narrator was saying and how the words tied together naturally. It didn't sound like someone …show more content…
The film's background is gray skies. Gray is such a dull color that often encourages the feeling of limitation rather than possibility and opportunity. So, I believe that image was chosen to express the negative side of creativity. There are no characters and no plot in this film. It's all one art piece that is sending a message about the purpose and the struggles of art. That message is that the questioning and doubting are all irrelevant and small in the presence of raw passion and creativity. When someone creates something, whether it's a song, a poem, a drawing, or a film, there is a little spark that ignites. It really isn't and shouldn't become about attaining other people's approval and praise. It's about physicalizing emotion, taking all the craziness that is brewing on the inside and turning it into physical form and sharing it with the rest of the