MovieChat Forums > Frank (2014) Discussion > the large paper-mache head was a gimmick

the large paper-mache head was a gimmick

posted 10 years ago by mmobini
5 replies | jump to latest

I dont think any new and fresh theme was explored in this film. Creating public persona through social media vs the reality, mental illness vs creativity, making art for oneself vs for fame. These are all themes that have been explored in such films as "Exit Through The Gift Shop" in such depth. I just hoped the angle this film approached them would be refreshing and new. If these themes were meant to be explored through props such as the large paper-mache head, then it just seems a little forced and gimmicky. Even though, without the distracting and ridiculous head, the story would have been much more effective. Mental madness and musical genius could be shown in many other ways that could work better than having the front man of a rock band wear a large paper-mache head.

My best friend was in a band that became popular in the US when they finally made it to the New york's underground scene. NYTimes, MTV, NPR etc wrote about them for a whole month. But sadly it was all based on the fact that they were from Iran, playing western music illegally in Iran, it was badass and unexpected for the western people to see. They went from no bodies to being under the spotlight overnight. However, they couldn't sustain that fame and broke down under the weight of that overnight fame and never amounted to anything. they produced some great songs before coming to New York simply because they did it for the love of music not fame.

This film was very truthful in that regard. The story reminded me a lot of Syd Barret's story and his rise and downfall within Pink Floyd. knowing that Syd was hugely unstable and in a lot of pain for his mental illness, is it right to still enjoy his genius? Should we take into account his suffering when listening to his genius?. Did the public ruin him because they were fascinated by his weird looks and never-seen talents while not caring what he's going through? These are quite deep questions that I think this film took an effective stab at. I just wish the off-beat "hipster" comedy tone and the the large paper-mache head didn't get in the way of it.

[–] Obbykins 10 years ago

Did you, like, not read any of the other posts on this board without reading it first?

Sure, the large, papier mâché head was definitely a gimmick. But one that was used for comedic purposes by the real Frank Sidebottom, as portrayed by his creator Chris Sievey. It's loosely based on his life.

I couldn't be bothered to read the rest of what you said, mostly because I haven't actually seen the film yet.

Unless your argument truly is 'This film would have been better off as a completely original story, without repossessing the work of a dead man' then I can see that, although don't necessarily agree with it (I like the idea of this film, but granted it might be absolute sh!t). Otherwise, I can't see how the rest of your argument could possibly hold water if you don't even realise that it's a rather surreal point being made.

- We could be men with ven!

[–] Enlightened_Lanterns 10 years ago

When people ignorantly believe this film was some attempt at a "new-wave, unexplored, creative thinking theme"...No.
This film was written by and based off of the fellow band members of the Frank Sidebottom band...a real life person.

Gimmick...Probably. Gimmick for the movie? No, this isn't the hobbit. Not only does the head add a bit of mystery but it allows the wearer freedom.

Imagine living in a world where you're different, and people look at you a certain way, wonder why you're different. Wearing the head (Even Fassbender states) Allows you the freedom of pulling from that freedom without worrying what you look like when you're doing it. You know what you look like...you have a giant paper-mache head on...it's all weird. Lyrics, thought process, soul, and head.

[–] SomethingAlliterated 10 years ago

The film is not remotely based on Frank Sidebottom, who was a comedy character created by a British comedian, he performed covers of mainstream songs and his own comedy songs as part of his stand up, radio and TV presenting acts, he also did not have a band. The creator of Frank Sidebottom didn't want a biopic making of his life, so the film is entirely fiction and not at all loosely based on his life, the only similarity is with the mask and name,

The head is a bit gimmicky, but the film was very entertaining, so I can forgive it.

[–] CigarDoug (16) 7 years ago

It is amusing that half the people on this board are mad that this movie "stole" the idea about the character Frank Sidebottom and the movie wouldn't exist without cashing in on his fame (I never heard of Chris Seivey before seeing this movie), and the other half are strangely pretending it had nothing to do with him at all. A paper-mache head. Worn by a singer. Named Frank. That looks exactly like Frank Sidebottom. Nope, nothing to see here at all.

There is a very small minority who think, rightly, that this was a tribute to Chris Seivey and his original idea, even though they borrowed from other singers to round out the character and make him weirder (like not removing the head, ever). More people are going to learn about the inspiration for this movie once they look into it. That's not a bad thing.

[–] flickfix 10 years ago

What does Exit Through The Gift Shop has anything to do with this film? You obviously did not get both films.

First of all, Exit Through The Gift Shop is a documentary and this is fiction narrative. Exit Through The Gift Shop is about art itself, and this is about humans.

Exit Through The Gift Shop has one of the most brilliant titles about art and how we perceive art. In Banksy's view, art is meant to provoke conversation, so we stop our mundane and meaningless daily entertainments to think about important humanitarian issues. Banksy was hoping that this art form will finally be accepted as serious art by the art world, with help from the public. Unfortunately, what the public fancies more, is collecting artifacts of clones of imitations of style of those art, much like buying mousepads of Picasso's art or a Warhol sweater on museum gift stores instead of talking about it, which already lost any original artistic meaning and intent. Instead of talking about issues brought forth by street art ( which has limited life span ), we want to collect original art ( which we can own forever ) that look like street art but aren't really art because they express nothing.

So, what does that have anything to do with this film?

This film, is about a group of mentally-ill people, who can't function normally. But when they are trying to make music, they stay sort of sane, and support each other. Whether their music is good or not or express any artistic values either for themselves or the public are all irrelevant. Then, comes this misguided soul who can't make music, and wants to be a musician so bad, and who's so fascinated with "tormented creatives" that he can't see the obvious fact that he's with a group of people with mental illness.

This film, like most art narratives, is trying to tell a fictional story for us to sympathize and empathize with the less fortunate. If anything, this film is closer to what Victor Hugo, Rodin, Ang Lee, and 80% of writers and filmmakers do, which is giving people who our society or culture would reject, a human side that we would empathize. A reminder to see things from their perspective, understand what their lives are different and their needs instead of forcing them to be what we deem they have to be.

So, what does this have anything to do with Banksy trying to legitimize street art, and pointing out the farce that is the commercialization of art?