Interviews with Christo, Chuck Close, Roy Lichtenstein, Judith Malina, James Rosenquist and others help illuminate the life and work of Warhol contemporary Ray Johnson.Interviews with Christo, Chuck Close, Roy Lichtenstein, Judith Malina, James Rosenquist and others help illuminate the life and work of Warhol contemporary Ray Johnson.Interviews with Christo, Chuck Close, Roy Lichtenstein, Judith Malina, James Rosenquist and others help illuminate the life and work of Warhol contemporary Ray Johnson.
- Awards
- 1 win & 2 nominations total
Joseph Ialacci
- Self - former Sag Harbor Police Chief
- (as Chief Joseph Ialacci)
Mort Janklow
- Self
- (as Morton Janklow)
Buster Cleveland
- Self
- (as Buster Cleaveland)
Clive Philpott
- Self
- (as Clive Phillpott)
Featured reviews
10jmotil
This is the story of Ray Johnson, a contemporary artist who's work reaches back from the 1940's till the time of his death in 1995. Johnson was at the forefront of performance art and created correspondence art along with Fluxus in the 1960's. There are many who contend that correspondence art was a precursor to the internet philosophically. His performance art pieces were essentially koans or Buddhist exercises in illustrating zen. How To Draw A Bunny is also about Ray Johnson the work of art, as his life itself was one great performance piece who's details were only connected posthumously. Fascinating both as a portrait of an artist and an era in modern art, the film is a must-see for anyone with an open mind and an interest in the path.
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.
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.
As mentioned in the movie, Ray Johnson may have been, "The most famous artist that you've never heard of." I've seen a large collection of his work first hand, in fact, as I've learned it could have been the largest show of his work prior to his death. Johnson, among may other things, was about duality, in the review prior to mine, the reviewer gave the film a poor review. If one is not inclined to enjoy or understand the subtleties of conceptual art, then by all means this is not the DVD for you. However, Johnson occupies a position in the art of the 50's and 60's that is important and this film shows his relevance as detailed by other "greats" of the day. Nothing was ever at face value in Johnson or his work. Each piece presents layers of meanings through images that continue to give. I wholeheartedly recommend this film. There is a great deal of "extra" content. For the searcher looking from answers about his art, this is the best place to begin. For the working "Mail Artist" is revered as the documentary of the artist who "started it all". Enigmatic, yes...but Johnson made himself his own work of art. This movie reveals more about him in a short period of time than any other source. Two great books are also available about his life and work. I gave this a full TEN stars. I have watched it repeatedly and and will view it many other times. Very well put together with an interesting soundtrack.
"How to Draw a Bunny" is a documentary about Raymond Johnson, an eccentric modern artist (isn't that a redundancy?), whose suicide by drowning in early 1995 was thought by many to have been his final and most grandiose act of "performance art." Famous for his trademark "bunny" signature, Johnson made his name primarily as a producer of abstract paintings and collages built on iconic images from the pop culture world around him.
The film provides a generous sampling of Johnson's work, along with interviews with counterculture friends and supporters who often seem more bizarre and "out there" than Johnson himself reportedly was - although in the few video clips we see of Johnson, he really does seem to be operating in his own little different-drummer world. However, one of the problems with choosing Johnson as the subject of a documentary is that he was so innately reticent about himself that it was hard even for people who were close to him to get to know who he really was. Interviewee after interviewee makes this point about him, and yet these were the people who actually knew him! How much more difficult is it for us then - who didn't know him at all or knew him strictly through the work of his we saw and admired - to find out who he was. Thus, right from the get-go, the film faces self-imposed limits on just how revelatory it can end up being. In a similar way, despite all the words uttered about the works themselves by the people being interviewed, the film offers us surprisingly little analysis of the artwork's underlying significance and "meaning." As one of the women interviewed tells us, she never really understood what Raymond was trying to say through his works; she just enjoyed the thrill of experiencing them. And, perhaps, that is the best way to approach "How to Draw a Bunny" itself. Don't go into it expecting a deep and profound examination of all that it is showing us; just enjoy the artwork for its own intrinsic value and sake. That's probably the way Johnson would have wanted it anyway.
The film provides a generous sampling of Johnson's work, along with interviews with counterculture friends and supporters who often seem more bizarre and "out there" than Johnson himself reportedly was - although in the few video clips we see of Johnson, he really does seem to be operating in his own little different-drummer world. However, one of the problems with choosing Johnson as the subject of a documentary is that he was so innately reticent about himself that it was hard even for people who were close to him to get to know who he really was. Interviewee after interviewee makes this point about him, and yet these were the people who actually knew him! How much more difficult is it for us then - who didn't know him at all or knew him strictly through the work of his we saw and admired - to find out who he was. Thus, right from the get-go, the film faces self-imposed limits on just how revelatory it can end up being. In a similar way, despite all the words uttered about the works themselves by the people being interviewed, the film offers us surprisingly little analysis of the artwork's underlying significance and "meaning." As one of the women interviewed tells us, she never really understood what Raymond was trying to say through his works; she just enjoyed the thrill of experiencing them. And, perhaps, that is the best way to approach "How to Draw a Bunny" itself. Don't go into it expecting a deep and profound examination of all that it is showing us; just enjoy the artwork for its own intrinsic value and sake. That's probably the way Johnson would have wanted it anyway.
Although I am an artist, I hadn't ever even heard of Ray Johnson until I stumbled upon this movie on the Sundance Channel. What a treat. It's interviews with people who "knew" Johnson - I don't think anybody really knew him.
He was very eccentric, e.g., if he was mad at you and you called him, he'd put the phone down without hanging up and go about his business - the caller could hear him moving around in the background. After some time - always varying - he'd pick up the phone, say "hello" and things would go on as if nothing had ever happened.
He really invented "mail art", sending collages to friends. He made up cost lists for his paintings, offering reductions if he cut part of the drawing/painting out.
I loved this film.
He was very eccentric, e.g., if he was mad at you and you called him, he'd put the phone down without hanging up and go about his business - the caller could hear him moving around in the background. After some time - always varying - he'd pick up the phone, say "hello" and things would go on as if nothing had ever happened.
He really invented "mail art", sending collages to friends. He made up cost lists for his paintings, offering reductions if he cut part of the drawing/painting out.
I loved this film.
Did you know
- ConnectionsFeatured in The 2003 IFP Independent Spirit Awards (2003)
- SoundtracksTake Me To The River
Written by Al Green and Teenie Hodges
Performed by Al Green
Courtesy of EMI Film & TV Music
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Как нарисовать кролика
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $4,658
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $2,706
- Mar 14, 2004
- Gross worldwide
- $4,658
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content