Okay, so with the Oscar Awards around the corner... The Academy is now expressing concern about the possibility that Banksy's documentary - Exit Through the Gift Shop would actually win for Best Documentary Feature.
"... The fun but disquieting scenario is if that film wins and five guys in monkey masks come to the stage all saying, 'I'm Banksy!' Who the hell do we give it to?... "
This is in the midst of the hype as to whether or not the documentary is a hoax... while Banksy has been quoted saying:

"... Ordinarily I wouldn’t mind if people believe me or not, but the film’s power comes from the fact it’s all 100% true. This is from the frontline, this is watching an art form self-combust in front of you. Told by the people involved. In real time. This is a very real film about what it means to ‘keep it real’... "

well, personally, after watching it, the documentary does seem like a slap-in-the-face at our current lifstyles... and if its a hoax, the biggest slap will come if it's unveiled as such at the acceptance speech on winning the Oscars... imagine the irony, a faux scripted film winning in a category aimed at showing reality as it is.

But then again, maybe it is true too.

.... If you wanna read on about my review of the film... Click here ^^x...

In it's crux, the film is about the journey of Thierry Guetta, a wanabe film-maker, and his entry as Mr Brain-Wash (MBW) into the underground world of street art.

The film can be seen in 2 parts... 1st, with Thierry as an accomplice/apprentice to some of the best in street art... starting with Space Invader... you have him behind the camera.. really shaky and unprofessional footages, high risk activities, the real side to it.

During this part, you get the feel that this artists take years to perfect their art, finding symbols that they relate to, finding places and themes that mean something to them, working hard to produce and install their work, even if it meant great danger... all accumulating with the hype about Banksy and finally the staging of Banksy's Barely Legal Exhibition... there is even a swipe at the auctioning of street art as a commodity

"... suddenly it was all about the money, but it was never about the money..."

and then the movie changed its focus... suddenly someone else was filming Thierry, and it started to look professional... and the whole film took an ironic twist.

as a film maker, Thierry was shown to be terrible... now as a street artist, he took a totally different route from the norm... while other street artists fiercely protected their anonymity, leaving their mark only in the form of style, labels or taggings... and focused more on their topic, on bringing across the message... Theirry on the other hand, went about putting up putting up a graphic tag portrait of himself.

To me, this was a swipe at street art... street art differs from street vandalism only when it invokes thought... it is not about leaving your mark, and making you more well-known.. although in certain countries, it is used to mark out your territory.. but more so, it is about the thought process, why the location, why the logo or image of choice, rebelling against a system... that's what really sets great street artists apart.
Personally, Theirry's self-portraits, aside from being a bold act, were meaningless. And in the last few minutes of the film, after his self-proclamation of being a successful street artist, we catch a glimpse of his clumsy and comical hands-on execution... Totally nothing like the swift, professional execution of his mentors, but more of child using crayons on a wall.

But, as the film puts it.. the public doesn't care about it... After his brief activity on the street, Theirry went on to hold a full-scale art exhibtion... going from being nothing... to being everything... no one had probably ever seen or recognised his works... but simple endorsements from Banksy and others attracted the media, and it snowballed from there... even the exhibition itself was kinda faux, with him basing his "creations" off that of others, and even hiring workers to do up those works, and to some extent, allowing them to decide the concept and execution of the exhibition... to the end, it seemed that all he did was really put in the dough, work out a few endorsements and media interviews, and Bamm!! He was a hit.

The film upped the ridicule level, by interviewing the public, who hailed him as one of the greatest artist of this age, comparing him to Banksy, fully appreciating his work... despite never hearing of MBW before... solely because of the hype of hearsay and the media...

And suddenly it became about the money... we see footages of Theirry giving absurd off-the-head amounts for his works, and people actually buying it, turning the exhibition into a million-dollar event.

Towards, the end, we see how successful Theirry has become from it all... despite being slammed by his mentors... which really leaves us to question:

Is Arts appreciation today really just a show of sophistication?

Are we really shallow in our appreciation of Art?

In an age of remixes and reinventing, what is originality?

Are starving artists just lacking marketing strategies?

Are we brain-washed from media hype that we allow them to govern our opinions?

What is Art today? and what discerns the fine line between mediocre and greatness?

Are fans of street art, really rebels against system, or just suckers in a another commodities industry?

Really food for thought.