‘Big Eyes‘ is an unusual film from many points of view. We are dealing with a story that takes place in the world of American art from the second half of the 20th century, a story inspired by real biographies and true facts, but the hero and heroine of the story, although famous, are not part of the consecrated names of the painters of the time, nor among the artists exhibited in the great museums. On the contrary, most critics and art experts consider Keane’s signed works as belonging to commercial kitsch, but that has not prevented them from being sold well and mass-produced, bringing to the authors beautiful incomes. However, the celebrity of the name Keane derives from the public scandal of the disclosure that for over a decade Walter Keane has assumed the paternity of the successful paintings created by his wife Margaret, and from the dispute between them that ended to court and was decided through a test of creativity carried out in the presence of the jurors. The feminist theme of critical appreciation and commercial success of women in the art world is combined with the one of the relationship between the kitsch appreciated by a large part of the public and the art exhibited and sold in galleries and praised by critics. Tim Burton worked at this film for more than a decade, and the result has an imperfection that makes viewers constantly wonder whether it is intentional or not.
Walter Keane broke in the art world in the late 1950s with a series of portraits, most of them depicting children, with an air of melancholy mirrored in their obsessively big eyes. In that artistic era in which abstract expressionism was fashionable, critics turned their backs, but the success with the public was almost immediate, Keane, a real estate agent originally being an excellent expert in ‘public relations’ and a skillful salesman for his own art. The problem, however, was that this art was not created by him but by his wife Margaret Keane. The truth, which included fraud and a sordid story of domestic violence, came to light a few years later, when Margaret, separated from her husband and having fallen under the influence of the ‘Jehovah’s Witnesses’ religious cult, brought it up to public notice. The scandal also reached the courts, raising question marks not only about the case in question (to which the creations belonged) but also about the reasons that made the woman artist collaborate on the fraud. Would the paintings have been equally successful if they were signed by a woman? What is the place and what are the chances of success of a woman in the world of art?
Cinematography is what I liked the most, which should not be surprising for a Tim Burton movie. The pastel colors and the sets have am air of superficial happiness, in tune with the kitsch atmosphere of the paintings around which the action revolves. Naive art or kitsch? We are left to decide. The main roles are played by Amy Adams and Christoph Waltz, both excellent actors, but here they do just two OK roles and they do not look at their best. This impression is created, perhaps, by the fact that the biographical story, based on real life persons, was written in a simplistic and conventional style, putting too often the characters in situations when thery act and speak exactly as we expected. Maybe Tim Burton, subtly, intended to tell us that a story about kitsch art can be told in the style of kitsch film? However, the script of the film enjoyed the approval of the artist who is the main heroine. In addition, the film has a strong feminist focus. Do you know which company is the first to appear generically as a producer of the film? Weinstein Company! The history of cinema sometimes takes unexpected turns.