A film resembling a lecture on street art, with the disadvantage that it is very long. Plus, some points, some interviews could be replaced by information blocks telling about street art not only in the UK and the United States, but also in other countries of the world. After all, in this case, a full review of this trend throughout the world will be given. But since I'm not an expert in this field, maybe that's all, that is street art in the U.S. and the U.K., that we have. Russia had its own, relatively famous artist of this direction, Pasha 183, whose works I watched many years ago in one of the central museums of modern art in Moscow, but how important he is in the art world, I can not say. If you compare foreign artists, Banksy has no competitors. The movie doesn’t start with Banksy. As can be seen from the title of the film, it is not only about Banksy, but about street art as a phenomenon and about Banksy as a central figure in this movement, because he is not only the most recognizable face of this direction, but also the most creative.
So the film begins with the origins of street art, which I like to call art for the poor. You can use a softer wording to call it “art for the people” or “democratic art”, because street art appeared on the streets and was addressed to ordinary people and even to people very poor, because the Negro ghettos are the place where this art was born. From my point of view, not including street art samples from other countries, especially from South America, seems to me a big mistake, because it is on these examples that you can understand what street art is and who it represents. And it represents those who stand on the other pole in relation to those people to whom classical art was turned like Michelangelo, Raphael, Botticelli, etc. Who were the main clients of these artists? Elite. The highest strata of society, monarchs and the highest ministers of the church. Recall that only after the revolution in France, the Louvre was opened to ordinary people. So street art is not only about those who will not be allowed close to the doors of the French salon, but also an artist will never be called and whose works will never hang next to the works of not only the above-mentioned artists, but also with the paintings of rejected artists of the early XX century. What does that mean? This means that such artists must find a stage for their paintings. And they found it on the streets. Street art was a triple violation of the law. The artists came from poor families and therefore the most criminal Negro neighborhoods. They violated the property law because they used buildings that didn't belong to them as easels, that's two. And the third is that their art is a cry of their social status, that is, street art is an art designed to draw the attention of society to a particular social problem. Street art is always, absolutely always about politics. Street art cannot be apolitical, just as rock cannot be apolitical. Because in that case, he turns. Actually street art in South America and street art Banksy, it is especially vivid and shows. I may disagree with Banksy’s political position, and we’ll see that position in the film, but I can’t help but acknowledge his genius and creativity and how he implements those ideas. And that's where I find the big drawback of this film -- it focuses very little on that, which is the position that street art is always politics. By the way, that is why there is no street art in Russia, just as there is no street art in China, Iran and other countries where law enforcement agencies watch political statements of artists with a magnifying glass. Why? And at the beginning of the film, they talk about it, that is, when we don’t see Banksy in the film, in the film we are told about the rise of street art in the UK against the background of Thatcher’s rule, or rather, as a reaction to her policy. Again, without going into the question of whether they are right or not, for I have always sympathized with the Iron Lady, the important thing here, i.e. in the film, is why street art appeared, what contributed to this, and why this art is a "break of the law." As I said, the film doesn't explain it clearly enough, even though it's better than nothing.
The second part of the film is a review of Banksy’s work, including his appearance, i.e. his first works, world success, work in Palestine, the creation of his own version of Disneyland and so on. Since this is not the first Banksy film, I already knew some of the works and many of the works in the film are not mentioned, but on the other hand, the film still offers a pretty good selection that shows who Banksy is, what he is famous for and what his philosophy is. If you look at the film as a whole, it’s not bad at all. He explains well the essence of street art, its main acting character, i.e. the main artist of this movement and makes it quite clear to the public, who are far from this direction in art. But the film is not as good as it could be. Some points could be shortened or, better yet, replaced for a broader explanation of this phenomenon, by showing more diverse examples, rather than focusing only on the US and Britain.
I think many viewers will ask why the film didn’t say anything about those artists who create funny and beautiful 3D models on the pavement or on the buildings of large stores. The film didn’t say anything about it, because it’s not art. Why? Yes, for the same reason why Goya's paintings of the late period ("Dark paintings") are high art, and the beautiful "pictures" of official royal artists who painted the victorious battles, although hanging in museums, no one knows. There is officiality, and there is art. And it's very rare that we can find something brilliant in this kind of art. In other words, “beautiful street art” may just be a beautiful picture, but art, authentic art, always comes from the depths of the artist’s soul. And this movie, it explains that. And so there is nothing in the film about the beautiful 3D pictures on the pavement, as well as the beautiful pictures that large corporations ordered for their brands.