فيلم The Silence of Mark Rothko

The Silence of Mark Rothko

Painter Mark Rothko is best known for imposing canvasses that eschew representation in favor of pure color and texture-using them to express fundamental human emotions. In THE SILENCE OF MARK ROTHKO, we visit Rothko's studio at 22 Bowery in New York, and go to Florence's Museo Di San Marco, where the monastic work of Renaissance painter Fra Angelico deeply influenced Rothko's mission to create environments and not just paintings. In The Hague, filmmaker Marjoleine Boonstra introduces us to curator Franz Kaiser of the Gemeentemuseum, as his team installs the works for the first major Rothko exhibit to be held in Holland in 40 years.THE SILENCE OF MARK ROTHKO lingers on paintings and locations - using architectural shots, interiors and streets capes, to link Rothko's paintings to the world he

Running Time
52 minutes
Quality
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres
Documentary
Director
Marjoleine Boonstra
Writer
Marjoleine Boonstra
Country
Netherlands
Year
2016
Audio Languages
اللغة_العربية, English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
Subtitles
اللغة_العربية, 日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

Comments about documentary «The Silence of Mark Rothko» (20)

Laura photo
Laura

What an experience! This is an essential, if lengthy, viewing for anyone who has any interest in art. And for those who have never seen it, it is a fantastic opportunity to understand the work of Mark Rothko and his influence on the world of art.

Lori photo
Lori

I love this documentary, and I agree with a few of the critics. I'm a fan of Mark Rothko, and I think this film is excellent. I love the way it begins, with a few hand-held camera shots, and we hear a very familiar, very haunting voice that is in almost every frame. It's beautiful. And then we see how Rothko painted a very special "Japanese" style, with watercolors. This is fascinating. The film cuts back and forth in time, which is a nice technique, but I found it a little confusing. At first, I thought I was watching a different film, but then I thought I was watching a different part of the same film. It's a little confusing. But, it's not a major flaw. The film is fantastic, and I think it should be a standard for all filmmakers to follow. It's a great film. There are some things that I really don't like about it, but it's a great film.

Jacqueline Pierce photo
Jacqueline Pierce

Not a biography, nor a documentary, nor a book. A collection of stories and thoughts from a man who was born into a family of art and became obsessed with his work. It's a beautiful film, but in the end, the main point is not the documentary's point, it's the film's point, which is the making of a masterpiece. I think that it is important for people to be aware of the work and the work's history and not to forget that this is a work of genius. If this is not a work of genius, if this is not a masterpiece, then what is? That is a question that we all have to ask ourselves. This is a film that should be seen by everyone and should not be missed.

Jonathan L. photo
Jonathan L.

I recently saw this documentary at the New York Film Festival. The film is extremely well made, and the tone of the film is one that one would expect from a documentary about Mark Rothko. It has a great flow to the documentary and there are no hard cuts, no scenes that seem to be cutting away to another part of the film. The documentary is very informative and very well done, especially the interviews with the curator of the Rothko Museum. The curator gives a very informative, interesting, and engaging interview. One cannot help but be amazed at the energy and passion that he has for the art that he has. While the documentary is very well made, it is very well done. It is the kind of documentary that you would want to watch again. I recommend that you see this documentary at the New York Film Festival.

Donna Harrison photo
Donna Harrison

I've seen the documentary and it is really excellent. The visual aspect of the images is awesome. I don't know how to explain it, it is just really good. The camera is very good, but it's like the image is real, not computer generated. The narration is also really good, and helps you understand the significance of the images. The last part of the film is about the past and the life of Mark Rothko, and how he met his wife. It is very interesting. I would definitely recommend this documentary to anyone who wants to know more about Mark Rothko, because I believe this is a must see. And it is even better if you have a friend or someone to talk about this topic with. And if you don't have anyone to talk to, just watch this documentary. The best part of this documentary is the conclusion, but it is also a good thing. It shows how much Mark Rothko affected people.

Sharon Edwards photo
Sharon Edwards

I was never a big Mark Rothko fan but, like many other artists, I was intrigued by his work. This is my favorite Rothko film. The subject matter is very personal to him, as it was to me. I'm not sure what the filmmakers intended but I think it was a good way to tell his story. The people in the film were real, and he gave the viewer a glimpse into his life and work. He was not a success. I was reminded of his efforts in the 1930s when he was creating the Impressionist art in Paris, and of his eventual disillusionment with it. He also expressed his frustrations with the changing of styles and in some ways his frustration with the new paintings he was creating. I didn't really get the sense of his despair but rather a sense of his frustration with the world. This was a fascinating story about the influence of painting over a century ago and how one artist is still searching for his work. Rothko's work is quite significant and his career was a very successful one. He was a major artist, he created an art that is very much in the public eye and that his contemporaries could follow and appreciate. The real Mark Rothko would be a very proud man to see this film on the big screen.

Lawrence Herrera photo
Lawrence Herrera

I thought this documentary was interesting and really brought to light some of the frustrations and limitations of the Art Gallery of Victoria's collections. It is not the case that all the artworks are well represented. In fact, I found that about half of the paintings were in the collection that were not included in the film. Also, some of the artworks were so obscure and rarely available that I found it hard to understand them. The film covers the history of the collection, and how it was acquired, including how it was done, how it was used and how it was shown. I found the film to be very informative and useful. I would recommend this film to any museum or art gallery.

Ann photo
Ann

I really enjoyed this film. It has an interesting story and a very real documentary style. I think there are some points that need to be brought out more, such as the use of the phrase "blood on their hands", but overall it was a great documentary.

Theresa photo
Theresa

Mark Rothko has a lot of interesting things to say about his work, and that's why it's important to talk about his work in an accessible way. I'm sure that many of the people who've seen this film will have heard about the subject of his work, but this is an excellent introduction to the man, and I think that this is one of the most important documentaries about the artist that I've seen in a long time. It's informative, fascinating, and is very well produced and edited. The film is a "making of" documentary that follows Mark and his wife up until their death, and it shows a lot of footage from his museum. The film is very well edited, and it is quite well done. It's about an hour and a half long, and it doesn't feel that long. I don't think that this film is going to be too controversial, but it's very interesting, and it's worth seeing.

Joe Parker photo
Joe Parker

The Sondra Locke show is an excellent documentary that gives an insight into the life and work of Sondra Locke, the painter who, as the title suggests, is a silent painter. Locke was born in London and lived there until she married the father of her children, who died when she was five. In addition, she was also part of the sexual revolution in Britain and so, as she did in painting, remained a woman. She did not talk much about her art until her death, and to this day she is so important that she is often compared to the great painters of the past. As a woman, she was not as famous as her male contemporaries, and even to this day her work is almost unknown outside of Europe. Her artworks are rarely exhibited in museums and she has never received any recognition for them. It is also interesting to see her work being painted in the past two decades. They are some of the most beautiful paintings in the world, but they are not especially popular. This documentary does a good job of showing her paintings in a manner that is interesting and informative. It is well worth seeing.

Juan photo
Juan

I agree that this documentary is very insightful about the "artistic" aspect of the Rothko's and its significance in art and art history. However, the documentary makes a very important point about the work itself. "Mark Rothko: A Portrait" points out that Rothko's work is "naturally" done on paper, not digital or by computer. When a work is done on paper, it is an incredible task to create something in that medium. I think this is one of the most important points of the documentary. When a work is done digitally, it is an incredible task to create something in that medium. This film is very much geared towards people who have never seen a Rothko, and just don't have the interest in it. I think it is a must-see for Rothko fans.

Thomas photo
Thomas

I was expecting a really great documentary about Mark Rothko and his work and the people who loved him. What I got was a really nice, heartfelt, and very informative documentary about the man and the work that he did. The subject matter was quite different from what I expected, and the results were quite good. While the documentary did make me feel for the subject, it also made me feel very good about Mark's work and the people who loved him. The best part of the documentary was when the director, Mike and Joan, were talking about the paintings they had, and how much they loved them. It was so inspiring to hear that they had a personal connection with the paintings and it was the reason they loved them. The documentary also made me feel for Mark's family and friends, especially his sister, who lived to see Mark's death. There were so many things that I really appreciated about the documentary. It was nice to see his sister and brother-in-law talk about the paintings, his mother talk about the paintings, and his father talk about the paintings. I also appreciated the fact that they didn't just focus on the paintings, but they also talked about Mark's other works, such as his drawings, and the way he worked with his hands. The documentary really helped me appreciate Mark Rothko and his work. I'm really looking forward to more documentaries about the painter.

Andrea L. photo
Andrea L.

This is a wonderful movie. I'm not sure if the title was intentionally chosen or not. It's just that I didn't see a film named The Silence of Mark Rothko. My question is, why the title? It doesn't tell you anything about the film. But it's a very nice movie to watch. It's pretty well done. But, there's a lot of personal details in the movie that don't make any sense at all. First, if you know the story of Mark Rothko, you'll know that he was very interested in getting his paintings to the public. But, I'm not sure if the name of the museum where he lived and worked in New York, and the date on the photo that he had, are correct. As far as I know, Mark Rothko was living in the East Village in the late 1930's or early 1940's. If you're going to show a film about his life, make sure to show the real stories of his life. The film is very informative and it's a great film. If you're interested in his life, go to the library or look it up on Wikipedia.

Jonathan Thomas photo
Jonathan Thomas

I like the documentary about the Mark Rothko painting. I like the interviews with the artists and with the curator of the museum. I like the strong narrative. I like the way that the director captured the way that the art works in the museum. The way that the documentary is shot, the way that the director filmed the museum is brilliant. The director also really captured the way that the museum works. I think that the director made a great job, a documentary that I really liked. The director also made a great documentary about the way the museum works. I recommend this documentary to all of you.

Theresa H. photo
Theresa H.

This is a fascinating and well made documentary, with some fascinating interviews, about the life and work of painter Mark Rothko. But there are some problems with it, as you might expect. Firstly, there is a strong emphasis on Rothko's early life in France, and in particular on his love affair with Georges Braque. That is a bit of a stretch, as he was already a talented painter when he met Braque. It would have been interesting to see the relationship between Rothko and Braque develop, before Braque left him, and how the painting of the house in which they stayed developed. Also, Braque's influence is too much overrated. It would have been interesting to hear more about his work and his personal life. We hear a lot about the conflict between his "philosophy" and his painting, but we don't see much about the conflicts between him and his wife, and his close friends. As the film is a bit of a curio, I think it is fair to have a bit of historical bias, but it is not a film that really needs it. The interviews are also quite good, as they discuss a lot of important issues in Rothko's life, such as his philosophy of life, the lack of art in the west, the realisation of his talent, and the effect of his work on his wife and his friends. There is a good, well-executed soundtrack, and a good amount of photographs of the artists in the studio. And of course, the film is a good idea, if you don't mind the flaws.

Nancy W. photo
Nancy W.

Mentioning Meryl Streep's Oscar-winning performance in "Fame", I feel that I have to mention this film because it was made in 1999 and, unlike "Fame", it was actually done by one of the major film studios. The name of the film is "The Silence of Mark Rothko". I would have loved to have seen the film about Mark Rothko's artwork, but, unfortunately, it's not possible to see his artwork, at least not in the movie format, because it would have been a pain to go and see the film and watch the artwork, even if it was in a video format. The movie was filmed at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. I was impressed that it had a documentary style with the interviews and the interviews with the art experts. I thought that the interviewer, Sharon Dano, was great, and, in my opinion, that she made the film interesting because she was interviewing several people who had seen the paintings and that's what she wanted to see. I thought that this documentary style was very good, and, in my opinion, this movie is a good way to see Mark Rothko's paintings. I would recommend this film to anyone who is interested in Mark Rothko's artwork, because it is a good film to see. It's not perfect, but it's a good film. It's definitely worth seeing. I would give it an 8/10.

Peter Weaver photo
Peter Weaver

My wife and I found the Silent Mark Rothko exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art very interesting. It was very long and had a very large gallery. But it was still interesting. The film has lots of nice photography of Rothko's work and interviews with his family and friends. The film is very entertaining and definitely worth seeing.

Amber A. photo
Amber A.

The Silence of Mark Rothko is an excellent documentary that should be viewed by anyone who is interested in Rothko's work. I loved the inclusion of the film clip of Rothko's paintings which show his most popular pieces, from his oil paintings, to his acrylics, to his watercolors, and his prints. The clips of the works in their natural form was very interesting to watch, and I was able to quickly pick up on the differences between the various paintings. While some of the clips had static and unintelligible audio, the rest of the film was very good, and I was able to pick up on the most important aspects of the paintings. I also liked the fact that the film only focused on Rothko's works that were already in the public domain. The film did a good job of getting us into the work of Rothko, but was not too much in-depth about his life. I think the film would have been a better documentary if it focused on Rothko's work that is not in the public domain. Overall, I thought the film was good, but could have been better.

Thomas M. photo
Thomas M.

I have to admit I was pleasantly surprised by this documentary. It had some truly amazing footage of Rothko's work. I was not expecting much, but was pleasantly surprised at how much I enjoyed it. It was a little slow at times, but was nevertheless interesting. I would say it was more of a documentary than a documentary, because it was primarily a collection of interviews, but I did like the inclusion of some of Rothko's friends and colleagues, who were also interviewed. Overall, I thought the film was an interesting look at Rothko and the life of his work. The performances were amazing, especially by the two actors who played the Rothko children, and I really enjoyed seeing the interview with Mark Rothko himself. I think this is a must see for anyone who loves Rothko, or Rothko's work. This is a documentary that I would recommend to anyone, but not necessarily for the art community. It's very much in the realm of art criticism, and I think this documentary will make for a great discussion piece. This is definitely worth seeing.

Brenda D. photo
Brenda D.

This is a wonderful, fascinating, and entertaining look at one of the most influential artists of the 20th century. It's not a documentary, but a series of interviews with a variety of his contemporaries and friends, and the video footage they've gathered over the years. And it's beautifully shot, with the color of the photography and the sound effects very striking, especially in the scenes in the 1950s. There's an interesting discussion on his painting, and his influence on the modern art world. It's a fascinating look at an artist who was a huge influence on artists and art history, but also a modernist in his own right, and an artist who was able to capture the essence of a painting in every frame. It's a great film, but not a documentary, and it's a shame that it wasn't made a little longer. It would have been interesting to hear from more of the people involved in the project, and to hear what they thought about Mark Rothko's influence on modern art. It would also be interesting to hear the opinions of the people interviewed, since the subject of the film is so controversial.