The film is about a little girl named Marla Olmstead who is seemingly an abstract art prodigy. She rises to fame with her abstract paintings (selling some for a whopping $5,000+), but soon after is the subject of criticism and skepticism when Mark, her father, is accused of either ‘doctoring’ or ‘coaching’ her paintings. This little four year old girl is scrutinized by the fine art community and is even subjected to a severely negative critique by CBS' ’60-minutes”.
I have mixed feelings about the Olmstead family’s predicament. In the end, I feel bad for Marla. She’s so innocent to everything going on around her. For the most part in the film, Marla seems very indifferent, uncomfortable, and even withdrawn from all the attention she receives from her paintings. I think her mother, Laura, was a very genuine person, who was manipulated into making her daughter a spectacle. The father on the other hand, in my opinion, is one of the main offenders. It’s clear he liked the attention that his family received from Marla’s paintings. In a way, he seemed to be living vicariously through Marla, as he himself was an aspiring painter. I found it odd that, in the end, the mother was so tired of all the accusations that she offered to take a polygraph. The dad sat silent. He didn’t make any convincing argument that he was innocent of being overly involved in Marla’s paintings. The directors of the documentary even went so far as to videotape Marla’s paintings while she went through the artistic process. I think it was evident that the painting they recorded on video was definitely ‘elementary’ compared to the untapped ‘polished’ pieces that hung in local art galleries.
Honestly, we really have no real proof if Marla did her paintings herself, or if her dad coached/directed her. Only the family knows the truth. But considering the documentary as a whole, I don’t think Marla is a ‘painting prodigy’. I think she’s a little girl that loves to paint. I don't think she chooses her color palettes, but rather they are given to her. I believe she's being exploited for the financial gain of her parents and artistic promoters. And I think her parents have gotten used to the elevated lifestyle attributed her paintings. Her poor little brother Zane is going to grow up with an inferiority complex. He’s almost the ‘forgotten’ one in the family. Even Marla tried to give him some artistic credit, stating to the dad in the film that he paints too.
I have to say, even though I too am an artist (with a background in fine art), I don’t totally understand abstract art at times. I appreciate the colors. I acknowledge it as an artform. But I don’t initially see the symbolism. I don’t think all abstract paintings are calculated. And I do think some elements of abstract art are accidental.
Marla is in a serious situation. As stated at the end of the film, what does happen to her at age 12? Will she still be hailed or forgotten? I guess Marla could be considered an artist in her own right, but should she be acclaimed as an artistic abstract painting prodigy?…I personally don’t think so.
Anyone else see the film? What did you think?
2 comments:
That movie sounds interesting. I appreciate abstract art that shows the skill of the artist, like Picasso's Cubism. However, alot of abstract art looks like it took them like 5 minutes to make. That little girl probably does have natural ability, but how can you call someone a 'prodigy' in a field with no standards?
Matthew and I netflixed this movie a little while ago and it was such an emotionally charged topic for us both (growing up with art the way we did and both going to art colleges ((and Suitland haha)) XP) that it was hard to not be worked up over it. We came to the same conclusions you reached, only I think I am a bit more angry about it LOL The gallery owner is a horrible two-faced liar and I HATE him, and I do not think Marla’s parents are any better. You get the impression that the mom is telling the truth until you watch the extra features and see the unedited interview (the mom and dad on the couch) and then it appears that she did not know in the beginning but knows now that Marla is not the one doing the paintings. I empathized with the man filming it most - which may sound odd, but he was so heartbroken by all of it because it is such a heartbreaking story of manipulation and lies. I visited Marla's website after watching the film, and it just depresses you even more. The whole thing is just corrupt and I hope for Zane and Marla's sake that they are able to survive it unscathed, or as undamaged as possible. It is good morality tale though, do not exploit your children, or of you do, expect that others will catch on and call you on your actions.
Post a Comment