Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

What's soo great about the Mona Lisa. It's ugly, and it looks like the person in it is half man half woman sorta.

Originally posted by BartmanX
What's soo great about the Mona Lisa. It's ugly, and it looks like the person in it is half man half woman sorta.
I think that you pretty much summed up all the qualities people admire about it--its ages, the dark tones and somber atmosphere (considered ugly by some), and melding of genders...the only thing you didn't say was about the eyes.

Originally posted by FeceMan
I think that you pretty much summed up all the qualities people admire about it--its ages, the dark tones and somber atmosphere (considered ugly by some), and melding of genders...the only thing you didn't say was about the eyes.

What about the eyes?

Originally posted by BartmanX
What about the eyes?
I believe they appear to stare into one's own eyes, no matter from what angle one views the painting.

Originally posted by FeceMan
I believe they appear to stare into one's own eyes, no matter from what angle one views the painting.

Oh yeah huh. I forgot about that. Even still, it's ugly and old.

Originally posted by BartmanX
What's soo great about the Mona Lisa. It's ugly, and it looks like the person in it is half man half woman sorta.

Some art can't be reproduced, and I have heard that the Mona Lisa is something you have to see in person.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Some art can't be reproduced, and I have heard that the Mona Lisa is something you have to see in person.

what do you mean 'reproduced'?

Originally posted by BartmanX
what do you mean 'reproduced'?

Re-created... or painted/copied by someone else.

Originally posted by BartmanX
Oh yeah huh. I forgot about that. Even still, it's ugly and old.

And yet it still considered to be one of the greatest works of art to ever be created.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder; what you may not like may appeal to others, and vice versa.

To be honest, when I saw it, it wasn't all that great.

It was small and far away.

Originally posted by BartmanX
what do you mean 'reproduced'?

What I mean is, where did you see the Mona Lisa? Did you see it in a magazine? Most likely you have seen a picture printed on to paper. Do you know how think the painting is? A photo will not reproduce that kind of detail.

I would love to be able to see it in person, and not just a photo of it...

Originally posted by BartmanX
What's soo great about the Mona Lisa. It's ugly, and it looks like the person in it is half man half woman sorta.

This may sound incredibly rude of me, but I immediately looked at the age of your profile when I read this comment, and was not surprised.

I recommend that you either pickup a book about art and read it, or take a course in art history before you become a critic.

What you should consider is what makes the Mona Lisa different from other paintings.

With its size, its as if the painting is trying to communicate with you with its glare. The fact that you find it compelling to know whats all the fuss about it is exactly the trick in it and it has seduced you to know more about it.

Its aslo been mentioned that the painting was a portrait of Leonardo Da Vinci, in the vests of a woman, so you could be right about it being half man /half woman.

Originally posted by Lana
I would love to be able to see it in person, and not just a photo of it...

I'm visiting Paris this spring

The Da Vinci code actually touches upon it's androgynous appearance.

Tom Hanks is in the Da Vinci Code its gonna be awesome *cough*sorryTOstrayOFFtopic*cough*

I was an extra on it w00t ; Last Friday that is. But it was only 2nd Unit.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
This may sound incredibly rude of me, but I immediately looked at the age of your profile when I read this comment, and was not surprised.

I recommend that you either pickup a book about art and read it, or take a course in art history before you become a critic.
True art doesn't need to be explained. He shouldn't have to take a course in history to realize a painting's beauty, it should be apparent.




The Mona Lisa is overrated. The painter isn't, the painting is.

personally I consider it art, but by far not the greatest painting ever.

"The Lamb Of God" by the brothersz Van Eyck, true they are belgian, but the level of detail on such an enormous paiting, now that's something which is art IMO

Shouldn't this thread be in the Art Forum?

Seeing The Mona Lisa left me somewhat unfulfilled.

Originally posted by long pig
True art doesn't need to be explained. He shouldn't have to take a course in history to realize a painting's beauty, it should be apparent.




The Mona Lisa is overrated. The painter isn't, the painting is.


True art? I'd love for you to explain that. What is your definition of true art?

Art is more about beauty and the appreciation thereof. There are not too many people who will call Francis Bacon's art beautiful, does that make it not "true art"? Art is also about creativity, expression, impression, technique, inspiration, reaction, influence and so on.

BartmanX asked, What's so great about the Mona Lisa." The fact that different elements were explored in that painting that hadn't been explored before, and the fact that it inspired great works from other artist's is just one reason among many why it is considered a great work of art.

To say," It's ugly, and it looks like the person in it is half man half woman sorta." May be a personal opinion of aesthetic preference, but it is a rather immature way to view art. I suggested an art history book or courses due to the fact that his view of art seems rather limited and I could see his questions being answered more effectively there than by a number of members trying to educate him on the subject on a movie forum.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What I mean is, where did you see the Mona Lisa? Did you see it in a magazine? Most likely you have seen a picture printed on to paper. Do you know how think the painting is? A photo will not reproduce that kind of detail.

I've seen it on TV, pictures in magazines, posters, ect. But never in a museum or the real thing. How come it will not produce that kind of detail?

Originally posted by Cepheus
Shouldn't this thread be in the Art Forum?

Theres an art forum?

Mona Lisa is ok..Though I prefer some works by some other artists...

The Mona Lisa was ignored until the mid nineteenth century.

not bad, but still not my thing

not mine as well.

but still I prefer it to mona lisa

I agree...Something more gentle and feminine, peaceful about it.

I think both aren't that appealing. This is not my type of art, my type is more active, something happening in the painting. These, to me, are just boring.

I took some art classes, and for its time it was a wonderful work of art. It has different layers, and was one of the best examples of a work of art that included color to show a difference in distance (the background). I believe its called a three-point perspective. I can understand why people like it, and how it was a breakthrough peice.....
but honestly I think its ugly.

I've been to the Louvre an seen it, and the first thing that struck me was how small it was. For some reason I've always thought it was larger, guess I've never seen it compared to a person or something else...

And I must agree that I don't find Mona Lisa particulary fantastic, but I hadn't that big expectations either. Personally I'm not that big a fan of these kinds of paintings, but I do find structures and wall/ceiling paintings fantastic.

I loved Notre Dame, Sacre Ceur, Versailles, l'Arc de Triomphe, le Tour d'Eiffel etc, I find these more physically astounding pieces of work easier to appreciate I guess
That's why I'd love to go to Rome, I've seen pictures and it looks fantastic. Probably why I also loved Athens...

Like so many others, I was also disappointed the first time I saw it as I' d never realised how small a painting it was.

Originally posted by Storm
Like so many others, I was also disappointed the first time I saw it as I' d never realised how small a painting it was.

I understand it was cut down from a larger painting.

personally I never found Versailles that special

It is Said that the Mona Lisa's features are from Lenardo Da vinci's Face

OK...now I hate her.......Lets go for Renoir paintings.

Hate Who ?

I've seen it in Paris.
The eye thing is true but still...........

I more like the Flemish masters like Breughel the old.

He's one of the starters of the surrealism


The triumph of death (bad quality of foto):

I think that it is really hard to place value on art... just like there is no such thing as a goos writer, because every reader thinks about the words in a different way... Could I paint the Mona Lisa? no... Would I date her? NO

Originally posted by idowhatiamtold
just like there is no such thing as a goos writer

I am guessing that you meant 'good' writer. There are many exceptional writers in history and many poor ones. Public opinion as to who is popular or who is not does not dictate if one is a good writer.

Originally posted by Susan-Storm
Hate Who ?

The moaning Lisa.........

most people who say they LOVE mona lisa FORCE themselves to love it to look intelligent and artistic infront of their peers, just cause from childhood theyve been taught that mona lisa is one of the crown jewels and the ones who taught em only say that cause they were taught the same thing, its just like shakespear, people bust their ASSES to try n find beauty, septh and wisdom in it. if truth be told mona lisa is just a small dark pile of crap thas neither interesting to dark mminds or jolly minds. and just a thougt but no1 really KNOWS what the artist was thinkin when they drew anythin and sayin that we have to understand what thea artist was tryin to show is utter bull. sure art is a lil hard to appreciate but not THIS hard. davinci was indeed a great man but to every other than him{maybe even to himself, who knows maybe he didnt mean to show anythin to the world from drawin mona lisa, maybe he was just bored and drew it} its nuthin that its hyped to be.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
most people who say they LOVE mona lisa FORCE themselves to love it to look intelligent and artistic infront of their peers, just cause from childhood theyve been taught that mona lisa is one of the crown jewels and the ones who taught em only say that cause they were taught the same thing, its just like shakespear, people bust their ASSES to try n find beauty, septh and wisdom in it. if truth be told mona lisa is just a small dark pile of crap thas neither interesting to dark mminds or jolly minds. and just a thougt but no1 really KNOWS what the artist was thinkin when they drew anythin and sayin that we have to understand what thea artist was tryin to show is utter bull. sure art is a lil hard to appreciate but not THIS hard. davinci was indeed a great man but to every other than him{maybe even to himself, who knows maybe he didnt mean to show anythin to the world from drawin mona lisa, maybe he was just bored and drew it} its nuthin that its hyped to be.
Of course. It's the "in" thing to appreciate. And if you don't like it, you must be illiterate or immature!

Originally posted by leonheartmm
most people who say they LOVE mona lisa FORCE themselves to love it to look intelligent and artistic infront of their peers, just cause from childhood theyve been taught that mona lisa is one of the crown jewels and the ones who taught em only say that cause they were taught the same thing, its just like shakespear, people bust their ASSES to try n find beauty, septh and wisdom in it. if truth be told mona lisa is just a small dark pile of crap thas neither interesting to dark mminds or jolly minds. and just a thougt but no1 really KNOWS what the artist was thinkin when they drew anythin and sayin that we have to understand what thea artist was tryin to show is utter bull. sure art is a lil hard to appreciate but not THIS hard. davinci was indeed a great man but to every other than him{maybe even to himself, who knows maybe he didnt mean to show anythin to the world from drawin mona lisa, maybe he was just bored and drew it} its nuthin that its hyped to be.

That Shakespear. Very overrated.

I've always maintained that people who don't like or appreciate Shakespeare's works (or find them overrated) do so because they don't understand them. Personally, I love Shakespeare. Something I've always wanted to do was be in a Shakespearean play, which I was a few years ago.

I personally like Shakespeare....

personally, i only like a couple of the quotes he uses in his plays, nuthin much, there are much deeper and better plays and works of fiction in the world, the real reason shakespear is so famous is because of the freakin queen havin an interest in his works, it could just as well have been sum1 else who was put in the limelight n hed be the one every1 was goin after, its just all bull {kinda like the beatles beein the greatest band on earth, although even that has more validity than shakespear} shakespear was just a recist sob who might have thought up of 5 or ten phrases which literated WORSHIP without any real reason.

His plays were cool, with the old English, and the metaphors he used, and his knowledge of history.....Some are very deep thinging...

Originally posted by debbiejo
His plays were cool, with the old English, and the metaphors he used, and his knowledge of history.....Some are very deep thinging...


ive heard deeper, more romantic and more eyeopenin things in video games!

He captured many historical events, mixed in fantasy, and magic....he was truly a wonder for his time...There is something about his writings that are very deep on more than a video game for sure...Some very romantic indeed.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
ive heard deeper, more romantic and more eyeopenin things in video games!

Go on...

I am enraptured by the observations of the cultural knowledgeable juggernaut that is leonheartmm.

Apparently, it is speculated (in a recent History channel) that Leonard da Vinci made the sinister looking, half smile on the Mona Lisa because she may be holding onto a secret.....that Mary Magdelan was Jesus' lover.

I don't know what to believe to be honest with you, but it was a pretty fascinating episode that concentrated on the Mona Lisa and The Last Supper.

Originally posted by BobbyD
Apparently, it is speculated (in a recent History channel) that Leonard da Vinci made the sinister looking, half smile on the Mona Lisa because she may be holding onto a secret.....that Mary Magdelan was Jesus' lover.

I don't know what to believe to be honest with you, but it was a pretty fascinating episode that concentrated on the Mona Lisa and The Last Supper.

That centres around the ideas mention in The Da Vinci Code, which is, lest we forget, a novel.

It is a shame how fictional novels and distorted hollywood movies (i.e. Stone's Alexander) are being accepted as valid historical documentation by people today. A shame, and actually kind of frightening.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
I am enraptured by the observations of the cultural knowledgeable juggernaut that is leonheartmm.

Fascinating.

Originally posted by FeceMan
I believe they appear to stare into one's own eyes, no matter from what angle one views the painting. I see that in every painting today

Yeah, I heard the voice. Who would have thought she sounded like Barney from The Simpsons?

I've seen it.

It small and u can only see it from 100 meters away cuz there are another 200 people standing in front of you.