I knew a weird kid in art class and his work just blew everyone else's out of the water. On break one day, I thought I'd go talk to him because he seemed like a nice person and I wanted to find out how he got so good- if he could recommend any books etc. He was REALLY weird, which was ok with me, but I couldn't tell if he wanted to talk to me or was just tolerating my presence. I guess I should have just asked him, but I was young. Now I would just say "I'd like to talk to you because I think you're interesting, but if you don't want to talk to me, that's ok too and I can leave, but if you change your mind later, I will still be happy to talk to you.." I always think of that guy when I think about Vincent and wish I would have gotten a chance to know him, but yeah..the thing I think is so ironic is that if Vincent was alive today, all the rich society people who faint over his work would treat the real man like everyone in arles did.
Yer absolutely right about how Vincent would be treated ... and His paintings would not be appreciated for what tha paintings are .... only met of few people that truly appreciate and genuinely understand what he did and how he truly was
Someone once said that anyone would want a van Gogh painting in their living room. But the idea of actually having van Gogh IN their living room was not so appealing!
My grandmother was an artist. In our dining room, there were 2 landscapes she painted. They were good. I remember always looking at them. I had never thought I could draw like her. Altho I tried oils, then pencil. I found them too messy. Then one day, a friend suggested I get a drawing tablet for my laptop. I did. And I started drawing eyes, and over time I actually painted with it. My style is like no one else's. Part of me is like Gauguin, minus the syphilis, but I'm half a cashier, half a painter. Never had a single art lesson. I learn by looking, seeing, observing the world. Part like Vincent painting empty shoes, chair s, and lots and lots of sunflowers. I'm painting sea scapes and still life's, portraits, odd what inspires me. I paint from pictures. They are my models. Vincent like copy masterpieces. I find myself a combination of the two. I have a huge portfolio of paintings. Never sold any of them. I just need to paint, driven to paint.
The only part of this movie I didnt like was Theos portrayal. Theo absolutely loved and supported his brother 100%, to the point of sacrificing luxuries he could have enjoyed, so that his turmoiled older brother could work doing something he loved, and that added value to the world. Here, Theo seems interested in covering for his own faults, like a frustrated parent whose negligence was the cause of some incident. This was not the case at all.
What you said was very nice. Theos love for his brother allowed the world to have this great art , Very true . And I saw what you saw in theo , a kind brother.
Van Gogh hasn't just inspired painters, but songwriters, musicians, actors, directors and so many more. This man was a perfect example, just how someone's genius can be ignored for years and years, until finally reaching a mainstream audience. Thank God, people finally realized and took notice of Vincent's God-given talent.
He inspired me I love his work. He Lived terribly And People hated him. But He’s respected now. He was a great man He never deserved the tournament He Received A Great man But Terrible Life. Idolize him I believe in god.. and I know that suicide is a sin but in his case I understood why.
I have always been fascinated by Vincent especially he and his brother Theo's relationship. Through their multitude of letters to each other is where we get to know Vincent and the love of brothers for each other. Basically Theo was the only one who loved Vincent. I have always felt so sad for him. He really was a ne'er do well in his lifetime. He would be so pleased with the fame he garnered later. He might be the most important one to say "I told you so!" I wonder if he had not cut off part of his ear would he have been so reknown? No artist has really done such an outrageous thing before or since. I think his paintings are pretty much the work of someone who was disturbed in some way but so what? At first they scared me, and the best thing about it it is he did not intend to give that impression. How wonderful for an artist!
Hands down, this is a superiorly outstanding biopic that thoroughly examines in full detail the explosively complex and fiery relationship (both artistic and personal) between Vincent van Gogh and Paul Gauguin (told from his point of view) during the two-plus months that they lived together in Arles, France. It was well-cast, with superb acting. I highly recommend it. The view is both credibly compelling and extremely riveting from start to finish! 10/10
John Simm is a fantastic actor . I really got into to this film as if I were there. When he flew into a rage near the end of the film, it made me jump out of my skin. And when he cut his ear off **********
I agree. It's a nice movie but it's still not the whole story. None of Gauguin's paintings from the same period were shown and even though Vincent had his problems (some believe he was either a manic depressive or an epileptic or BOTH), but he was NOT a lunatic! His letters reveal that he was not only passionate but intelligent. Like some artists, Vincent neglected the basics of hygiene and cleanliness but Gauguin wasn't that much better. He just dressed up when he NEEDED to!
If Vincent's mother accepted him and showed him love and affection, he wouldn't have suffered so much mentally and emotionally. Poor man was set up to fail and what he created was the paintings of a genius. He never hurt anyone, just himself. How much suffering he endured, we will never know, but it was very difficult to be poor, an outcast and not able to sell any paintings. Vincent, you will always remain in the memory of humanity as one of the greatest artists to even live.
I've lived in penniless obscurity and I've known many people of different degrees of craziness , just like this . I think we're all crazy but some more extreme than others. Some learn to grow and some grow more mad.we are all reflections of the human condition in its best and worst. Genius is not exclusive to madmen or the so called sane.
Van Gogh and Gauguin are at each other’s throats a lot of the time but in a way they need eachother I heard they were like this in life they clashed a lot and Vincent was a hot head with one hell of a temper also he could hardly give his work away for free and that guy using his paintings to cover a crack now that same painting well real one is worth millions love this movie and Vincent’s life is facinating
The small details; 1:09:19 According to Doctor Felix Ray, who initially treated his ear, almost the entire left ear was cut. 1:10:50 He cut his left ear, not the right.
Yes... The drawing the attending doctor made of the cut to Vincent's ear shows the left ear mostly cut off... That drawing has recently resurfaced, among the research papers of biographer Irving Stone. ( I believe that was after this movie was made, though I'm not positive. ) For many years it was commonly believed that Vincent only cut his lobe off but the drawing suggests otherwise.
Zenoist2, since you started it... A lot of people do not know that Vincent married the prostitute, and they were happy until she started nagging him. He was, at heart, a good man, so he let it go in one ear and out the hole on the other side of his head.
gauguin fears van gogh is on the brink of a psychological meltdown. van gogh claims gauguin puts too much salt in the stew........ they drink, they argue, but most of all they paint together, sharing a ferocious obsession ...great ! almost like an old married couple :P
What about brotherhood? And, comradery? I know about these things as a painter. I(me) started outside of school learning painting. I was encouraged; then inspired. By others in my circle of friends.🧑🎨♾️💋
He probably knew that. I would imagine it's why he wouldn't have reported it as it happened to the police. He was a complex human being. Not perfect by any stretch, but I think he saw the world perfectly.
Theres one thing i learned about art, one question actually, the question ISN,T whethera picture is any good, the question is whether u love it, i got trapped by trying to do work that was good, Screw that! Now i just ask myself do i like it, sometimes i hate it sometimes i like it and sometimes i love it, i desperatly want u too love it too but if u dont, tough!
Rupert, we all know that Van Gogh was extremely troubled however he was not just a lost "walking-bottom -of-a-shoe" (SOLE). His SOUL was also in distress.
A ridiculous film. van Gogh was upper-middle class, Gauguin more so ( look up his ancestors) Their conversation was very educated both were extremely well-read, Van Gogh spoke four languages. They were both bourgeois, their conversation would have been fascinating with very advanced thinking.They were not at all as portrayed in the film. Their arguments were intellectual constantly referring to literature. I have the three volumes of Van Gogh's letters and have read them many times also Gauguin's letters. Vincent was a difficult person from the youngest age but not a demi imbecile.
It has been great to see all the discussion. To be honest I didnt know too much about either Artist before I watched this film but really enjoyed it. I know a lot more now due to your comments.Thanks and Peace. x
Van Gogh goes down in history as a starving artist simply because he died too soon, at 36. Had he LIVED a normal lifespan, he would have actually be remembered as a hugely successful artist. His paintings began to sell like crazy by the 1920's, when he would have been in his fifties. Same thing for Gauguin, who also died young and missed out on his huge success. BOTH artists died in poverty, while their descendents all became trust-fund babies. Life is cruel. There is no God. 😮😮😮
I wasn't able to watch 'Lust for life' with Kirk Douglas and Anthony Quinn from 1956 here on YT like I ve done in the past; now all I can find is the trailer and a few short clips. So I watched this instead and the best I can think of to say about it is that it approached this well worn story from a much more personal and claustrophobic angle; it was very bleak and depressing.
Good deciphering on the letters being PROOF! Vincent was as you say, "Passionate but Intelligent" BOTH for sure. His problem is he is over Passionate, HE REALIZED THE MAGIC and wanted everyone to realize the same.
Paul Gauguin was an ass.. He ripped off the money Theo had given him to take care of Vincent at the Yellow House in Arles. Gauguin had no interest in going there at all. It was Theo who paid him to do it. He spent most of the money on prostitutes, drinking and his own selfish reasons rather than paints and food.. He never even liked Van Gogh's work. When the money ran out, so did Gauguin. He was a big part of why Vincent began losing hope in being able to keep going. When Theo had a child and named it "Vincent" he told his brother that expenses had gone up and he didn't have the money to support him and his work for a while. Imagine how Vincent felt that another "Vincent" was taking his place. Dr. Gachet was constantly assuring Van Gogh he was not ill at all. That he was an artist and in no way mad at all but when Vincent befriended the Dr's daughter and they became close, her father told her that he would not allow her to be around that "mad" man. All of these things made Vincent decide to commit suicide. He felt abandoned and he felt like a burden to everyone around him. In short, he thought suicide would be the best thing he could do for everyone involved. Sure, he suffered from bi-polar disorder. So do I. If it wasn't for my illness, I could not have reached those deep levels of creativity hidden inside of my mind. There's a price for the ability of being a great artist in any area of the arts. It's your sanity. The greatest creative minds that have ever existed are, were and will be mentally ill to some extent. It's the price you pay for being gifted. It's not easy being crazy.creative but madness didn't kill Vincent Van Gogh. He was just trying to be kind and do the honorable thing. God Bless Vincent Van Gogh.
Lowell, I think you are idealizing Van Gogh and his mental issues. Bi-polar he may have been, but his whole life was one long struggle for acceptance, first and foremost from his father, then Kee Voss, then the art world, even his brother, Theo. The man was "a bull in the china shop" his whole life with a constant need to throw himself into everything he ever attempted and then expected quick success ...and acceptance by all. He was not a respected, let alone famous, artist in his lifetime. The fame came much later, more for his struggles than his art. I have come to think he might have had more success and happiness as an outdoor photographer, in the footsteps of Matthew Brady and Ansel Adams. He always sought to capture the beauty of wild nature and human labor. I wish Theo had taken away the easel and given him a camera/tripod.
DadsLloyd Maybe so. But Gauguin was a pompous ass and the two of them really didn't care for each others work. A doomed relationship from the start. I'm pretty well studied on Van Gogh and the many theories and myths associated with all the incidents of his "roller coaster" life. Not an expert by any matter of means but I too, am bi-polar so I can relate to how hard it is to maintain any kind of healthy relationship with another person. Family, friend or mere aquaintence. It's not easy. Just as Vincent's life never was. Thank you. I appreciate your comment very much. Any discussion on Van Gogh is a good discussion and I love doing it.
I think that you are being a little harsh on Paul Gauguin! I take it that you have never lived with a schizophrenic or a manic depressive? They would start a fight in an empty room! Furthermore, many painters, Francis Bacon for example, derive inspiration by living life to the full and are personally obnoxious, so it is unfair to judge Paul Gauguin unfavourably just because he was unable to get on with Vincent Van Gogh, whom we both admire greatly, or comes up to what you consider to be your own moral standard. Even taking mental illness out of the equation, this pair would never have got on with each other. The one a fastidiously neat ex sailor/banker, the other a slovenly ex lay preacher/art dealer. Morally, they were polar opposites. Gauguin hated conventional morality, Van Gogh was a deeply moral and pious man. Their painting styles were equally divergent: on the one side flat thinned oil paints, the other heavy impasto to name but one obvious difference. Finally, there must have been/be persons in your life whom you cannot abide or get along with, does that make you a bad person? Sometimes opposites do not attract! As Vincent would have said: 'a handshake' from Villiago.
Villiago Well put. BTW I've lived with a bi-polar person my whole life. Myself. I was diagnosed in '92 after self-medicating for 20 years. My parents sent me to three different psychiatrists before the age of 12. I'm very much like Van Gogh outside of his outrageous work ethic. I've been involved in the arts my whole life. The ups and downs, the highs and lows and everything in between including several suicide attempts. Lot's of relationships that never went anywhere and I could count the number of friends I have today on three fingers. I have feelings which Vincent had as well. I live a very lonely life and have never married. I believe there's a lot of false information about Vincent and I like exploring different concepts and theories about his life. I'm just voicing the way I feel about an artist I think about everyday. Always like hearing other peoples comments or thoughts and I believe everyone has a right to their own opinion. Thanks for sharing. ~ A handshake from Hayenga
I love the pictures from Van Gogh a lot more than Gaugins'. They are much more thrilling. I think his problem was his insecurity and Gaugin hasn't checked it at all.
I enjoyed it! Was this done by the BBC? Although it probably wasn't the most historically accurate bio-pic, it certainly captured the conflict and contrasting styles of these two painters. Thanks for taking the time to post this.
Anybody who is wants to see movies about Gauguin that are even more accurate, I recommend GAUGUIN: THE SAVAGE starring David Carradine and WOLF AT THE DOOR: GAUGUIN starring Donald Sutherland. The main reason why Paul abandoned his family is because they moved in with his wife's relatives and they were very critical of his quitting his broker's job to become an artist. He frequently wrote to his wife and his favorite daughter and returned to visit them....
Van gogh is an inspiration to anyone who does not fit in to the boring status quo. Lust for Life is ten times better. Kudos to the actors but truthfully who can measure up to Anthony Quinn and Kirk Douglas.
Me encanto esta pelicula ya que no cae en la copia obvia . Me encantaron los protagonistas y la relacion tan intensa entre ambos , resulta fantastico como dos artistas en un periodo tan breve hayan vivido tan intensamente y hayan dejado un legado imborrable en la historia del arte . El director es un genio igualmente .
+bodhisattva99 It also confused me. Later, i guess that on one hand maybe the director wanted to make a clear comparison between the penniless life led in Arles by the two brilliant painters and the great value created after their death.
+bodhisattva99 On the other hand, this film is named The Yellow House and it concerns the unforgettable and meaningful experience in this particular place both for Vincent and Gauguin which did contribute to their art career later, and that really counts and makes the film what it is.
I think he was too arrogant to admit and definitely jealous of Vincent's unique talent. Look at Gaugin's work, what's there so unique about? Not to me, that's for sure. Vincent was killed mostly by people like Gaugin who never understood him.
I suggest that viewers read "Van Gogh, the Life" by Steven Naifeh and Gregory White Smith for a much more insightful look at Van Gogh's life and personality. The book, a New York Times Bestseller, is filled with detail (letters, period interviews, psychological and artistic appraisals, etc) and presents what, for me, is a rather repulsive portrait of Vincent from his early childhood. Irving Stone's book "Lust for Life" should have been titled "Lust for Acceptance", based on Vincent's constant struggle for acceptance by his minister father, mother, siblings, relatives, employers.....in short everyone he ever knew or met.
So basically Paul Gauguin drove Vincent mad by not allowing him to paint in his frenetic, brilliant style, by critisizing and belittling him at every turn? Interesting take.
Gauguin sure is mad...but the best part of this is the last lines that tell you the dollar value of the work they did together, not to mention, what each of their total catalog is worth!
Its funny how People today believe that things were really different back then. Excluding the electronics, plumbing and lighting everything today is as it was, then. The "If van gogh was alive today..." HE-it would be as it was. The rich and famous clamoring Vincent.His family were involved in the, todays, closed & exclusive art market where talent is not the guiding light but who the artist knows and where they're at
The perspective frame they used in the movie is it proper? I thought the perspective frame and grid would match the canvas he was working, but it was smaller.
I noticed the same thing as I was watching, and the only conclusion that I could come to is that he was using it to focus on a portion of the painting he was working on.
@@artistbob9559 One draws the lines of the wires or strings on the canvas then fill in what one sees looking through the frame in each triangle, this makes placing objects trees buildings e.t.c more easily on the canvas.
Since many letters from both Gauguin and Van Gogh are still extant, it is likely that the movie is reasonably accurate. I do recall art historians talking of how they argued constantly, sometimes in intellectual debate, but even so, it must have quickly become tiresome.
I changed my opinion of this movie. It DOES make Gauguin seem weak compared to Vincent. Also, I learned that it supports the half-baked theory that Gauguin is the one that cut Vincent's ear. I've always liked both of their works and I stand by my long-held assessment. Van Gogh did some great work but not everything he did was great. What we have seen again and again in books are the same pieces. If you go see a large collection of his work,, many of the lesser known pieces have weak compositions. Whereas with Gauguin, the compositions are generally rock solid. And the colors Gauguin's paintings are vibrant and well organized. I think BOTH were amazing painters but too often in these movies, Gauguin is often treated unfairly and this movie is no exception.
I think we all know that Vincent cut his own ear off. The thing is, did he cut it off because of a row with Gaugin, or was it because of the prostitute he had an affair with?
You may be right in your assessment of works side by side if all work was saved by Gauguin. Monet destroyed many of his paintings because he was no satisfied with them. I think all artists have work they like and some that they feel are mediocre or work that marked their growth along the way.
John Herr Just wanted to say to Pulsar, have you seen Van Gogh's paintings in the flesh? I have, and I can tell you that they are very moving in a way which I haven't seen in other paintings. I think both Van Gogh & Gaugin were strong characters, but in very different ways, ways that can be seen in their work. They were both great artists, but I think Van Gogh's work is the greater, partly because they are so emotional.
Lucia Tilyard Yes, I have seen Van Gogh's works in museums. There was a major show of his work in the early 2000s or the Late 90s and I was surprised by how many of his paintings I DIDN'T like! As I said elsewhere, some of his compositions were off-balance and he didn't always use those thick brushstrokes he was so famous for. The reason why we see the same paintings over and over again in most books and films is because they are among his best works! By contrast, I saw a major show featuring Gauguin's works and yes, I was amazed to see many paintings that I had never seen in books on his work. And, even in some of his less successful pieces, the composition was nearly always sound. I was also amazed at how good he was in woodcarving and ceramics! Gauguin had a very cerebral approach toward his work. This is not to say Van Gogh wasn't intellectual, you can find prep drawings for some of his pieces but he was definitely more spontaneous which is why his catalog is bigger than Gauguin's. He also didn't have a job and with Theo's support he could afford to be more prolific. But what annoys me is when some people say Vincent's work was more "passionate" than Paul's. As if sweeping swirls and aggressive colors are somehow more "vibrant" and the only way to express "passion". I find Gauguin's paintings extremely heartwarming by the simple choice of colors and their positioning in a given picture. And the models DO NOT all have "the same expression" as one guy put it. They have a range of emotions from fear, subdued anger or disgust, to curiosity and joy. It just depends on the picture, which shouldn't be surprising.
John Herr And let's not forget, some artists paint over less successful works! That paint and canvas cost MONEY! I love it whenever they do an X-Ray of a renaissance painting and find changes an artist made or another painting on the other side! What? Did they think only contemporary artists made mistakes or changed their minds!?
Vincent van Gogh (pronounced "Gokh", not the Americanised "van Go"!) was obviously a bona fide genius. Unfortunately he has also been cheapened as short hand for the clichéd 'troubled genius'. He certainly loved his art, as if wrought from the darkest depths of his soul. I believe he was genuinely an artist in so far as he HAD to paint, and this primaeval drive was in no way influenced by him wanting to sell his work per se, unlike most 'artists', as he didn't value nor measure his work by cheap monetary value. He painted as he breathed- because he simply had to...he didn't paint a picture but imprinted his very soul.
This doc/movie makes me want to read Vincents letters, there's a lot of them? I read some, a hand full. Vincents words and perceptions/thoughts are beautiful based on the ones i read?
This was as close I think to the reality. What is understood as genuis now. after the fact..The life. Is often excuse the pun ..painted as an over simplification of the one you claim to know after the event. Only Vincent himself really knew the truth. No matter how many different attempts long after try to know it as it actually was.
I have found in life that you have to do the promoting of your own work yourself. Picasso is a good example. Even the gifted inventor Thomas Edison had to do it. We likely would never have heard of the little scruffy band in The Cavern Club without Brian Epstein. Now we still have their music on the radio 60 years later.
With regards to many of the previous comments: Every ‘Hollywood type’ script/screenwriter quickly learns that a marketable script needs, above all, a compelling, lovably flawed hero and an easy to despise heavy. Even better if you can write in a guilt ridden relative. In the case of historical stories, those personalities will often be regardless of actual historical fact. Here Gauguin is the mean spirited, selfish, womanizing, military booted heavy. Van Gogh is the poor taken advantage of innocent, childlike dreamer/tantrum thrower of a hero and Theo is the after the fact doubter who wishes he had only done better when he had the chance. Yawn. It’s a fun bit of fiction, but for those interested in more likely facts, there has been plenty of well-researched material written by reputable historians about both artists and brother Theo.
It doesn't seem anyone who was part of this production did much research. Sunflowers wasn't even hung in Gaugain's room. Gauguin may not have thought Vincent's work was too amazing, but he understood it. They were in Arles as equals not as teacher and student.
hello chitra...this is rashmi....no its not like that paul always criticized vangogh 's works......the way vangogh painted, it raised a questionsss...,the way vincent painted was indeed different style of painting from others ,,......paul appreciated vangogh because he had different style and different vision for painting ...vincent didn't follow the traditional method of painting nor paul appreciated it,....paul was very happy tat vincent followed his heart and represented the world in different way. its was not just method of dabbing tat made him world eminent artist but his genuine dedication love n craze for art.
For a while it looked like Vincent might recover,but he was taken away by a rising fever.Vincent had a martyr complex,plus by forgiving the youths in his heart he may have felt that he could square things with God.
Havent watched it yet, i like to make art but looking at vincents art makes me want to quit, hes just too brilliant, then i get inspired, look at his art again and want to cut my throat,
I feared this was going to be another hatchet job depicting Gauguin as an inferior to Vincent but it's not. Van Gogh's output was twice, close to three times that of Paul's but he never had a job, while Gauguin had several in his lifetime. Gauguin wasn't an upper-class twit who got "lucky", he worked his butt off! Nearly every Painting I've seen by him had a solid composition with delicious colors; Vincent's work was also great but sometimes had bad color or weak designs. A Fair and Fun movie..
I knew a weird kid in art class and his work just blew everyone else's out of the water. On break one day, I thought I'd go talk to him because he seemed like a nice person and I wanted to find out how he got so good- if he could recommend any books etc. He was REALLY weird, which was ok with me, but I couldn't tell if he wanted to talk to me or was just tolerating my presence. I guess I should have just asked him, but I was young. Now I would just say "I'd like to talk to you because I think you're interesting, but if you don't want to talk to me, that's ok too and I can leave, but if you change your mind later, I will still be happy to talk to you.." I always think of that guy when I think about Vincent and wish I would have gotten a chance to know him, but yeah..the thing I think is so ironic is that if Vincent was alive today, all the rich society people who faint over his work would treat the real man like everyone in arles did.
Yer absolutely right about how Vincent would be treated ... and His paintings would not be appreciated for what tha paintings are .... only met of few people that truly appreciate and genuinely understand what he did and how he truly was
Holy word salad Batman
Someone once said that anyone would want a van Gogh painting in their living room.
But the idea of actually having van Gogh IN their living room was not so appealing!
If Vincent came back to life the whole world would be clamoring to rub shoulders with him.
The dichotomy.
Thank you for posting this blessed Sunflower gem. 🌻🌻🌻
My grandmother was an artist. In our dining room, there were 2 landscapes she painted. They were good. I remember always looking at them. I had never thought I could draw like her. Altho I tried oils, then pencil. I found them too messy. Then one day, a friend suggested I get a drawing tablet for my laptop. I did. And I started drawing eyes, and over time I actually painted with it. My style is like no one else's. Part of me is like Gauguin, minus the syphilis, but I'm half a cashier, half a painter. Never had a single art lesson. I learn by looking, seeing, observing the world. Part like Vincent painting empty shoes, chair s, and lots and lots of sunflowers. I'm painting sea scapes and still life's, portraits, odd what inspires me. I paint from pictures. They are my models. Vincent like copy masterpieces. I find myself a combination of the two. I have a huge portfolio of paintings. Never sold any of them. I just need to paint, driven to paint.
Never stop
❤Oftentimes,people are despised and neglected while alive,only to realize that their importance and greatness are recognized when they're gone.😢
The only part of this movie I didnt like was Theos portrayal. Theo absolutely loved and supported his brother 100%, to the point of sacrificing luxuries he could have enjoyed, so that his turmoiled older brother could work doing something he loved, and that added value to the world.
Here, Theo seems interested in covering for his own faults, like a frustrated parent whose negligence was the cause of some incident. This was not the case at all.
What you said was very nice. Theos love for his brother allowed the world to have this great art , Very true . And I saw what you saw in theo , a kind brother.
No kidding! I mean the guy died soon thereafter of a broken heart.
I would also say that the actor playing Theo is too old, compared to Vincent. Theo was his younger brother.
Van Gogh hasn't just inspired painters, but songwriters, musicians, actors, directors and so many more. This man was a perfect example, just how someone's genius can be ignored for years and years, until finally reaching a mainstream audience. Thank God, people finally realized and took notice of Vincent's God-given talent.
He inspired me I love his work. He Lived terribly And People hated him. But He’s respected now. He was a great man He never deserved the tournament He Received A Great man But Terrible Life. Idolize him I believe in god.. and I know that suicide is a sin but in his case I understood why.
I have always been fascinated by Vincent especially he and his brother Theo's relationship. Through their multitude of letters to each other is where we get to know Vincent and the love of brothers for each other. Basically Theo was the only one who loved Vincent. I have always felt so sad for him. He really was a ne'er do well in his lifetime. He would be so pleased with the fame he garnered later. He might be the most important one to say "I told you so!" I wonder if he had not cut off part of his ear would he have been so reknown? No artist has really done such an outrageous thing before or since. I think his paintings are pretty much the work of someone who was disturbed in some way but so what? At first they scared me, and the best thing about it it is he did not intend to give that impression. How wonderful for an artist!
I think now would be a great time to mention the starry musical :) it’s great, give it a listen
How many of today's world would have that conviction to carry on despite of everything at that time?
Hands down, this is a superiorly outstanding biopic that thoroughly examines in full detail the explosively complex and fiery relationship (both artistic and personal) between Vincent van Gogh and Paul Gauguin (told from his point of view) during the two-plus months that they lived together in Arles, France. It was well-cast, with superb acting. I highly recommend it. The view is both credibly compelling and extremely riveting from start to finish! 10/10
Simon Farnby is in this as well as John Simm? Awesome!
If the power of art exists , it does with everything Van Gogh related . This film is simply heavenly
John Simm is a fantastic actor . I really got into to this film as if I were there. When he flew into a rage near the end of the film, it made me jump out of my skin. And when he cut his ear off **********
I agree. It's a nice movie but it's still not the whole story. None of Gauguin's paintings from the same period were shown and even though Vincent had his problems (some believe he was either a manic depressive or an epileptic or BOTH), but he was NOT a lunatic! His letters reveal that he was not only passionate but intelligent. Like some artists, Vincent neglected the basics of hygiene and cleanliness but Gauguin wasn't that much better. He just dressed up when he NEEDED to!
If Vincent's mother accepted him and showed him love and affection, he wouldn't have suffered so much mentally and emotionally. Poor man was set up to fail and what he created was the paintings of a genius. He never hurt anyone, just himself. How much suffering he endured, we will never know, but it was very difficult to be poor, an outcast and not able to sell any paintings. Vincent, you will always remain in the memory of humanity as one of the greatest artists to even live.
I've lived in penniless obscurity and I've known many people of different degrees of craziness , just like this . I think we're all crazy but some more extreme than others. Some learn to grow and some grow more mad.we are all reflections of the human condition in its best and worst. Genius is not exclusive to madmen or the so called sane.
The actor that plays Van Gogh looks curiously like Thom Yorke :)
Thanks for posting this, it barely began, and I am already loving it.
The actor is called John simm who was also in life on mars as dci sam Tyler and doctor who as the harold Saxon master
Van Gogh and Gauguin are at each other’s throats a lot of the time but in a way they need eachother I heard they were like this in life they clashed a lot and Vincent was a hot head with one hell of a temper also he could hardly give his work away for free and that guy using his paintings to cover a crack now that same painting well real one is worth millions love this movie and Vincent’s life is facinating
The small details; 1:09:19 According to Doctor Felix Ray, who initially treated his ear, almost the entire left ear was cut. 1:10:50 He cut his left ear, not the right.
Yes... The drawing the attending doctor made of the cut to Vincent's ear shows the left ear mostly cut off... That drawing has recently resurfaced, among the research papers of biographer Irving Stone. ( I believe that was after this movie was made, though I'm not positive. ) For many years it was commonly believed that Vincent only cut his lobe off but the drawing suggests otherwise.
Gauguin asked Van Gogh if he'd like a fresh tube of paint.
To which he replied " no thanks, I've got one ear."
Sorry,.
Zenoist2, since you started it... A lot of people do not know that Vincent married the prostitute, and they were happy until she started nagging him. He was, at heart, a good man, so he let it go in one ear and out the hole on the other side of his head.
Not even funny mate
Very funny mate ....
@@artistbob9559 sub par sense of humor
I've had these moments with my father.
So I really connect with this.
gauguin fears van gogh is on the brink of a psychological meltdown. van gogh claims gauguin puts too much salt in the stew........ they drink, they argue, but most of all they paint together, sharing a ferocious obsession ...great ! almost like an old married couple :P
lin reynolds love this movie
What about brotherhood? And, comradery? I know about these things as a painter. I(me) started outside of school learning painting. I was encouraged; then inspired. By others in my circle of friends.🧑🎨♾️💋
Thanks for uploading, love Van Gogh. An interesting comparison to, "Lust For Life", one of my favorites.
van gogh My favorite artrist ever. i watched this on c4 years ago nice to see it again.
What a pair ha to live in a little house, yellow at that grate, the art that VG created was something else wow.
The more I see this part of his life... the more I read... the more I learn... the more I believe the theory that Gauguin cut him in an altercation...
He probably knew that. I would imagine it's why he wouldn't have reported it as it happened to the police. He was a complex human being. Not perfect by any stretch, but I think he saw the world perfectly.
I love the way the director has used Vincent's perspective on the scenes in this film.
Whoever made this film, thankyou!
oh dear that was rough ..I love Van Gogh Paintings.
Theres one thing i learned about art, one question actually, the question ISN,T whethera picture is any good, the question is whether u love it, i got trapped by trying to do work that was good, Screw that! Now i just ask myself do i like it, sometimes i hate it sometimes i like it and sometimes i love it, i desperatly want u too love it too but if u dont, tough!
Rupert, we all know that Van Gogh was extremely troubled however he was not just a lost "walking-bottom -of-a-shoe" (SOLE). His SOUL was also in distress.
Very beautiful movie in art , characters , music everything beautiful true fact about life
l have seen this more than 10 times now, can you please make another Vincent van Gogh/Paul Gaugain movie.
love the setting and colours in this movie
This film better had been nominated for cinematography, if not won!
"Vegetables" as he picks up an orange 🍊 🤣
A ridiculous film. van Gogh was upper-middle class, Gauguin more so ( look up his ancestors) Their conversation was very educated both were extremely well-read, Van Gogh spoke four languages. They were both bourgeois, their conversation would have been fascinating with very advanced thinking.They were not at all as portrayed in the film. Their arguments were intellectual constantly referring to literature. I have the three volumes of Van Gogh's letters and have read them many times also Gauguin's letters. Vincent was a difficult person from the youngest age but not a demi imbecile.
Vincent always in my heart ❤️
It has been great to see all the discussion. To be honest I didnt know too much about either Artist before I watched this film but really enjoyed it. I know a lot more now due to your comments.Thanks and Peace. x
Van Gogh goes down in history as a starving artist simply because he died too soon, at 36. Had he LIVED a normal lifespan, he would have actually be remembered as a hugely successful artist. His paintings began to sell like crazy by the 1920's, when he would have been in his fifties. Same thing for Gauguin, who also died young and missed out on his huge success. BOTH artists died in poverty, while their descendents all became trust-fund babies. Life is cruel. There is no God. 😮😮😮
Vincent painted from the heart
José Manuel Valles y Septién and his eyes you have to see
José Manuel Valles y Septién for paint
Wonderful in Narrative and dubbed , thanks!
I wasn't able to watch 'Lust for life' with Kirk Douglas and Anthony Quinn from 1956 here on YT like I ve done in the past; now all I can find is the trailer and a few short clips. So I watched this instead and the best I can think of to say about it is that it approached this well worn story from a much more personal and claustrophobic angle; it was very bleak and depressing.
Good deciphering on the letters being PROOF! Vincent was as you say, "Passionate but Intelligent" BOTH for sure. His problem is he is over Passionate, HE REALIZED THE MAGIC and wanted everyone to realize the same.
Paul Gauguin was an ass.. He ripped off the money Theo had given him to take care of Vincent at the Yellow House in Arles. Gauguin had no interest in going there at all. It was Theo who paid him to do it. He spent most of the money on prostitutes, drinking and his own selfish reasons rather than paints and food.. He never even liked Van Gogh's work. When the money ran out, so did Gauguin. He was a big part of why Vincent began losing hope in being able to keep going. When Theo had a child and named it "Vincent" he told his brother that expenses had gone up and he didn't have the money to support him and his work for a while. Imagine how Vincent felt that another "Vincent" was taking his place. Dr. Gachet was constantly assuring Van Gogh he was not ill at all. That he was an artist and in no way mad at all but when Vincent befriended the Dr's daughter and they became close, her father told her that he would not allow her to be around that "mad" man. All of these things made Vincent decide to commit suicide. He felt abandoned and he felt like a burden to everyone around him. In short, he thought suicide would be the best thing he could do for everyone involved. Sure, he suffered from bi-polar disorder. So do I. If it wasn't for my illness, I could not have reached those deep levels of creativity hidden inside of my mind. There's a price for the ability of being a great artist in any area of the arts. It's your sanity. The greatest creative minds that have ever existed are, were and will be mentally ill to some extent. It's the price you pay for being gifted. It's not easy being crazy.creative but madness didn't kill Vincent Van Gogh. He was just trying to be kind and do the honorable thing. God Bless Vincent Van Gogh.
Wow - you must have known his personally, to have such an opinion.
Lowell, I think you are idealizing Van Gogh and his mental issues. Bi-polar he may have been, but his whole life was one long struggle for acceptance, first and foremost from his father, then Kee Voss, then the art world, even his brother, Theo. The man was "a bull in the china shop" his whole life with a constant need to throw himself into everything he ever attempted and then expected quick success ...and acceptance by all. He was not a respected, let alone famous, artist in his lifetime. The fame came much later, more for his struggles than his art. I have come to think he might have had more success and happiness as an outdoor photographer, in the footsteps of Matthew Brady and Ansel Adams. He always sought to capture the beauty of wild nature and human labor. I wish Theo had taken away the easel and given him a camera/tripod.
DadsLloyd
Maybe so. But Gauguin was a pompous ass and the two of them really didn't care for each others work. A doomed relationship from the start. I'm pretty well studied on Van Gogh and the many theories and myths associated with all the incidents of his "roller coaster" life. Not an expert by any matter of means but I too, am bi-polar so I can relate to how hard it is to maintain any kind of healthy relationship with another person. Family, friend or mere aquaintence. It's not easy. Just as Vincent's life never was. Thank you. I appreciate your comment very much. Any discussion on Van Gogh is a good discussion and I love doing it.
I think that you are being a little harsh on Paul Gauguin! I take it that you have never lived with a schizophrenic or a manic depressive? They would start a fight in an empty room! Furthermore, many painters, Francis Bacon for example, derive inspiration by living life to the full and are personally obnoxious, so it is unfair to judge Paul Gauguin unfavourably just because he was unable to get on with Vincent Van Gogh, whom we both admire greatly, or comes up to what you consider to be your own moral standard.
Even taking mental illness out of the equation, this pair would never have got on with each other. The one a fastidiously neat ex sailor/banker, the other a slovenly ex lay preacher/art dealer. Morally, they were polar opposites. Gauguin hated conventional morality, Van Gogh was a deeply moral and pious man. Their painting styles were equally divergent: on the one side flat thinned oil paints, the other heavy impasto to name but one obvious difference. Finally, there must have been/be persons in your life whom you cannot abide or get along with, does that make you a bad person? Sometimes opposites do not attract!
As Vincent would have said: 'a handshake' from Villiago.
Villiago
Well put. BTW I've lived with a bi-polar person my whole life. Myself.
I was diagnosed in '92 after self-medicating for 20 years. My parents sent me to three different psychiatrists before the age of 12. I'm very much like Van Gogh outside of his outrageous work ethic. I've been involved in the arts my whole life. The ups and downs, the highs and lows and everything in between including several suicide attempts. Lot's of relationships that never went anywhere and I could count the number of friends I have today on three fingers. I have feelings which Vincent had as well. I live a very lonely life and have never married.
I believe there's a lot of false information about Vincent and I like exploring different concepts and theories about his life.
I'm just voicing the way I feel about an artist I think about everyday. Always like hearing other peoples comments or thoughts and I believe everyone has a right to their own opinion. Thanks for sharing.
~ A handshake from Hayenga
Paulie G and his bad temper. High key.
Such a great film. Helps to balance my psyche.
This was really good. And I wasn’t expecting it to be. Lesson learned
one excellent movie !!
see it for the second times last night :))
I love the pictures from Van Gogh a lot more than Gaugins'. They are much more thrilling. I think his problem was his insecurity and Gaugin hasn't checked it at all.
Wow! You can feel the tension from the very start of the film.
I enjoyed it! Was this done by the BBC? Although it probably wasn't the most historically accurate bio-pic, it certainly captured the conflict and contrasting styles of these two painters. Thanks for taking the time to post this.
This really shook me. Thank you
The way this british public access movie is a comfort of mine
Anybody who is wants to see movies about Gauguin that are even more accurate, I recommend GAUGUIN: THE SAVAGE starring David Carradine and WOLF AT THE DOOR: GAUGUIN starring Donald Sutherland. The main reason why Paul abandoned his family is because they moved in with his wife's relatives and they were very critical of his quitting his broker's job to become an artist. He frequently wrote to his wife and his favorite daughter and returned to visit them....
Van gogh is an inspiration to anyone who does not fit in to the boring status quo. Lust for Life is ten times better. Kudos to the actors but truthfully who can measure up to Anthony Quinn and Kirk Douglas.
Me encanto esta pelicula ya que no cae en la copia obvia . Me encantaron los protagonistas y la relacion tan intensa entre ambos , resulta fantastico como dos artistas en un periodo tan breve hayan vivido tan intensamente y hayan dejado un legado imborrable en la historia del arte . El director es un genio igualmente .
what does it even mean to talk about the collective value of the paintings in terms of money?
+bodhisattva99 It also confused me. Later, i guess that on one hand maybe the director wanted to make a clear comparison between the penniless life led in Arles by the two brilliant painters and the great value created after their death.
+bodhisattva99 On the other hand, this film is named The Yellow House and it concerns the unforgettable and meaningful experience in this particular place both for Vincent and Gauguin which did contribute to their art career later, and that really counts and makes the film what it is.
+Hira Sweet V
Thank you !! Looking for this always ~
^,^
in one film the sunflower paintings werent found, but were hanging on the wall as a gift from Van Gogh.......
Great Vincent British actor John simm he dug deep for this one great cast colour , ➡️all or nothing ⬅️💢
Is it true that Paul criticized Vincent work and never appreciated it?
I think he was too arrogant to admit and definitely jealous of Vincent's unique talent. Look at Gaugin's work, what's there so unique about? Not to me, that's for sure. Vincent was killed mostly by people like Gaugin who never understood him.
Right. And for the two days he lived after 'being shot by local youths' he didn't bother telling Theo or Dr Gachet. Right.
I suggest that viewers read "Van Gogh, the Life" by Steven Naifeh and Gregory White Smith for a much more insightful look at Van Gogh's life and personality. The book, a New York Times Bestseller, is filled with detail (letters, period interviews, psychological and artistic appraisals, etc) and presents what, for me, is a rather repulsive portrait of Vincent from his early childhood. Irving Stone's book "Lust for Life" should have been titled "Lust for Acceptance", based on Vincent's constant struggle for acceptance by his minister father, mother, siblings, relatives, employers.....in short everyone he ever knew or met.
If one is able to read German I strongly suggest Matthias Arnold: "Biographie" and "Werk und Wirkung", both about 1000 pages and very, very good.
The magic mushrooms im on make the beginning of this movie with its first note feels like waking up for school for the very first time in your life!
So basically Paul Gauguin drove Vincent mad by not allowing him to paint in his frenetic, brilliant style, by critisizing and belittling him at every turn? Interesting take.
An amazing movie, I would have loved to live in the yellow house...
John Simm is one of my favourite actors..thank you for uploading! can i ask if its a true representation of the happenings?
The Genius of Van Gogh
Gauguin sure is mad...but the best part of this is the last lines that tell you the dollar value of the work they did together, not to mention, what each of their total catalog is worth!
Hardly anyone at that time had any time for him
Thank you!
Vincent was both a tortured soul and a free spirit.
This is hilarious and I can't take it seriously. Hour and thirteen minutes of juvenile sniping.
Grazie! !!
Today the paintings of both artists are worth millions of Euros - Dollars - Pounds.
Its funny how People today believe that things were really different back then. Excluding the electronics, plumbing and lighting everything today is as it was, then.
The "If van gogh was alive today..." HE-it would be as it was. The rich and famous clamoring Vincent.His family were involved in the, todays, closed & exclusive art market where talent is not the guiding light but who the artist knows and where they're at
The perspective frame they used in the movie is it proper? I thought the perspective frame and grid would match the canvas he was working, but it was smaller.
I noticed the same thing as I was watching, and the only conclusion that I could come to is that he was using it to focus on a portion of the painting he was working on.
Yes, but Vincent used wires not string.
@@artistbob9559 One draws the lines of the wires or strings on the canvas then fill in what one sees looking through the frame in each triangle, this makes placing objects trees buildings e.t.c more easily on the canvas.
Yes its for perspective,
Only done 3 vallys and aint even tired . I have been on cocaine for 8 days but this movie always chills me out
Since many letters from both Gauguin and Van Gogh are still extant, it is likely that the movie is reasonably accurate. I do recall art historians talking of how they argued constantly, sometimes in intellectual debate, but even so, it must have quickly become tiresome.
I changed my opinion of this movie. It DOES make Gauguin seem weak compared to Vincent. Also, I learned that it supports the half-baked theory that Gauguin is the one that cut Vincent's ear.
I've always liked both of their works and I stand by my long-held assessment. Van Gogh did some great work but not everything he did was great. What we have seen again and again in books are the same pieces. If you go see a large collection of his work,, many of the lesser known pieces have weak compositions. Whereas with Gauguin, the compositions are generally rock solid. And the colors Gauguin's paintings are vibrant and well organized. I think BOTH were amazing painters but too often in these movies, Gauguin is often treated unfairly and this movie is no exception.
I think we all know that Vincent cut his own ear off. The thing is, did he cut it off because of a row with Gaugin, or was it because of the prostitute he had an affair with?
You may be right in your assessment of works side by side if all work was saved by Gauguin. Monet destroyed many of his paintings because he was no satisfied with them.
I think all artists have work they like and some that they feel are mediocre or work that marked their growth along the way.
John Herr Just wanted to say to Pulsar, have you seen Van Gogh's paintings in the flesh? I have, and I can tell you that they are very moving in a way which I haven't seen in other paintings. I think both Van Gogh & Gaugin were strong characters, but in very different ways, ways that can be seen in their work. They were both great artists, but I think Van Gogh's work is the greater, partly because they are so emotional.
Lucia Tilyard Yes, I have seen Van Gogh's works in museums. There was a major show of his work in the early 2000s or the Late 90s and I was surprised by how many of his paintings I DIDN'T like! As I said elsewhere, some of his compositions were off-balance and he didn't always use those thick brushstrokes he was so famous for. The reason why we see the same paintings over and over again in most books and films is because they are among his best works!
By contrast, I saw a major show featuring Gauguin's works and yes, I was amazed to see many paintings that I had never seen in books on his work. And, even in some of his less successful pieces, the composition was nearly always sound. I was also amazed at how good he was in woodcarving and ceramics! Gauguin had a very cerebral approach toward his work. This is not to say Van Gogh wasn't intellectual, you can find prep drawings for some of his pieces but he was definitely more spontaneous which is why his catalog is bigger than Gauguin's. He also didn't have a job and with Theo's support he could afford to be more prolific.
But what annoys me is when some people say Vincent's work was more "passionate" than Paul's. As if sweeping swirls and aggressive colors are somehow more "vibrant" and the only way to express "passion". I find Gauguin's paintings extremely heartwarming by the simple choice of colors and their positioning in a given picture. And the models DO NOT all have "the same expression" as one guy put it. They have a range of emotions from fear, subdued anger or disgust, to curiosity and joy. It just depends on the picture, which shouldn't be surprising.
John Herr And let's not forget, some artists paint over less successful works! That paint and canvas cost MONEY! I love it whenever they do an X-Ray of a renaissance painting and find changes an artist made or another painting on the other side! What? Did they think only contemporary artists made mistakes or changed their minds!?
They missed the blaring fact that Vincent had Hogan's room decorated with the Sunflower painting for him to arrive .they weren't there
Vincent van Gogh (pronounced "Gokh", not the Americanised "van Go"!) was obviously a bona fide genius. Unfortunately he has also been cheapened as short hand for the clichéd 'troubled genius'. He certainly loved his art, as if wrought from the darkest depths of his soul.
I believe he was genuinely an artist in so far as he HAD to paint, and this primaeval drive was in no way influenced by him wanting to sell his work per se, unlike most 'artists', as he didn't value nor measure his work by cheap monetary value. He painted as he breathed- because he simply had to...he didn't paint a picture but imprinted his very soul.
This doc/movie makes me want to read Vincents letters, there's a lot of them? I read some, a hand full. Vincents words and perceptions/thoughts are beautiful based on the ones i read?
This was as close I think to the reality.
What is understood as genuis now.
after the fact..The life.
Is often excuse the pun ..painted as an over simplification of the one you claim to know after the event.
Only Vincent himself really knew the truth.
No matter how many different attempts long after try to know it as it actually was.
I have found in life that you have to do the promoting of your own work yourself. Picasso is a good example. Even the gifted inventor Thomas Edison had to do it. We likely would never have heard of the little scruffy band in The Cavern Club without Brian Epstein. Now we still have their music on the radio 60 years later.
With regards to many of the previous comments: Every ‘Hollywood type’ script/screenwriter quickly learns that a marketable script needs, above all, a compelling, lovably flawed hero and an easy to despise heavy. Even better if you can write in a guilt ridden relative. In the case of historical stories, those personalities will often be regardless of actual historical fact. Here Gauguin is the mean spirited, selfish, womanizing, military booted heavy. Van Gogh is the poor taken advantage of innocent, childlike dreamer/tantrum thrower of a hero and Theo is the after the fact doubter who wishes he had only done better when he had the chance. Yawn. It’s a fun bit of fiction, but for those interested in more likely facts, there has been plenty of well-researched material written by reputable historians about both artists and brother Theo.
I liked Robert Altman's "Vincent and Theo". It's here on youtube too.
research Gauguin-history records a not good man
This is what happens when you lost to The Doctor.
It doesn't seem anyone who was part of this production did much research. Sunflowers wasn't even hung in Gaugain's room. Gauguin may not have thought Vincent's work was too amazing, but he understood it. They were in Arles as equals not as teacher and student.
can somone tell me what songs being played on the piano in the cafe is called?
This Van Gogh reminds me of Thom Yorke.
I was about to say that too .. he does have an striking resemblance with thorm yorke ..
hello chitra...this is rashmi....no its not like that paul always criticized vangogh 's works......the way vangogh painted, it raised a questionsss...,the way vincent painted was indeed different style of painting from others ,,......paul appreciated vangogh because he had different style and different vision for painting ...vincent didn't follow the traditional method of painting nor paul appreciated it,....paul was very happy tat vincent followed his heart and represented the world in different way.
its was not just method of dabbing tat made him world eminent artist but his genuine dedication love n craze for art.
For a while it looked like Vincent might recover,but he was taken away by a rising fever.Vincent had a martyr complex,plus by forgiving the youths in his heart he may have felt that he could square things with God.
The movie shows that he cut his earlobe but in fact he cut off his whole ear
It's the primary and primal English. I can't imagine this doc with American English?
Someone pretty please give me the song at 4:20 :(?
Happy Easter! I love this movie along with Lust for Life. I'm excited for Loving Vincent to come out
🌻
❄️
Havent watched it yet, i like to make art but looking at vincents art makes me want to quit, hes just too brilliant, then i get inspired, look at his art again and want to cut my throat,
Didn't he play Mr Rochester in Jane Eyre?
I feared this was going to be another hatchet job depicting Gauguin as an inferior to Vincent but it's not. Van Gogh's output was twice, close to three times that of Paul's but he never had a job, while Gauguin had several in his lifetime. Gauguin wasn't an upper-class twit who got "lucky", he worked his butt off! Nearly every Painting I've seen by him had a solid composition with delicious colors; Vincent's work was also great but sometimes had bad color or weak designs. A Fair and Fun movie..
"I'm very good with an egg"