Mark Mothersbaugh Quotes

It's disappointing to see films become pure entertainment, so that it's not an art form.

I think a smart person today realizes that you have to be part of the art films that are done just for the sake of the art.

I don't think it's an unnatural thing at all for my collaborations or projects to be seen as art but entertainment at the same time.

I personally don't distinguish between artistic and commercial films.

I realize that every picture isn't a work of art.

I don't think there's any formula for what makes great art.

The character of the artist doesn't enter into the nature of the art.

Whereas painting is a more rarefied art form, with a limited audience, I recognized film as this extraordinary social tool that could reach tremendous numbers of people.

With a movie you're creating from the beginning this particular work, let's not call it work of art, because very few movies are works of art, let's just call them bits of popular culture, whatever they are, sometimes very rarely by accident a movie becomes a work of art.

Artists change how we see the world - and that can have value in the way people do business.

I believe that Ryan Murphy is a genius. His instincts remind me of Andy Warhol. I recently went to the Warhol museum in Pittsburgh, and you can see a lot of echoes of Andy in Ryan's work. Like Andy, Ryan's finger is so on the pulse of culture that he's ahead of culture. Their aesthetic and their vision of the world are very similar.

Poetry is not mainstream, but then neither is serious fiction, really. But I don't think there's a lot to worry about in this particular 'problem'. Why does art have to be mainstream to be significant?

I began to exercise a lot of cinematic muscle with the precepts I had learned in the New York art world. Film was intriguing. I began to think of art as elitist; film was not.

The movie medium will eventually take its place as art because there is no other medium of interest to so many people.

Art should never try to be popular. The public should try to make itself artistic.

I had grown up thinking of movies as something to eat popcorn with. Bergman and the other European directors were the first ones to open my eyes to film as art.

Take Tom Sachs as an artist. His brain is more brilliant than anything, so of course, anything he puts out over a ten-year period is going to continue to be super relevant. But if you look at some artists, they have one good idea, but unless you know where it's coming from, it's not going to be lasting.

If gaming were seen as an art, the important question would be not whether games are good for us but whether they are good, full stop.

I'll buy a bottle for anyone who can tell me what makes a picture beautiful!

Regard it as just as desirable to build a chicken house as to build a cathedral. The size of the project means little in art, beyond the money matter. It is the quality of the character that really counts.

A picture, to be an interesting picture, must be more than a picture, otherwise it is only a reproduction of an object, and not an object of value in itself.

I don't believe in very many things, but art is definitely one of them. And at the top of that list, film and art influence our world's culture much more than many of us understand and fully respect.

Not all art is great; most of it's rubbish.

Is the Mona Lisa an 'accurate' representation of the actual human model for the painting? Who knows? Who cares? It's a great piece of art. It moves us. It makes us wonder, makes us gape - finally makes us look inward at ourselves.

There's an audience for all kinds of great art.