MovieChat Forums > Exit Through the Gift Shop (2010) Discussion > I CANT BELIEVE YOU GUYS DON'T GET IT

I CANT BELIEVE YOU GUYS DON'T GET IT


The movie is a satire. It is a critique of the contemporary art world. The over-commercializtion and exploitation of street art. why do you think its called exit through the gift shop? that should tell it all right there.

It is not a documentary.

They set everyone up with the stupid Mr. Brainwash Show in LA and convinced a bunch of sheep that the BS 'art' they made was brilliant. all those people, thousands of them were there because they bought into the hype machine and turned a joke into a success.

I am not quite sure if the art really sold for as much as he said. It could have, or maybe its an exaggeration, but it doesnt really matter.

what matters is that all those people didnt look at the crap on the walls and say 'this is not art, this sucks', they bought into the hype and loved it. Why? cuz they go with the flow, they dont develop their own opinions, but rather follow popular opinion.

The experiment proves that if you take a bunch of garbage, throw it on the wall in a huge 'gallery' and have big artists say its the real deal, people will show up and love it cuz they are idiots.

the movie just chronicles this. who knows if guetta is a real character or not. it doesnt matter. he was in on it weather thats his real name or not. The whole thing is a farce. I can't believe no one gets it. I mean by the end of the movie its almost as if they are not even trying to keep up the guise of the documentary going. it gets so out of whack that it should be obvious that its all a joke.

Guetta supposedly started filming in like 2007. he wasnt documenting the birth of street art. he was documenting the death of street art. this has been going on for years. and no i dont mean grafitti. i mean street art, stencils, print outs wheat pasted up. all of that filming happened over the last few years after all of those artists were well established. that footage wasnt home movie footage. it was shot for the purpose of the mockumentary, to make it seem like this guy was a filmmaker documenting street art (i didnt see any old school footage of old school grafitti. how can you tell the story of the birth of street art without telling the story of grafitti. just shows that wasnt the point of the movie). all of the footage was shot to etablish the creation of a fictitious character. this is what creates the whole story. this is the foundation for this supposed documentary. if guetta is the filmaker then why is the camera on him the whole time, even before banksy flipped it on him. who is the guy really behind the camera? ever think of that? the whole storyline about guetta's youth and how he filmed everything in life etc- its all made up.

you think if you show a bunch of video cassettes scattered around a room in boxes that that means its all full of actual footage, years of footage? of course it isnt. it helps to create this ridiculous character and this ridiculous fake movie that he was making (or not making as he shot and shot and didnt edit)so that Banksy could takeover the project. It was all a plan from the beginning.

sorry, maybe life remote control was weird and insane, but it was supposed to seem like that. again, to create a reason for banksy to take over. a guy who has never edited video in his life can not make that movie. it was strange but the editing was no amateur *beep* that was professionally made to look kinda crappy. why? to give a reason for banksy to take over. Why? so he could 'turn the cameras on guetta', who was supposedly a far more interesting story.

he wasnt an interesting figure that needed to be filmed. it became an interesting story after they started filming him , once he became a star. So why did they start filming him in the first place? why would banksy take so much interest in this guy? cuz he didnt give him up to the uber dangerous Disney Land security??? No it was because the clever, unpredictable ending was planned form the beginning. he was a cartoon character. the whole point from the beginning was the build up to the big art show where everyone gets duped. guetta is a symbol of all thats wrong with art. the way he acts on the day of the show, not giving a damn where any paintings go, just telling people build me this build me that. and thats's his art? this is a criticism of an art world in which many artists dont even create their own work. they conceive the piece and have assistants actually make it. yeah, artists dont even paint their own paintings these days (obviously not in all cases but this is prevalent in art culture).

i thought it was obvious, but now the moviegoing crowd is getting duped too. all of these people think its a breathtaking view of the birth of a genius street art form and the birth of a great artist which no one could have predicted. yeah, because hes not an artist. (unless he really is banksy, which i doubt. the french accent is too good. unless banksy really is a french englishman. ha. yeah right)

this is banksy's prank on the world. this is his original piece of art. everyone kept copying his style and it became all commercialized and all the money got involved, so banksy flipped the script on the whole thing. its a joke on fake artists, unoriginal copycats, bogus art critics, the hype machine, fickle 'art' fans who cant make their own opinion, and now the movie-going public that doesnt get it. i thought he made it pretty dam obvious, but not obvious enough.

reply

I agree with you completely, but they definitely didn't start filming in '07. There are scenes where Guetta is much younger and weighs much less.

reply

someone already posted this link, but really, if you haven't seen this interview of the filmmakers, watch it... as it answers a lot of questions and clarifies the whole thing up a great deal:

http://www.woostercollective.com/2010/10/one_to_watch_david_polands_dp30_on_exit.html

cheers

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

It concerns me to find that people don't know that MBW is a hoax let alone that this film is satirical. The regurgative porkpie hat wearing "hipster" generation is well represented in all their glorious dayglo vapidity. They just don't get that this isn't about the art of the spraycan-that it is about he art of the prank. People who disagree will say that true life is stranger than fiction...and I'd be the first to agree. However, in this case, there are far too many suppositions one needs accept to adequately maintain versimilitude and when when you stack them on top of one another the cumulative suspension of disbelief would suggest that if you think this is a real documentary and that MBW is real, well, you just might have been forcefed lead paint chips as a toddler. Or you are Madonna.

" How 'bout that dipper, Bob?"
ONE EYED JACKS, 1961.

reply

This interview with the editor and producer really clarifies the movie:
http://www.woostercollective.com/2010/10/one_to_watch_david_polands_dp30_on_exit.html


What happens in the movie is real, there are no actors, there is no script, it's a documentary, a very well edited documentary.



-Henrik,have we established pathos?
-Perfectly Herr Doctor. And all this in one take!

reply

Dont you guys find it weird that the producer and editor of the film have never made a film before. they are these guys being interviewed speaking nonsense, basically trying to reinforce that guetta is real and trying to sound professional. are we supposed to believe them because they have nice british accents? (heres the link: http://www.woostercollective.com/2010/10/one_to_watch_david_polands_dp30_on_exit.html)

Who are these guys. why are we to believe them. how is this proof of anything. this prank is dynamic, still alive and they are further reinforcing it by continuing to put effort making it look like it wasnt a hoax.

i mean are these guys in this interview actors? are they the real editor and producer? are they in on it? probably. im not buying any of it.

this explains nothing. sorry.

all i know is there is no reason for anyone to start filming this guy and putting so much energy into watching him and following him around and putting resources into these filmmakers watching thousands of hours of bs footage that theyve all agreed is crap. if its crap why are u watching it? why would u pay people to watch useless crap. they keep saying hes such a bad filmmaker etc.

why would they do all of that before thierry ever got big? there was no story. there was nothing worth watching or spending time on. the only way i would make sense to film all of that is if you know the way the story is going to end which is to know that this idiot would become a huge artist.

the only way to know that is to plan it out and put your resources towards making that happen, meaning fairey and banksy hyping him up and making this all go according to plan. im glad some people are admitting that they were fooled and now after reading stuff on the internet and watching it again they see whats really going on. theres nothing wrong with that. he tried to fool you. at least you are being real.

reply

As much as I would love to think that this is a farce, would Banksky or *whoever* bother to invent this character years ago? Were the "early" Theirry with camera pieces not real? Can anyone testify to them? And what of Theirry's family videos? Are they not real either? What about his clothing shop? Is that fake too?

Let's say Theirry is real. It seems clear to me that Banksky didn't want anything to do with him after seeing his cut of the street art film. Being ignorant of what was actually happening, he promoted Theirry's show for the hell of it. I don't get what's unbelievable about that. Isn't it possible that the great Banksky could finally make a mistake?

One thing that does make me lean in the farce direction is wondering who filmed Theirry as he did his street art and put together the LA show. His wife? He didn't seem to have any friends, but you see other people sometimes during his street art stuff.

Either way, I effing loved this movie and am loving the mystery around it just as much.

reply

[deleted]

Brilliant!

As a big fan of Banksy I'm a little bit gutted I didn't get this right away but after reading your message I think you are definitely right. So yeah... thanks for educating me a little bit more as a Film and TV student. It is a little bit sad that people are so set on arguing and striving to be the one who is right that they close their mind to their own point of view and aren't willing to open it to new points of view.

I admit I was fooled by the film and I love it all the more for that reason.

I pity the closed-minded that are resorting to ignorant insults.

reply

I loved the film too...and I was fooled as well. On second viewing it became suspect, then fairly clear that this was a masterful setup based upon...wait for it...my own Film & Television education. If I am close-minded and ignorant for catching on to this and laughing/crying along with Banksy et. al about the sad state of affairs that is the current form of our pop culture, then so be it. Glad to have someone call it out for what it seems to be, which is it's all about riding weak whitewash rather than the breathtaking drop-in... How many people really knew about Banksy and the streetart movement as it was burgeoning? Answer: none too many. But as soon as it is overblown and way past the "sell by date" it becomes "cool". Laughably, as the original phake (using 'ph' cuz it's kool ya know :o) hipsters celebrate the stale new thing they are obviously missing out on what is now and fresh. And the point is it doesn't even matter that they are missing out on the new fresh thing because it's not about appreciating something for it's originality, rather it has come to be about not missing out on what is celebrated and the satisfaction of being "in the know". So pity me accurately, not for being closeminded and ignorant, but elitist and bitter.

" How 'bout that dipper, Bob?"
ONE EYED JACKS, 1961.

reply

Its usually the people that dont know dick all about Banksy that are the ones that are trying to troll the guy that made this thread, totally clueless. theyre the people that watched this film and became Banksy fans after it not knowing about his perceptions to fool people 100% of the time. For me Banksy is a true artist, having that power and backing to totally outfox people is the sign of true brilliance and show just how good an artist the guy actually is. The signs are there in this film, if you dont know about Banksy then of course your gonna make yourself look stupid in this thread.

reply

It was brilliantly done, real or not, and if it weren't scripted to play out the way that it did then it may as well have been! Good observations!

Hardly ever missed, did I?

reply