“My Kid could Paint that” tells the story of Marla Olmstead, the artist who became famous for her paintings as a four year old child. The documentary gives us a somewhat in-depth look at her life but mainly focus more on the controversy surrounding her art. This controversy mainly centered around two questions. Is this really her art and is this art? The video also brings up other important questions but they generally stem from these two. The fact that Marla’s art is also classified as Modern Art also shines a light on the rebellious art movement. Modern Art was a direct reaction to what was or is considered art. The very nature of the style forces you to really think about what you considered art to be. So, Marla Olmstead’s pieces of work is almost the perfect representative for the style.
The Film itself seems to tackle these questions
…show more content…
When the film started I got a brief look at some of the paintings before the documentary actually went into Marla story. My first thoughts was someone is just trying to make money off this kid and she being forced to do these silly paintings. So I supposed I went into this movie with a somewhat negative view but after actually watching Marla work on a few paintings that view change. This made me come to the conclusion that, although all forms of art gives us a peek into the personality of the artist, Modern art seems to do it best. Modern art is usually nothing but raw emotion or powerful ideas driving the art. Which, to me makes the art far more intimate and personal than other styles. Marla was driven purely by her love of painting and seeing that in the videos made me want to understand more pieces of Modern Art. On the other hand this film also made me realized that I could never just “view” works of Modern Art without at least story of why the artist did it. To me, it loses its value once the story attached to it is no longer