Hello Clare ☺

That's' horribly true

Maybe brilliant...but I respect his work more than I love it. Matisse is who I love!!!!

Me2

Who do we have here? One cannot but feel sorry for you.

@@nmaync "Who we have here" is Salvador Dali, stating his view of Picasso, and there is probably nobody else more qualified to offer an informed opinion about him. And he was correct. Picasso was an unbelievably spoiled prima donna, who, while extremely talented, fell into the ego-trap that many famous people do. He knew that anything he did after he got famous would be praised, so he just started spewing crap on canvas and pretended it was profound. Ignorant, trend-obsessed people who couldn't think for themselves did the rest by pretending to "understand this revolutionary art". Next thing you know, someone is feeding you shit and you are expected to say it is delicious to be popular. In reality, the emperor has no clothes.

Mcchuggernaut damn u mad lol x

@@mcchuggernaut9378 Haha. Dali was a piece of shit from what I have read.

both of them full of complexes I rather Picasso as he very truely copied many art forms, but Dali being under the influence of Gala and Eluard to the point that he denounce Bonoul the fantastic film director as a communist. the monopoly of modern art between Picasso, Matis and Gala. I am sure Gala had a lot to do with this comment, he was too delusional to pronounce such words.

same :)

Loved it too!

+Adam Yagoub That's awesome man.... Glad it helped. Hope your professor loves it...... - MIKOS

How do you cite a KZfaq video

www.google.co.ma/search?q=chaibia+talal+tableaux&newwindow=1&safe=active&client=opera&hs=3tY&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjP2Z-vsOLPAhVLLsAKHTeVABEQ7AkIKw&biw=1366&bih=668

Jackey. Honestly, if you think this helped you, it actually banalised Picasso. Just read Picasso's own few writings.

His wife went through the red period.

You really need to be an idiot to think that Picasso wasn't an genius. His paintings, almost all, are very, but very detalistic, even his style of mixing colours was detalistic. His painting construction abillity was that good, that in some of his paintings, one step, and the painting is diff, and you starting to see more details. He was on same level as Dali, or even better. He needed just couple of lines, that are not synchonized, and he could do anything with iit. He was creative fabric (that's why he made almost 50000 artworks in his life, some of them wasn't good, but mostly, they wasn't even an artwork). He was one of the best artists in the history, and you can dislike him, but disrespecting him, and saying that he had lacks of skill, it's just showing your lack of skill and that you're stupid ass ignorant.

santos0x az%

Molly bbb

What a pretentious statement. You sound like you're trying to act smart

His father was a art teacher and trained him.

Because........documentaries

It's called establishing shots, to get you into the journey.

@ Dary... would you prefer dumb shots of the narrator just lying on a sidewalk

The narrator's nice

He is a total fake , more interested in his own image than any art or other topic

It should be unmade.

+Del Green Bonobo - Flutter

Legalize it now!

Great comeback! thought that was silly, too. LOL

Communist: everybody gets the same or they get what they need. Nobody needs a mansion and certainly not everybody can have a mansion. Rich jet set: people with mansions. "To be a rich jet setter expects and is only available to people incapable of wanting all/most/many people to live a happy, secure, comfortable, positive, meaningful life filled with the ability and opportunity not only himself/herself and their family and friends, but also any and all people to succeed?" ---you lost me. Are you saying that MY saying that he's a "rich jet setter" is ME expecting that the rich jet setter lifestyle is only available to people wanting everyone to have what they need? If so then yes. Why? B/c that rich jet setter has more than he needs and it's not hard to give that stuff away. If you think that everyone should have the same amount of wealth, your first response to getting rich should be to give a great deal of that wealth away and that doesn't take a life time. It should be like "I won 100 million dollars! Who wants some!" and a couple days later you should have like 100 bucks. To NOT give the money away means you only believe in communism when OTHER people have to give up their money. "It's funny how people when they think and feel great for whatever reason (the weather is just right, the flowers smell great, you just accomplished a goal, you had an epiphany and feel 'one with the universe', etc) wish that everyone around them could 'be in their shoes', are espousing communistic/socialistic concepts..." ---yes but that's not really what communism is all about, now is it? Communism was about money and means of production and not 'feeling good b/c the flowers are in bloom'. Anyone and everyone can enjoy flowers if all they're doing is looking at them and smelling them and if the flowers are on public land or in small yards where people on the sidewalk can see. It costs nothing. "What about marrying the best of Capitalism and Communism together?" ---hey, that's great. I'm all for not having things suck. Personally, I've long thought that the reason communism failed was that it was run by people and people themselves suck. People themselves are 'me supremacists' so when they got into power under communism, they screwed it. Capitalism at least admits that people are 'me supremacists' but eventually these people found a way to make even a system designed to exploit their vices fail. I'm not by any means saying "Yaaa, capitalism!" and then "Boo, communism!" but simply that Picasso, genius though he was, was as human as anyone else and not about to give up his wealth and power just to be a good communist.

+ThatIsANiceLamp First of all art and government infrastructure aren't usually dependant upon the other to sustain. You can be a communist artist, and luckily that doesn't mean your art can only use the color red. Great argument though. Who needs intelligent reasoning, deduction, and clarity, when you've got so many holes in your argument.

......ensconced in culs-de-sac,

Don't judge the human race by this disgusting entitled little jackass. There truly are sincere artists in this world

I admired his work for awhile. But i realized my 6 yo granddaughter draws and paints better and she is not a nutcase like him.

@@shebastinson7813 lol. People say that a lot. Always mention a child. With all due respect, and in my opinion, you don't have a clue. That's ok though. Go enjoy your grand- daughter's art. Leave Pablo's work to those of us who can appreciate it. Peace.

The meaning of a painting IS the painting.

I'll point one out -- the commentator -- as if amusingly selected "to irritate and provoke." Where's me estoc?

I can't see the need for constant sarcasm on the part of the presenter. It should be a serious subject. If such people are allowed to mock everything, that will slowly chip away at real art and we will be left with the clownish figures of "the artist" of today. Funnyly enough these people don't spew sarcasm at their own clownish artists. In addition, the use of music in this video is nauseatingly cliche, and at some point even brings in Bowie. It's totally anti-cultural; but why do they make it?

What a pointless comment !

Albert and somebody museum

A child could have done it

He copied it all from Braque. you say hes the greatest because you cant name many other artists but the most famous

@@wonderrob3225 Snob.

+Vishvesh Tadsare j'y suis jamais allé

I was going to make that point too but thought I'd check the comments first and see if anyone else caught that! :)

Bego Bertran b

Plagiarize ! But be sure always to call it please...research!

How did this bullshitter get to make a show of any kind ?