Watch Surviving Picasso For Free

Purely Joyful Movie!

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

Another film found in a throwaway collection for me, so why add in this review? Because if you're a Merchant Ivory sumptuous depictions fan, to warn, I felt this one was a letdown: In the art of film, well, nice sun washed colours throughout - except at beginning introduced at the tail end of the second world war just before Picasso meets Gilot, which is the inspiration for the film - and plus a couple of nice crane shots, one in this context, at the beginning. But even here, having begun showing Picasso as more or less darling of the occupying German invaders, no follow up so as to make relevant why this might have been so of him: it merely serves to introduce his fourth major lover, on whom regular screenwriter collaborator, R.P. Jhabvala, has adapted Ariana Huffington's source novel - and that (presumably) on her - lover, F. Gilot's - memoirs: and that is where the major disappointment arises in that for such female sources and a foremost 'feminist' (Gilot) do her own thing, this storyline didn't give much - if any - insight into the female psyche as to how she (they*) truly felt inwardly about this granted, prodigiously talented ergo charming artist, yet, presumably, egotistical selfish brat, that Picasso must have been, yet held such mesmerising, demoniacal sway over her (and them all!*)Which then brings to A. Hopkins' 'portrait of an artist': unfortunately, he gives yet another of his 'I am Anthony Hopkins' - now Sir - so I can just act and deliver my lines in precisely the same way I as I do in virtually any film I have ever made' style …. other than the balding pate and the brown contact lenses, it's him - not in in the least convincing as Picasso, the genius and irresistible lover. In a word - or two - poor - and lazy. * his four other major lovers are cast to appear in the film, but to no understandable reason as to why he exerted such sway over them. Perhaps the best female character in this quite clearly supposedly 'female perspective' film, is the de facto (Grand) Mother-in-law, (Gliot's Grandmother) played by the ever superb and reliable Joan Plowright, but who sadly was just not given enough time in the screenplay / film. Overall, disappointing effort.

Although not mentioned in the IMDb profile, this film was also based on artist Francoise Gilot's work entitled, "Life with Picasso". In an interview with Charlie Rose, Gilot emphasized that her book's title came from the French "vivre" meaning to live or life in general, rather than the possessive "My Life". In interview, Gilot likened herself to a camera taking in the life around them.Having said this, it must be understood that the screenplay was not written as a documentary on the artistic process, which is why it does not focus on the individual paintings or the techniques of Picasso, Gilot, Matisse or Braque, all of whom are noted masters of twentieth century art. Rather it is an important film for other reasons, as a character study as artist as a whole which a less insightful or sensitive observer might mistake for tedium or sentimentality. But even more significant is the film's revelation of the importance of autonomy and benevolence in the life of an artist.

i absolutely hated this film! having no interest in art, this film only held the interest that it had two of my favourite actors in it, Anthony Hopkins, and Julianne Moore. But although their performances may have been good, the film lacked in interest for me. Although my expectations of the film were high, maybe higher than they should have been, but those expectations were crushed some what. The film wasn't badly directed, acted (apart from the lead lady) or in any way, i general bad movie for those who are interested in those sorts of things. But the film really did generally bore me to death and i couldn't wait for it to end. If you are an art fan, you may enjoy this, if not,then i doubt this film will hold any interest to you.

There are certain stories that are better if they remained untold. As a matter of personal taste I do not like Picasso's work. When saw the title, I purchased the video because I wanted to see who was the person behind the scribbles? Also because I always question why some good painters are unknown and will always be unknown and others achieve worldwide acclaim so undeservingly. This movie has good acting, by Anthony Hopkins (Silence of the Lambs) and Natasha McElhone (The Truman Show) and all the other actors are good. The story is well told. I just dislike Picasso very much. He treated all the women in his life like dirt. They all put up with him! They had low self-esteem and he destroyed the little they had left. The most amazing thing is that he had a wife and about five mistresses, and every place he went they all went, and put up with his mistreatment. The ambiguous man did not believe in God but kept all his hair and finger nails wrapped and dated, and kept by one of his mistresses because he was afraid of Black Magic! Picasso himself as a human being had no redeeming qualities.While Françoise was pregnant with Paloma Picasso, he left for Poland for three weeks but remained in Poland for about four months. Every day Françoise would receive a telegram saying: Hugs and Kisses! I guess that where the famous Paloma Picasso (jewelry designer) got the idea for her famous design of hugs and kisses. The telegrams were not even sent by Picasso. The women who were involved with Picasso: One would get a sharp pointed knife and stab her hand with it and laugh while she bleeds. His wife became a crazy vagrant, who went around cursing him. Nobody was normal except Françoise, who almost lost her identity. His older son became Picassos' chauffeur because Picasso kept telling him that he was not good for anything. Françoise survived by leaving him after ten years. I would not have stayed with that man even for a day! In sum: this is a story about a jerk! Humans have somewhat an inborn desire to be good. Maybe I am naive! Most people can distinguish between good and evil. Picasso lacked that quality. I do not recommend this movie because the main character lack's morality and the core of the story has no social value, as most characters in the story allow themselves to be used to exploit the financial side of the name Picasso. This movie is about the use of someone's likeness for financial gain!