Art School Confidential (2006) User Reviews (143)

A Twist of Lime with a Crabapple on Top

[Feanim · 5/10 · 25 April 2006]

The beginning of this movie was hilarious. Jerome goes to art school and meets zany characters, including his gay roommate, his wannabe filmmaker roommate, and his art teacher (played by John Malkovich). The dialogue was witty. The audience loved the satire of modern art, because we all know how ridiculous modern art can be yet we must be polite and insightful when looking at it. Everyone could relate to the perverted college humor. Unfortunately, all this silliness ended. Right in the middle, the movie took a turn of tone and with it took the refreshingly simple but fun plot.

Art School Confidential suddenly became serious about its characters, including the mysterious strangler. The decision to transform the movie into a serious mystery was it's major flaw. With this move, the writers felt they had to incorporate a more confusing plot to achieve a mysterious tone. By the end, the initial idea of simply amusing the audience was lost because of the poorly-crafted mystery, leaving the audience disappointed.

Why do filmmakers do this? They think because we have paid to see an indie movie, we want an obscure plot twist topped off with an unresolved ending. It's like having ice cream, fun and simple, then someone comes over and adds a twist of lime and tops it off with crab apples! Obscure, but no fun because it tastes weird and you were content with the ice cream by itself. I recommend the first hour of this movie.

Art class

[jotix100 · 7/10 · 30 June 2006]

Jerome, the young man at the center of this story, changes his suburban existence for the art scene being taught at Strathmore's, a place that should be avoided like the plague. Jerome, who has been the butt of all the bullies in suburbia soon discovers the big city is not exactly prepared to accept him, or his art.

Jerome is an insecure young man who learns quickly his art professors see things in a different fashion, as is the case with Mr. Sandiford, an artist himself, who tries to discourage the young people in his class at any given moment. In a way, Sandiford, who is also a mediocre painter, can't stand the competition of the bright new would be artists that he is supposed to teach and mold.

The young man becomes entranced by a beautiful young female model, Audrey, who doesn't realize she is the object of Jerome's affections. Since he is not attracting any compliments from the teacher, Jerome decides to take some of the eccentric Jimmy's drawings to make collages and present them as his own, without any positive reaction from anyone. He is also instrumental in the fire that consumes the dilapidated building in which Jimmy lives.

Terry Zwigoff, whose previous films have dealt with off beat characters in films such as "Crumb", and "Ghost Life", doesn't quite make it with his take on Jerome. Working with his screen writer, Daniel Clowes, he doesn't quite pull it off.

Max Minghella plays Jerome, the potential artist who doesn't seem to believe in his own talent. Best thing in the film is John Malkevich, who plays Sandiford, with perfect pitch. Jim Broadbent is perfect as Jimmy, a man who has given up on his art and on life. Sophie Myles is an enigma as Audrey because she seems lifeless in her role.

One can only wish Terry Zwigoff better luck next time.

Zwigoff and Clowes show Hollywood how it's done (again)

[Jonny_Numb · 7/10 · 14 October 2006]

What's fascinating about the films of Terry Zwigoff is the relativity contained within--for as shockingly vulgar, tasteless, and non-PC a punchline can be, it is made funny because we have seen the characters in some form in our own lives, and ultimately empathize with their plight (the self-loathing mall Santa of "Bad Santa"; the disaffected teenage girls of "Ghost World"; the hopeless introverted romantics of "Art School Confidential"); instead of pointing a mocking finger and getting a laugh at someone else's expense, Zwigoff's humor hits a note that insists "we've all been here before, and we can laugh about it." His films also possess an underlying sincerity (and humanity) that goes unseen in the over-confident Hollywood claptrap that stinks up theaters nowadays.

"Art School Confidential," Zwigoff's second collaboration with cartoonist/screenwriter Daniel Clowes ("Ghost World") is another modest coming-of-age film of subtle implication. The world of Strathmore College, an art school located in the inner city, is presented as a heavily-satirized den of losers, where Jerome (Max Minghella) is looking to become, in his words, "the greatest living American artist." He rooms with obnoxious film student Vince (Ethan Suplee), who is working on an amateur film about a rash of on-campus murders, naively romances pretty art model Audrey (Sophia Myles, "Underworld"), and is given tragic (yet hilarious) words of wisdom by Jimmy (Jim Broadbent), a burned-out alcoholic and former student. When met with disenchantment and disappointment over the pretentious students and the professors (including John Malkovich, who does a funny reprise of his "Shadow of the Vampire" persona) who ignore his work, Jerome hatches a self-destructive plot that eventually--through ridiculous circumstances we believe anyway--lands him in prison.

While "Art School Confidential" sometimes seems at the mercy of far too many subplots, the eclectic group of art students and wayward adults are so wonderfully depicted (even if more than a few are outright bastards) they make the film irresistible. Zwigoff's films often come off as pleasant anachronisms of cinematic technique--his lovers always bear more in common with the stars of early cinema than their magazine-friendly counterparts; yet at the same time, he can pull more hilarity out of a truly tasteless joke than any other director working today (the best go to Suplee and Joel More). Directors who attempt this kind of crude/sensitive balance usually fail--Zwigoff, however, is both in touch with his inner romantic and child. The end result of "Art School Confidential" is intelligent, bitingly satirical, magically romantic, and filled with irreverent hilarity.

Ultimately what we are left with is a film that can be amusing at times but is utterly forgettable

[citizenchris · 25 August 2008]

Art School Confidential 8-25-08

A rather tamed beast of a film, rather like a guard dog snipping at a guest being told constantly to behave. One gets the since that the film is constantly holding back, it clearly has something to say about the state of art and artists but it just never seems as poignant as it wants to be. John Malkovitch and Angelica Huston some of films best actors are seemingly marginalized and rather boring. The fresh faces, whose names escape me, are equally uninteresting. The only highlight performance wise was the wonderful Adam Scott whose one scene proves the futility of the entire film. The filmmakers via Adam Scotts bit role manage to get all the the things they have to say out of the way in a brief little rant of a scene. Whats left is a tired romance and a somewhat ironic serial killer sub-plot that is just silly. Ultimately what we are left with is a film that can be amusing at times but is utterly forgettable.

Hilarity Art!But also too caught up in its attempt to be offbeat and ends up being too contrived and a total mess.

[HiddenVoice · 6/10 · 25 April 2006]

Terry Zwigoff presents you true art and the meaning of art, both Viusal and Film.It sure is pain in the ass and no one can better explain that to you than this film.

The film is about a young teenager trying to pursue a career in Art in an art school.But before he can do so, he must learn a few things about what art really is.His obsession to art school and his vision combine with the teachers minds who pretty much spend their whole time relating art with life.And in a art school where amateur art is more appreciated than professional,visionary art.But soon when he meets a women , his life takes a turn.Though,he has a nemesis to face to win the girls heart.Apparently,the nemesis' work,which is just plain childish according to our hero,is widely appreciated.So the competition begins.But as he desperately tries and loses,and gets advices from a drunken ,washed out,but talented artist,he drifts himself apart from art.But things take a big change for our depressed,lost hero,when he is gets involved in a murder mystery ,where he is the primary suspect.

Art school confidential has ideas.Lot's of intriguing offbeat ideas.And while it tries to be funny and offbeat but it fails in the end.Tries to make a successful satire out of art,but it fails to churn up even one great laugh.And it's boring at times,it just dangles around emphasizing what art really is, without actually telling us what it really is.It just mingles and experiments with the concept of art and tries to make something out of it ,pretty much throughout the film.It's characters slowly become pathetic and uninteresting.It's situations becomes absurd and pointless.It just disappoints.

But despite all that,it's fun.It sure is entertaining,but it could've been really big if any of the filmmakers even tried once.And when the plot shifts to its murder mystery,it gets even worse.It's something I didn't expect.It's got a few good moments,but it's not enough for a premise like this.The film daringly tries to make a point by shouting out loud that art schools suck.They're waste of time and just there to rip you off your cash.The students are taught by a bunch of old failures trying to make a living passing on their failures to the new generation.

It would've been better as a satire than an attached murder mystery.I mean,there's nothing wrong with the murder mystery drama thing,but I just wanted to see a proper satire here.Instead of some predictable resolution to the whole mystery.It's got some good twists and turns ,but in the end it's all too obvious.It's half baked as a love story ,and neither is it emotionally touching.Way too contrived and convoluted unintentionally.Too jumbled up.

With the exception of Broadbant,the rest of the cast is just fine.Minghella tries but can't be more than average,although he gets the character's depressing sadness.Malkovich is just a waste of talent and one would expect a lot from him.

As original as it tries to be,in the end it goes for the conventional ending.The writer,who is adapting his own book,just has no clue what he's doing and what he wants to convey most of the times.The writer focused more on the comic elements of the film rather than finding a way to solve the mysteries of the plot that can hardly fit the way it is written.It sometimes feels disconnected from the material, I mean at times you feel like watching different short movies in one film with same actors in different situations and hardly relate to the story.And the director seems to go along with it,giving us as much entertainment and fun out of it as he is able to.

This film at times becomes hard to watch as it mixes so many elements that if succeeded in mixing them well,it could have achieved remarkable result.But that is not the case in this satire. Mixing social satire, art school satire,a wicked love story, murder mystery ,and attempting to bring about a coming-of-age story.This doesn't work.

It can stand out to be a different approach, even if it's not fully successful ,it still succeeds on entertaining you.With a cop-out ending.

For all the true artists out there this film is your lesson.Perhaps.

Just Look at Me Now

[ferguson-6 · 6/10 · 22 May 2006]

Greetings again from the darkness. I don't question the chemistry of director Terry Zwigoff and writer Daniel Clowes. I enjoyed "Ghost World" and hated "Bad Santa", which I realize has a near cult following. They are master scene creators (vignettes, if you will) but just don't seem to have the skills to make an entire movie flow.

Blessed with a tremendous cast including John Malkovich, Angelica Huston, Jim Broadbent and Steve Buscemi, Zwigoff continues to brow beat the audience with his perceived brilliance. This film suffers from the weak presence of Max Minghella ("Syriana" and "Bee Season") who is in most scenes. Minghella, with his bedroom eyes and pouty supermodel lips, has no real personality and just can't pull off either the quiet moments of desperation or the ha-ha outbursts of the kid who thinks the stupidity of his surroundings must be a big joke.

A bright spot is Sophia Myles who has some screen presence as the art class model slash girl of his dreams whom Minghella believes he is destined to be with. Also the commentary on the art world in general, and art school in particular, is quite poignant. Otherwise, there are too many in your face punch lines and definitely too much penis screen time for my tastes.

Here's hoping Zwigoff and Clowes keep at it because, although I don't agree with those who think they are great, I do believe there is potential greatness waiting to develop.

Entertaining but weak

[zetes · 7/10 · 15 May 2006]

This is definitely Terry Zwigoff's least successful film, and a big disappointment in a lot of ways. But I think if you don't expect too much, it's fun and has some good twists along the way. The film follows Jerome, who goes to art school after graduation. The film's major strengths are that it really gets into the absurdity of the concept of art school (I don't think many believe that one can be taught how to be an artist), and that it communicates well the feeling of not being able to succeed. It also does good by not making Jerome a remarkable artist himself. He's a talented drawer, but his stuff is largely uninteresting and unimaginative. For a while the film seems to be poking fun at more abstract art, but then it does pull back and smartly doesn't dismiss the more abstract or pop art on display, though it does put forward some of the various artists' pomposities. The film plays a lot like Ghost World, which had the same director and writer, in that it sets up all the characters as stereotypes and then begins to reveal them as more human. Unfortunately, it just doesn't work nearly as well here. There are a ton of other problems, too. Max Minghella, the actor who plays Jerome, is painfully dull. He looks like a model in a catalogue. The girl in whom he develops an interest is equally dull, an everyday blonde cutie who comes off as rather vapid. With these two protagonists, a certain tiny part of the film kept coming to mind, where one of the very rare persons of color in the class asks their art history professor why they only study dead white males. Why do we have to have these two boring, white-bread characters dominating the film? Luckily, the supporting cast is very good, and includes John Malkovich (in a rather typical but entertaining Malkovichian role), Steve Buscemi, Jim Broadbent and Joel Moore. It also includes Anjelica Huston, whom I generally don't like. But it feels like she might have had a bigger part originally which was cut down.

Another misfire

[davidesachs1 · 4/10 · 6 May 2006]

Much of the problem with Art School Confidential lies with the character of Jerome. Clowes writes graphic novels, and the main character he's written here is simply a cartoon figure with no depth to speak of. He falls much too fast from his ambition of becoming the world's greatest artist to someone willing to compromise his talent for the sake of coming in first in a college competition. Granted, he is pliable, aping whoever he happens to be with at the moment—it's Bardo one moment, star alumnus Marvin Bushmiller (Adam Scott) the next— and adopting the bitter, nihilistic rantings of failed artist Jimmy (Jim Broadbent) as if those beliefs were his own. This might all be interesting if Jerome was, say, the type of troubled, seeking boy that Minghella played in Bee Season. Sadly he is not, and though Minghella is a fine actor, there's not a lot he can do with what is essentially a stick figure.

That's not to say that Art School Confidential is completely worthless. Malkovich (who also produced) is very funny, and so is Broadbent, but mostly this feels like the type of comedy Jerome's roommate Vince might someday make: overly broad, obvious, and very self- conscious. It wants to be cool, it wants to be hip, but like Jerome in his quest to be the next Picasso, it's merely clueless.

Coming of age gone wrong.

[poohead · 8/10 · 21 May 2006]

For the first 30 minutes, 'Art School Confidential' sets itself up as a coming of age movie. But instead of at that pivotal moment when one comes of age, Jerome the aspiring artist turns to the dark side and begins to show someone with genuine ambition and a worthy character descend into a turbulent test of artistic innovation. Whatever the hell that means. 'Art School' not only depicts the individual growth of Jerome, but also analyzes the definition of art, and in some respects, defines it quite well. Why does shitty art get so much acclaim? Why does quality art often go unnoticed? Why are artists such pretentious ass holes? The whole movie answers all these questions hilariously and beautifully.

"Confidential" takes art world to task

[Solipsisticblog · 7/10 · 11 July 2006]

I am a big fan of Daniel Clowes work and was very excited to see one of his best short pieces was being turned into a movie.

The movie is strange and a little disjointed, but I think Clowes fans will be satisfied. Its a dark movie that takes "underdog becomes the hero" movie conventions and subverts them. I didn't really see the end of the movie coming, but given Clowes work, it was a perfect conclusion.

Many critics have commented on the fact that the movie's murder subplot feels shoehorned in. It is absolutely essential to the story, though, as it provides the film's protagonist with his triumphant entry into the art world.

"Art School Confidential" fails in some ways, but it is wholly original and unlike anything you will see in the theater this year.

Recommended.

Read more at http://solipsisticblog.blogspot.com/.

Great cast, but not quite a good movie

[ArizWldcat · 4/10 · 27 January 2006]

We saw this dark comedy at Sundance (SLC showing). I wanted very much to give this a totally positive review, but it's just so disjointed that it was hard to decide what it was trying to say. The cast is terrific: John Malkovic, Anjelica Huston, Jim Broadbent, Sophie Myles, among others. There are a lot of things that are funny in this film, and we did laugh. But the storyline is all over the place. I read an interview with the director (who didn't come for Q & A after this one), and he said the storyline has a lot to do with his fear of New York, along with his fascination for it. The NYC shown in this film is very scary; I don't think I'd ever even want to visit it, much less want to live there! The film skewers a lot of snooty art types, and in that arena, it works. However, the second half of the movie just didn't quite work for me. The firsthalf of the film was amusing, but when it turned extremely dark in the final act, it just didn't feel right. It's too bad, because I think it's great fun to skewer the snooty art world...but this was just too far over the top.

Art Film Movie About An Artist At Art School ...Whoa!

[fwomp · 8/10 · 22 May 2006]

Yesterday I went to my local art theater to watch an art film about a future artist attending art school. Whew! I'm glad I got that out!

But lets chat about this art film, shall we? Here we go...

It's got a lot going for it. First and foremost is an impressive script. Obviously the screenwriter, director, producer (or all three) attended art school at some point. And making fun of the people and faculty at such a place is where the comedy in Art School Confidential takes wing. When Jerome (Max Minghella), the main character, begins attending his freshman year at Strathmore Art School, he's quickly introduced to the cliché-riddled cast (the cliché is purposeful and pulled off just as well as the movie GALAXY QUEST). He meets the burned-out art teacher Professor Sandiford (John Malkovich), the beautiful model that every male wants named Audrey (Sophia Myles), the angry lesbian, the teacher's pet/kiss-a$$, the drug addled film student, and a splash of others. There's also a strangler on the loose in the neighborhood which will play a vital role in how Jerome's artistic dreams play out.

The ridiculousness of art school is what really makes this movie work. Jerome is obviously very talented, but other artists whiz by him because art is what the artists say art is. It might be a picture of a car, or a man attaching jumper cables to his nipples and letting current run through him, or a mound of plastic chairs.

Jerome wants to be the next Picasso. He studies hard, tries to get noticed, but nothing seems to work. He's also a virgin and wants desperately to get laid but with the wacked out student body at Strathmore, he's got his work cut out for him.

As Jerome works and works, trying to become a successful artist, we get to watch him fall into despair; he starts smoking, drinking, and visits a washed up Strathmore graduate named Jimmy (Jim Broadbent) who gives him some dark and grotesquely sage advice: "Are you good at 'getting on your knees?'" (I've cleaned that up a bit, but you get the idea.) It becomes apparent to Jerome (and the movie watcher) that he has no chance of becoming a recognized artist ...unless something drastic happens. Which, of course, it does (Cliche? Oh yes!) Once this "something drastic" happens, Jerome learns the true nature of being an artist. It's an unfortunate and incredibly funny set of circumstances that finally thrusts Jerome into the limelight.

The level of casting in this indie film is surprisingly large and notable. In addition to John Malkovich (BEING JOHN MALKOVICH) we see Anjelica Huston (THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS), Jim Broadbent (MOULIN ROUGE!), Matt Keeslar (DUNE miniseries), Ethan Suplee (COLD MOUNTAIN), Steve Buscemi (THE BIG LEBOWSKI) and several others.

This impressive cast pulled off the overly-pretentious attitudes that flood many art schools. They were witty yet cynical which made laughing out loud a requirement during the viewing of this amazing little flick.

God I love these little independents when they're done right!

Better than you'd expect!

[starmandelux23 · 7/10 · 3 July 2006]

I guess this movie is one that would make more sense or resonance if you are an art student. True story, after seeing this movie, my friend, who is a graphic-design/painting major, almost considered dropping out. It wasn't until we (me and my other art-major friends) convinced him that as long as you aren't out to do art just to be famous (like Jerome did), you won't have to preform unseemly acts with one's mouth to climb the ladder for recognition.

While this movie IS disjointed, it does fit in perfectly for a Daniel Clowes story. Fans of his work will be happy with the results.

This film is a good reminder that just because you're an artist, doesn't mean you should be unhappy. Just don't try to be in it just for the money, cause you'll end up more of a mess than when you started!

Fails to finish what it started. Spoilers

[hendrixlee102-1 · 4/10 · 20 January 2007]

As a current art student, this film came up in many conversations during class. Some said it was funny, others didn't like it, so i decided to see for myself. As the movie starts, the mood seems as though it's going to be a satire to the whole art school environment, and how things are done, and the kind of people there are at the schools. It was humorous to see the cliché art students. Although soon enough the film began to depart as it seemed it was going to be about Jeromy getting laid, and another college virgin story. But soon the film finds ground and becomes a bit of a love story, as Jeromy finds the 'perfect'.

Around this time is where the film suddenly spawns numerous plots and usually would not be seen in the same film. The murder mystery emerges of the local serial killer. This entire subplot, seemed to ruin the art school aspect of the film. As the satire of art school dwindled and the film became more and more bleak, and began dealing with the hopelessness of being successful, it seems as though the entire art school satire set up had been for nothing. By the end of the film you don't recall anything in the beginning that really helped bring a close to the film.

Over all this film was scattered and the 2nd half didn't not deliver what the first half promises the film to be about.

An insider film that lost its way

[futures-1 · 13 November 2007]

Caveat: I have a deep suspicion that if you did not attend a Visual Arts school, or perhaps at least a school of one of the Arts, this one is going to leave you confused, irritated, or apathetic. It's definitely an "insider" film. That said, the first 75% is deadly accurate on the pretentious, hopeful, pseudo-intellectual, hot house environment of training in the Arts, complete with student politics, faculty politics, administrative politics, art scene and art business politics, and any other politic you can throw in. It's "hip" deep in its own bullshit. I began to lose interest when I caught on we were heading out of the Arts theme and into a Murder/detective theme. At this point, the story loses what I found witty and insightful, pursues the murder angle, and in an overstated, clichéd manner, tries to wrap the two themes together in a final irony. Perhaps these things would be entertaining or even eye opening for those who DIDN'T attend an Art school, but for me, it was enough to stick with the in-house world of young college students trying to find their way into their personal illusions about what the art world could and would offer them.

Shattered dreams 101...........

[merklekranz · 6/10 · 7 September 2009]

First the good points ............. The idea seems fresh, even if you have seen all the first college semester movies out there. The lead, Max Minghella is convincing as the wannabe great artist. The presence of John Malkovich, Michael Lerner, and Angelica Huston adds immeasurably. For the first hour or so the movie holds interest with the outrageous art projects. It is at this point that the movie takes an unexpected, and questionable turn. Now the bad points ............. The female lead, artists model, seems both miscast and rather unremarkable. Sophia Myles is never convincing as a love interest. Finally, the ending is both unbelievable, and unsatisfying. More good than bad, still misses the mark, but not by much. - MERK

Great potential, but not that much of a movie

[klaraschumann7 · 6/10 · 24 February 2012]

While browsing through IMDb, this movie caught my eye and I decided to watch it, without any expectations. The script was great (done by Daniel Clowes, the same guy who wrote Ghost World), but there was something missing. Even with great cast in supporting roles (Buscemi, Malkovich, Houston, they really delivered). I had a few good laughs, but most of the time I just didn't find the movie really convincing. It shows quite realistic situation in art schools, using lots of irony, but director could have made much better choices, making it less disconnected. At one point I felt like it turned into real cliché Hollywood C production movie. But it was an easy watch for sure.

Failed Pygmalion

[oparthenon · 6/10 · 24 November 2020]

Art School Confidential is an intriguing film, but one that will appeal to a limited audience. If you yourself have questioned the nature of art, or are yourself an artist, the film might make an impact. Otherwise it may appear to lack coherence or seem merely episodic. In its favor are fine performances all around, with a magnificent turn by Jim Broadbent as the pathetic failed artist and plaudits to Steve Buscemi for an uncredited performance as the terrifying Broadway Bob. Actually, everyone in the film is terrifying, and if you do not view the film as rather subtle satire, you might come to believe that art school is really the way it is portrayed here, or that all artists have to compromise, or -- well, any of a number of other clichés about art and artists.

This is not, I repeat, a film for everybody. It deals with the coming-of-age of a young artist, who must deal with the cynical attitudes of his teachers, and of various hangers-on, who are all convinced that they never got their share of celebrity pie and desperately seek it. How the youth (Jerome, played to perfection by Max Minghella) arrives at his moment of fame makes up the bulk of the film. Other, brief moments by Anjelica Huston as a world-weary art historian, and a beautifully subtle performance by John Malkovich as blowhard Prof. Sandiford (wait for the scene with the triangles -- it's a gem), give class to what might otherwise have been a tawdry take on the 'confidential' sub-genre in American gangster cinema (one thinks of LA, Kansas City, and New York, amongst others.)

Clearly, I liked the film, despite having to endure some occasionally awkward script-writing (as with Vince, the film-major roommate) but these were intended to fill out the 'art school' palette, and the film-making gag does get funnier as it goes along.

Not a film to be taken seriously, although when Jerome smacks his head against the portrait he did of the beautiful Audrey (Sophia Myles) and then gently kisses it, it is a heartbreaking moment indeed. A failed Pygmalion -- is this what all true artists are?

Totally useless film

[samnation7 · 3/10 · 19 December 2006]

I am a huge fan of the original Clowes comic strip this was supposedly based off of. And I am also a graduate of the art college system it parodies. So I was very excited when I heard about this movie. Then I saw it. What a misfire and waste of time! Art school has a TON of things to parody and a TON of b*llsh*t to expose. Why waste our time with this really LAME romance plot and really, REALLY LAME strangler junk? It was like some poorly written teen movie that had some of the dialog and text from the original Clowes strip just kind of shoe-horned in there to try and make it more "arty". The whole art school cliché crap was barely touched on. And when it WAS used, it came off very stiff and felt forced. I was bored, I didn't care about any of the very 2-dimensional characters, and while I got a slight chuckle from some of the art school stuff, it was nowhere near as big a part of the movie as it should have been. Go back and read the original comic strip if you want a razor-sharp rip of art school BS. Because you will definitely NOT find it in this movie.

This film impressed the hell out of me

[tomwaitsisgod · 9/10 · 14 May 2006]

I came into this film expecting a mean, rude comedy in the vein of Zwigoff's previous effort Bad Santa (a film which has more brains than it gets credit for). For the first 3/4 or so of the film, that's what I got, and I enjoyed every second. Towards the last bit, the film takes a turn darker than you would expect. This sudden twist, unexpected as it was, did not feel trite or convoluted. More fascinating.

Make no mistake this a dark comedy in the truest definition. There is something about the ending that is supremely haunting.

Ethan Suplee provides the hyper-actively aggressive role he has become beloved for. Malkovich does not disappoint as the burnt-out and oh-so-full-of-crap art professor. Jim Broadbent channels Chuck Bukowski here as he barks like a pit-bull and alternately purrs like a tabby as the disheveled failed artist/ nihilistic mentor of our boy Jerome, who just may be the only unpretentious and truly talented student at Strathmore University. Throw in Anjelica Huston and Steve Buscemi in delightfully understated roles, a string of murders courtesy of the mythical Strathmore Strangler, and the positively stunning Sophia Myles as the nude drawing class model Audrey who becomes both the object of Jerome's affection and the source of his disillusion, and you have got a dysfunctional masterpiece.

Nice study in the comic form of art.

[ryangilmer007 · 7/10 · 13 July 2006]

This nice little study into comic art is both unique in the genre and a fun view. However, when it continues to try and merge quirky character on top of quirky character, the enjoyment may wear a bit.

Unfortunately the movie failed to find an audience, even with its implied insight and social commentary.

Thus if you like Art, a little comedy or even just John Malkevich talking about triangles please enroll in this school.

As,-->

the movie is a decent trip into a warped mind of "Art"

Additionally, remember to stay after the credits for a brief additional scene, which always adds value for those whom routinely stay.

I picked the wrong time to watch this film

[rustajb · 1/10 · 30 January 2007]

Being an art school drop-out myself, and having read Daniel Clowes original Art School Confidential, I had high expectations for this movie. Having spent a miserable day trying to find inspiration to create and failing miserably, I opted to rent the movie and get a few laughs. Man, was I so off base. The movie starts off like it's going to be a comedy and I was even forgiving of the expository narrative provided by "career student guy". Where good story telling would have worked, they opted for a guy whose only existence in the film is to tell you who people are and classify everything. But a comedy it did not remain. Very quickly the tone of the film shifts and a haphazard love affair begins amid a city that seems only marginally interested in a local strangler. The director tries very hard to force you into guessing who the strangler is, but since he never strangles any of the characters in the movie, he's hardly on your mind unless someone mentions him. So we start as a college comedy, turns into a sappy romance, then to a mystery thriller and finally a piece of crud. I never found myself caring about any of the characters, even the lead character lost my interest after about 30 minutes. In the end I felt like I had just spent the last hour and a half watching someone's lame attempt at movie making and not a real film at all. It's as if the student filmmaker in the movie had made the movie himself as part of his Junior thesis. Terrible film, can't recommend it.

And what art school has a basketball team anyway?

Great film- fun, exciting, fascinating, and keeps you pleasantly off balance

[mothratwin89 · 9/10 · 15 May 2006]

First off, let me just say how much I love Max Minghella. I saw Bee Season at a film festival a while back and straight off knew he was going to do fantastic things with his career. So far he's proved me right.

I have been anticipating Art School Confidential for a long time. I found out about it through the IMDb, and as a big fan of Zwigoff's previous work, I was really looking forward to seeing what he was going to do with the fabulous cast he had assembled (Malkovich, Huston, Buscemi, etc). The movie did not disappoint.

The beginning of the film is about what I expected- cute, off-beat story about a talented geek who goes to art school and pursues the girl of his dreams. And then it got dark. And then it got very dark. And then it got extremely dark. I soon realized I had no idea where it was going to take me next, and that excited me. The 'mystery' aspect of the movie is brilliantly done as well- it keeps you just well informed enough that you have about a 50/50 chance of figuring it out preemptively, and you'll always realize what's going on just when you need to.

I have read reviews that called Art School Confidential misanthropic, among other things. I disagree. It has misanthropic aspects, misanthropic characters, but overall I found that it ended on an expressly positive note. I absolutely loved the ending. Five minutes before it ended, I wasn't sure how it was going to end, and that, in my opinion, is the best way to do it. Zwigoff's direction is also very impressive. There's a distinct difference in the atmosphere throughout- it starts out looking and feeling sunnier and lighter, and as Minghella's character becomes darker, so does the look of the movie. Just one of those little things that adds to the overall experience.

Art School Confidential thoroughly covers ground that Ghost World touched on briefly- namely, the line between art and BS. It is clearly a subject on which Terry Zwigoff has a lot to say, and he says it very eloquently. The cast is great, the music is great, the direction is great. Go see it. And let me say again... I love Max Minghella. Here's hoping he doesn't turn to stupid teen flicks to pay the bills.

a film where satire and drama don't mix well

[Quinoa1984 · 6/10 · 7 May 2006]

Terry Zwigoff and Daniel Clowes, director and writer of Art School Confidential (second meeting after Ghost World), have here a perplexing convergence of sensibilities. It's a film that I really wanted to like more than I ended up doing so. It has a premise that is not bad at all. A suburban kid constantly picked on as a kid (and virgin) goes to an odd-ball (and usual kind of) art school, where he meets people who are, admittedly by the film itself, walking clichés.

And for the first half hour, give or take, I thought the satire (and, more importantly in this case, laughs) that Zwigoff and Clowes were aiming for went off splendidly. There are some funny vignettes showing the young Jerome (Max Minghella, whom I'll get to next paragraph) trying to adjust to this new world, where he has troubles finding the right girl, and in general to his fellow drawing classmates as they mouth off as the pretentious being brilliance. BUT, then the storyline takes a bit of a detour, and it along with the characters never fully recover.

The problem I see reminded me of why another film that targeted a specific group in-wind of an institution-kind of setting, so to speak, like Election, worked well and this didn't. Not to compare too much as they're different films, while Election could work in balancing out some of the more dramatic aspects with the satire, Art School Confidential just couldn't. As the filmmakers get more into the love story portion of the film, then into the serial killer storyline (involving characters with secrets soon revealed), one realizes that a) what little satire is left is overwhelmed by the dourness that accompanies the darker side of Jerome's descent into art-school hell, and b) its star Minghella just can't pull it off totally.

As an actor he often has a look on his face and in his eyes that's very much the same scene to scene, close to being on the verge of weeping outright (yes, even more than Jake Gyllenhall in his earlier years). Overall his work isn't awful, but there's more needed for this rather simplistic character - when it comes down to it (and, admittedly, clichéd but not an interesting kind)- and is outranked by other superior actors like Malkovich and Broadbent.

Maybe some might find more wit in the film's later half than I did, but even the ending that tries to put one more satirical point in the works, seems like its been in other films before. And there are a couple of points logistically in the story that just don't work (i.e. certain particulars that one once SOBER could see put on the paintings). Despite a few bright spots early on, and some cutting wit and clever jabs at the ponderousness of how art school's work (with some of the best material from Ethan Suplee's sub-plot as a struggling filmmaker), it's a disappointment coming from this writer/director duo. For all the possibilities that could be open with such material, only a few are realized.

Dull & Lazy!

[GLoc1984 · 3/10 · 2 December 2006]

Having previously seen the excellent Ghost World, I came to this film expecting more of the same offbeat GenY satire, instead what I got was a dull poorly scripted pastiche which seemed to be making a bid to become the latest member of the Scary Movie franchise and failing even in that ! A paper thin and utterly predictable plot combined with a blunt force trauma script to make this a soggy mess of a film which not even the combined talents of heavy duty thesps John Malkovich & Jim Broadbent could hold together for long. The biggest problem with this film is that it can't decide which genre it wants to be in, and in shooting for more than one misses all of its targets by a clear mile. The bulk of the the film resembles a bizarre hybrid of one of those 1980's John Hughes movies (Breakfast Club, 16 Candles, Ferris Bueller etc)with all the humour & charm surgically removed, and the scary movie franchise without the absurdist gags and movie in-jokes. And then just when you think the fusion cusine can't get any more bizarre, they throw in a couple of woefully tacked on secondary plot lines, one of which has clearly been lifted wholesale from Patrica Cornwell's dubious theories about Walter Sickert and another referencing John Wayne Gacy - and all to no obvious effect! Anybody who thinks this is dark humour is very, very wrong! Compared to the efforts of contemporaries Todd Solondz or even Keven Smith these guys are not even treading water. Do yourself a favour, if you are tempted to see this film save yourself the price of a ticket and wait until it hits the £2.99 discount racks of your local corner shop - trust me it won't take long, and at least you'll have a shiny new frisby to bounce off the wall!