How to Draw a Bunny
How to Draw a Bunny
PG | 10 January 2002 (USA)
How to Draw a Bunny Trailers

Interviews with Christo, Chuck Close, Roy Lichtenstein, Judith Malin, James Rosenquist and others help to illuminate the life and work of Warhol contemporary Ray Johnson.

Reviews
HeadlinesExotic Boring
RipDelight This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.
CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.
StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.
fairchildqua This is a doc about a fascinating character and there is no way a story about him wouldn't be interesting and worth a watch so definitely watch this movie with many caveats The soundtrack is from hell- I believed it was created to torture prisoners at Guantanamo Bau There are. No revelations just a really strange thing the director did- he kind of made his suicide like a work of his art very very controlling and interpretative and not documentary but ego driven and self driven Go see it for sure but not what it could have been in the right hands
labronk This documentary provides a much different angle on the presentation of subject, and this is what makes it exciting. That we cannot ever know Johnson, especially in light of the fact that he has committed suicide, makes the entire exercise all the more intriguing. Interview after interview evinces an all-too-rare character study of someone who simply did not want to be known. The art of this concealment builds to an exhilaratingly creepy conclusion that will be familiar to anyone who has been affected by suicide. How can we think we know someone who commits this unthinkable act? The segments regarding Johnson's rope-a-dope art dealings and coyness about capital is worth the price of admission alone. His influence is everywhere in the art world to this day, and yet few will remember him.
adri1968 I had no idea what this documentary was about going in, but a week after watching it, the movie and the artist at its core, Ray Johnson, still haunt me. This is a movie about a person who really had no real life or essence except his art and his ideals. People in his life tell stories about him to try to piece together who he really was and what his life was all about. I don't know that there's ever been an artist or person like Ray Johnson. The curator of his art show says she feels totally "manipulated" by him. Like he left clues so she would know exactly what to do. After you see the film, you may feel as I do, that the film makers made exactly the film Ray Johnson would have wanted. Very spooky in parts, and utterly fascinating. It's practically a who's who of the pop art world.
Zingarese Well not really, its all pretty much drawn out for you. This film is a very solid documentary about Ray Johnson an underground artist from NY, that never grew in popularity as his peers from the scene. The film presupposes that the "mysterious death" was not "mysterious" at all but in fact was really something that could be considered his final performance. The film is extremely linear in that sense. We get a quick summary of his childhood, we get a quick peek at the NY scene, and we get hints throughout the film how he loved the idea of messages in a bottle, or things associated with water and floating. So yes, you pretty quickly build up a theory he committed suicide and that it was a performance. The film is so absolute that their is not even a hint of doubt in anyone interviewed that his death was an accident or foul play, that the idea of this film being about solving his death, is misleading. (Which I personally was annoyed at because I misjudged what the jacket description considered the arch of the film, not the directors fault, but I was still tossed by that for a minute).The true arch of the film is also a bit shallow, "Who was Ray Johnson?" This question is answered in the first lines of the film. Friends, Gallery owners and even mailmen knew a little bit of him, but when pondering the question, everyone realizes no one really knew who the man really was. After reiterating this point again and again, we finally come to the closest realization (From I believe Billy Name) when he says, "To try and separate the man and the art is impossible when talking about Ray Johnson". Not a direct quote, but something to that effect. Ray was art, and what he did was not a creation of art but art itself. This of course then concludes the big question, "Was his death a performance?" This answer again is pretty self explanatory.This film is a good look at an artist and does a good job at detailing a man's life, but in relation to the elements that surrounded this man, we are left a bit shallow. We interview famous people from the art world, but the film never dives deeply into the art scene, or for that matter anything.There is nothing wrong with a film that stays directly on its subject and this film exceedingly does that well, but if you wanted to learn more about the art scene, this is a good film to pick up AFTER you have learned about the scene from other sources. This film only allows you to put faces to all the artists you have heard or read about before. I do recommend this film on the basis that you get a strong solid film, but do not be misled to feel that this film is revelatory in any such way.